Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

Israel did say it would keep East Jerusalem forever. That is because the Pals, when in control, desecrated various holy places, including the Western Wall area.

Not really: Jerusalem was declared as the capital of Israel in 1949.
And the "Jerusalem Law" - as part of the country's Basic Law - declared Jerusalem the unified capital of Israel in 1980.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Someone once described Jean Simmons as having a joke memorised for every occasion, a sure sign he had no spontaneity or wit. Anyone can cut and paste stuff off the web, when they do it to the extent of Advocate, they're trying to make up for something.

0 Replies

Quote:

Advocate said: Israel did not say it is staying in the WB forever. In fact, it has offered land for peace in the past, but to no avail, and stands ready to negotiate borders. Israel did say it would keep East Jerusalem forever

What did the Pals reply to Israel's fair offer to hand back land?

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

As for Obama, I have given him credit when due, and criticized him when he deserved it. I'm not a wishy-washy admirer of anyone who isn't consistent with working for the American People, and that includes any current or past presidents.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foofie wrote:
How come I was never taught Palestinean history in school?

I have no idea.
Perhaps, however, it's the same reason why I wasn't taught the history of any and all of the about 200 countries in the world?

But - as an aside - it is very interesting that you were taught the individual history of various countries at school! Good for you - and good done by your school! (We only got to know about roughly in geography classes - history was more focused on periods.)

Sorry, if I confused you. Yes, we too were taught periods. From the early church to the present. It was really about who was being adversarial with whom. Or, what Popes or Kings were doing whatever. It was basically European history as world history. The western powers, as each matured into a force to be reckoned with. Germany got some attention during the Thirty Years War.

I guess I reflect that early education. Meaning my brain is American, but before the American colonies, it is eurocentric. That doesn't include eastern europe. I looked upon it like a sports team; I was always rooting for western Europe.

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

What did the Pals reply to Israel's fair offer to hand back land?

There have been a number of such fair offers over the years. If the Palestinians can manage it, they always respond by massacring Israeli children. If not, the Palestinians come up with twisted mind games and still refuse to make peace.

I have a long reply typed up to your earlier post, and I skim through the history of Israel's endless attempts to make peace by offering to give up the West Bank. I'll hit the reply button as soon as I review it for spelling errors.

0 Replies

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

My goodness, Advocate, how melodramatic can one get?! The facts are when the Palestinians do get their own state they will show a lot more human tolerance than Israel has hitherto shown the Pals. The Israeli government is a ruthless cold-blooded nation; we see this by the way they cruelly mistreat the most defenseless occupied Palestinians.

I remember when two Israeli reservists got lost going to their training camp, and were captured by just regular Palestineans, and then butchered. One came grinning to the window, which a cameraman caught, showing the blood of the butchered Israelis on his hand proudly, and smilingly. My point is that the Israelis are not enjoying the violence they might need to do; however, there is more than one Palestinean that looks upon killing an Israeli as a festive act. You might be a little naive to not see the total difference in cultures, at least amongst many of the males.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

4- Israel has handed back chunks of the Golan and Gaza/Sinai.
5- Israel says "We're staying in the West Bank forever", and the extremists say "We won't negotiate, our only wish is the total destruction of Israel"

Have I got all that right?

4 is a little bit wrong. Since Syria has never made peace with Israel, there has never been any return of any part of the Golan Heights.

5 is way wrong.

Back in the 1990s, everyone was naive enough to think Palestinians would make peace, and there were negotiations to give the Palestinians the West Bank and Gaza in exchange for that peace.

As these negotiations progressed, the Palestinians were given large swaths of the West Bank. Because of this, even today land that Palestinians actually live on is governed by Palestinians.

Unfortunately when the Palestinians got control over that land, all they did was try to massacre Israelis. Fortunately, the Palestinians started their massacre before they had been given all of the West Bank.

It was close though. When the Palestinian massacres finally collapsed the peace talks, there was an offer on the table to hand 97% of the West Bank (in one contiguous block) over to the Palestinians. Had the Palestinians taken that offer before beginning their massacre, it might have been grim going for Israel.

The message Israel took from that was that negotiations were not possible, so they should just unilaterally pull out of Gaza and 90% of the West Bank, wall off the Palestinians, and leave them to their own devices.

Unfortunately, the Palestinians were still interested only in massacring civilians. Fortunately the Palestinians again struck before they had been given the West Bank. The huge artillery barrage that the Palestinians sent out of the Gaza Strip nullified the pullout from the West Bank before it was even started.

So Israel abandoned the concept of the unilateral pullout and returned to negotiating. Unfortunately, the Palestinians refused to accept any bargain, even though they were again being offered the entire West Bank as part of a final peace deal.

Eventually, the Palestinians tried a new tactic. They walked away from the talks, and said that they would not return until they had gotten a concession (halt to settlement construction) for free while giving nothing in return.

There were a few obvious problems with giving in to this demand. One problem was that if Israel gave in once, the Palestinians would just do the same thing all over again.

Another problem was that the Roadmap For Peace involved a careful balance of concessions being traded off against each other at certain points in the negotiation process. If the Palestinians got this concession now for free, there would be nothing to give them later when negotiations got to the point where they were supposed to receive this concession in exchange for one of their own.

However, Obama offered Israel a deal. He would give Israel a big stockpile of 5000-pound bunker busters (capable of destroying Iran's buried nuclear facilities). And in exchange, Israel would halt settlement construction temporarily, for just 10 months.

Israel halted settlement construction for 10 months (and got the bombs), but despite the Palestinians getting the halt to settlement construction that they had been demanding, they still refused to come and negotiate.

Anyway, while all this circus was going on, the Oslo Accords that had governed this entire concept of "handing land over to the Palestinians in exchange for peace" were still technically in effect.

One of the key provisions in the Oslo Accords was that neither side would take unilateral actions against the other. They would instead come to a negotiated agreement for everything.

A year or so ago, the EU decided that they wanted to make this entire situation even worse, and the idea that they came up with was to demolish the Oslo Accords by having the UN recognize the Palestinians unilaterally, instead of this recognition being a concession negotiated at the bargaining table.

They went through with this, and now there are no longer any Oslo Accords.

It would have seemed that at this point that there was no longer any hope of agreement with the Palestinians, but just this year Secretary Kerry restarted the negotiations, and through some unfathomable miracle, he actually achieved the best hope for successful negotiations since back in the 1990s. I really have no idea how he did that.

Unfortunately, the Palestinians still don't want to make peace. So they sent out their thugs and henchmen to spew the most outrageous anti-Semitic lies imaginable all over the internet until this one last spark of hope was extinguished.

Mr. Kerry's negotiations continue, but there isn't really much point in hoping anymore. At some point they will collapse, and that will be that.

Thanks to the EU, the Oslo Accords are gone now too. And at some point Israel is just going to forcibly deport all the Palestinians out of the West Bank. They can't allow a hostile population to occupy that territory.

So it is certainly true that Israel is going to end up keeping all of the West Bank.

But it is not even close to true that this was something that Israel is insisting on. Israel has offered over and over and over and over to give up the West Bank if only the Palestinians would make peace with them.

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Thread title: Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

Wow, this thread has run to 129 pages so far so let me make a simple summing up, correct me if I'm wrong-

1- Before 1967 the Israelis lived in Israel and the Palestinians lived in Palestine (aka the West Bank)
2- Extremist Arab elements regularly shelled Israeli settlements.
3- So Israel had to invade the West Bank, Golan Heights, Egyptian Gaza and Sinai in the 1967 Six-Day War to stop them
4- Israel has handed back chunks of the Golan and Gaza/Sinai.
5- Israel says "We're staying in the West Bank forever", and the extremists say "We won't negotiate, our only wish is the total destruction of Israel"

Have I got all that right?

Yes. But one might want to add a number six where liberals ignore the first five points and focus on the ongoing adversarial situation where Palestineans are willing to sacrifice their own to act out their hatred of Israel?

2 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

...BTW, as you may know, the Pals refuse to allow a single Jew to live in peace in the territories. This, of course, is notwithstanding that Israel has 1.7 million Pal Israeli citizens.

Notice how liberals never point that out. I wonder if liberalism might be a precursor to poor memory?

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

It is cute how you add the "LOL" at the end of your comments. But we know full well that you are a humorless bastard.

CI is not a "bastard." Just a survivor of an internment camp at a young age. I do not know if that affected him negatively, upon adulthood, but it certainly didn't help him, other than getting people to pity his young years?

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Look at all these young Jewish anti-Semites!

Quote:

STUDENTS REFUSING TO SERVE THE OCCUPATION
Shministim was the name adopted by a group of high school seniors who, in 1970, sent a letter to then Prime Minister Golda Meir, explaining that they declined to serve in the Israeli Defense Force due to the IDF’s role in policing the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. In 1987, a second Shministim group was formed, again composed of high school students who refused to serve in occupied Palestine. In 2001, a third instance of the sarvanim — or refusenik — movement arose. Members of this third incarnation of the student group are currently touring the U.S. The tour was organized by Jewish Voice for Peace and is being aided by CodePINK.
On September 30, two Shministim refusers, Maya Wind and Netta Mishly, spoke at the Unitarian Church of Staten Island. The event was co-sponsored by the UCSI and Peace Action Staten Island.
The two young women began their presentation with a description of how conscription works in Israel. It is mandatory for all Jews and some non-Jews as well. Women serve two years, men, three. Draft dodging is very common. According to Wind, 40 percent of those required to serve elude the draft as a variety of loopholes exist. Orthodox Jews are exempted on religious grounds and married women are also not required to serve. Physical ailments are a third way out of military service and mental illness — real or invented — is “another popular one,” Wind said. Israel also grants conscientious objector status to some conscriptees, although potential COs must convince a panel that they are “universal pacifists” who will not fight under any circumstances. The last officially accepted category is “misfitting” which, according to Ms. Wind, includes “everything from smoking pot in high school to a rough socioeconomic background.”
But the Shministim do not fit into any of these categories. They are refuseniks with a political cause — “selective refusers” who reject Israeli policy towards Palestine and its peoples. Because they are not pacifists and cite a political reason for their refusal, they often become political prisoners of the Israeli military.
Maya Wind read a portion of a Shministim letter that was sent to the Israeli political leaders. The section mentioned several “defense methods” the Shministim find objectionable: “checkpoints, targeted killing (of Palestinians), roads for Jews only, sieges and war.” The conclusion of the statement summarized the Shministim position saying it was “impossible to be moral and serve the occupation.”

0 Replies

Can you feel the love?

1 Reply

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

Advocate wrote:
Just think of what the Pals would do should they take charge in Israel. It would be mass murder.

My goodness, Advocate, how melodramatic can one get?!

Nothing melodramatic about pointing out the reality that Palestinian vermin like to massacre innocent people.

Moment-in-Time wrote:

The facts are when the Palestinians do get their own state they will show a lot more human tolerance than Israel has hitherto shown the Pals.

The fact is that Palestinians are vermin that are incapable of tolerance.

And when they do get their own state, it is going to be limited to the Gaza Strip alone. They will not have any power over any Israelis.

Moment-in-Time wrote:

The Israeli government is a ruthless cold-blooded nation; we see this by the way they cruelly mistreat the most defenseless occupied Palestinians.

Don't be silly. Palestinian vermin might get upset over being prevented from murdering innocent people, but that is neither cruelty nor mistreatment.

0 Replies

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

this apartheid existence

Your anti-Semitic hate speech is really really vile.

0 Replies

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

the devil IDF

You Nazis sure don't like it when Jews are able to defend themselves.

Moment-in-Time wrote:

broke a little Palestinian boys arm in two places for throwing rocks;

I guess he won't be throwing any more rocks at innocent people, will he?

Moment-in-Time wrote:

Heck, the IDF have used their tanks to run over homes and sometime disabled Palestinians are not quick enough to get out of the way.

Things like that happen in wars.

The Palestinians are the ones who insist on starting wars with Israel.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Can you feel the love?

The point is that all this rhetoric won't change a thing. It is just a number of posters needing to vent their opinion. And, needless to say, their opinions do not count for anything that will, or will not, transpire.

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Quote:
Thread title: Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

Wow, this thread has run to 129 pages so far so let me make a simple summing up, correct me if I'm wrong-

1- Before 1967 the Israelis lived in Israel and the Palestinians lived in Palestine (aka the West Bank)
2- Extremist Arab elements regularly shelled Israeli settlements.
3- So Israel had to invade the West Bank, Golan Heights, Egyptian Gaza and Sinai in the 1967 Six-Day War to stop them
4- Israel has handed back chunks of the Golan and Gaza/Sinai.
5- Israel says "We're staying in the West Bank forever", and the extremists say "We won't negotiate, our only wish is the total destruction of Israel"

Have I got all that right?

Yes. But one might want to add a number six where liberals ignore the first five points and focus on the ongoing adversarial situation where Palestineans are willing to sacrifice their own to act out their hatred of Israel?

Look again. #5 is wrong where it says Israel refuses to give up the West Bank.

Israel has repeatedly and endlessly offered 1967 borders if only the Palestinians would make peace with them.

0 Replies

About 10 years ago I watched a US or Brit TV documentary about Israel/Palestine and they asked a young Israeli soldier on patrol how he thought the problem could be solved.
"Well we could give them the Palestinians their land back" he answered.
I wonder how many other Israelis feel the same way but are afraid to say it?

PS- and in another TV docu later, another soldier was asked the same sort of question and gave the same sort of answer, but his commanding officer overheard and came over to fetch him away from the camera!

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

... Besides that, Vichy France co-operated often (mostly) quite well with the Nazis.

It takes a degree of intelligence to know when to cooperate.

0 Replies

Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know