Merged Stolen Palestinian Land

[Marc39]

Yes. No honest person expects Israel to return land to people who will not be at peace with them.

Full withdrawal..for full peace. This must be the equation. No 10 year truce..or 20 year half-peace. Full diplomatic and economic with entire Arab world, for a full withdrawal from the West Bank (small land exchanges allowed).

It will never happen as long as Muslim supremacists govern Gaza.

 

[Tin Foil Timothy]

You say the West Bank is occupied, others say not. I don't know of an independent nation called the West Bank.

Oh dear it gets worse. Really you should move with the times and seriously sharpen up the quality of your debate. The old "Palestine isn't a sovereign state therefor nothing can be done against it" 'argument' has been even tossed out of the debate toolbox by the Zionist Apologists themselves years ago. Have you not noticed that even the most die hard Zionist Apologists don't use that one here? You should consider as to why.

The West bank is occupied. It's occupied by Israel. FACT.

 

[Tin Foil Timothy]

So you've been running off and reading Wikipedia?

And really, what is the purpose of your ridiculously out of context post?

The west bank was controlled by the Jordanian government for a while? So?

The West Bank has no sovereign status. So?

Expansionist Israelis want it for themselves and thus call it a disputed territory ( are you a supporter of Israeli Expansionsm? ). So?

.. and saying 'not the Palestinians' is absurd. <shakes head in amazement>


Can you enlighten us as to the point of these statements?

So come on Marc39 !!! You're not avoiding this post are you? Admitting your post had no purpose is the best option at damage limitation.

 

[Marc39]

Really you should move with the times and seriously sharpen up the quality of your debate. The old "Palestine isn't a sovereign state therefor nothing can be done against it" 'argument' has been even tossed out of the debate toolbox by the Zionist Apologists themselves years ago.

International law doesn't "move with the times" and Israel's presence in the West Bank in the form of settlements is consistent with international law. Indeed, a cogent case is made for the legality of the acquisition of land in a defensive war, which resulted in Israel's control of the West Bank in 1967. Further, the League of Nations Mandate explicitly recognized the right of Jewish settlement in all territory allocated to the Jewish national home in the context of the British Mandate. These rights under the British Mandate were preserved by the the UN under Article 49 of the UN Charter. Finally, given that Judea and Samaria are part of the Jewish ancestral homeland, the West Bank is ARAB occupied territory, as is Gaza.

 

[gdnp]

No state is required to permit trade across its own borders absent specific treaty obligations to the contrary. Israel has no obligation to permit goods to cross its borders into Gaza. By the same token, Egypt had the right to restrict trade crossing Egypt's border into Israel. The Straits of Tiran, however, are international waters. Using force in international waters in order to block shipping reaching another sovereign state, as Egypt did in the Straits of Tiran, was a violation of Israel's sovereignty and a belligerent act. Mislabeling as a blockade Israel's restrictions on trade across its own border with Gaza and the creation a false equivalence with Egypt's siege of Israel in 1967 does not change the legal rules or the relevant facts.

Gaza has a long Mediterranean coast. That is, a coast between international waters and Gaza. They also have airspace, and flight paths into Gazan airspace over international waters. Israel blocks ships and planes from entering Gaza through these routes, which have NOTHING to do with Israel's borders with Gaza. Why you keep harping on Israel's right to control trade over its border with Gaza is beyond me. I have stated quite clearly that they do. The blockade of the Gaza coast and of Gaza airspace, however, is an act of war equivalent to Egypt blocking Israeli shipping through the Straits of Tiran. There is no false equivalence.

Once again, feel free to argue that Israel is justified in doing this or that they are justified in maintaining their occupation of Gaza. Just don't try to claim that Israel's actions are peaceful. A state of war continues as long as Israel maintains the blockade and thus occupation.

 

[Thunder]

International law doesn't "move with the times" and Israel's presence in the West Bank in the form of settlements is consistent with international law. Indeed, a cogent case is made for the legality of the acquisition of land in a defensive war, which resulted in Israel's control of the West Bank in 1967. Further, the League of Nations Mandate explicitly recognized the right of Jewish settlement in all territory allocated to the Jewish national home in the context of the British Mandate. These rights under the British Mandate were preserved by the the UN under Article 49 of the UN Charter. Finally, given that Judea and Samaria are part of the Jewish ancestral homeland, the West Bank is ARAB occupied territory, as is Gaza.

When a nation occupies land from warfare, regardless of the previous legal status of that land, the land is now occupied. It is against the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions to confiscate land in the occupied territory and use it for civilian purposes. They can ONLY confiscate land and use it for military purposes.

Only after the status of the land is finalized between the two warring parties can the land be settled by civilians from the occupying country.

Not only that, but in 1979 the Israeli Cabinet decided that NO private property would be used for ANY Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

The Israel Lands Authority did a study a few years ago and found that, contrary to this Cabinet decision, a good 30% of the settlements were built on private property. The land had a legal owner and Israel still confiscated it and built civilian settlements on it.

This is against international law..and EVEN against Israeli law.

Deal with it.

and btw.....the fact that the West Bank was part of Judaea...2,300 years ago...is absolutely meaningless when it come to INTERNATIONAL LAW in 2009.

 

[Thunder]

The West Bank has no sovereign status, it's disputed territory, having been captured from the Jordanian government, not the "Palestinians". As for atrocities and persecutions against "Palestinians", Lebanon, Jordan and Kuwait would be at the top of the list of perpetrators.

The West Bank has a legal status. It is legally occupied by the State of Israel. It has not been annexed by Israel. Therefore it is Occupied under the Geneva Comventions and the UN Charter.

When Israel accepted the 1947 Partition Plan, which gave the West Bank to the Arabs, they made it clear that they would accept a Jewish state without these lands.

Also, after the 1948 war, Israel was more then willing to accept the armistice lines with Jordan as Israel's border. They made no argument that the West Bank, then occupied and annexed by Jordan, was "disputed territory":

From Wikipedia-

"In the Knesset then Foreign Minister and future Prime Minister Moshe Sharett called the armistice lines "provisional boundaries" and the old international borders which the armistice lines, except with Jordan, were based on, "natural boundaries".[13]. Israel did not lay claim to territory beyond them and proposed them, with minor modifications except at Gaza, as the basis of permanent political frontiers at the Lausanne Conference, 1949.[14]"

"Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, always the diplomat, had hoped for a comprehensive peace settlement at Lausanne, but he was no match for Prime Minister David Ben Gurion, who saw the armistice agreements which stopped the fighting with the Arab states as sufficient, and put a low priority on a permanent peace treaty (Pappe, 1992, Chapter 9: The Lausanne Conference)."

 

[gdnp]

Finally, given that Judea and Samaria are part of the Jewish ancestral homeland, the West Bank is ARAB occupied territory, as is Gaza.

This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

Do we need to go back to the Old Testament to find out who was there first? Didn't the Israelites take it from the Canaanites or something? What right does the Jewish God have to give Canaanite's land to the Jews?

 

[The Fool]

No state is required to permit trade across its own borders absent specific treaty obligations to the contrary. Israel has no obligation to permit goods to cross its borders into Gaza.

Ok, thats good.....so Gazans can trade freely by sea then? They can fly planes in and out over the Med?

Think about your answer first....

 

[Marc39]

This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

Do we need to go back to the Old Testament to find out who was there first? Didn't the Israelites take it from the Canaanites or something? What right does the Jewish God have to give Canaanite's land to the Jews?

Here's a shocker for you---Arabs originated from...Arabia. Palestine is the Jewish homeland. The Arabian Peninsula is the Arab homeland. Let Saudi Arabia take in the West Bank and Gazan Arabs. But, they won't, because, they want nothing to do with them. Nice.

 

[Marc39]

Ok, thats good.....so Gazans can trade freely by sea then? They can fly planes in and out over the Med?

Think about your answer first....

You might do the same. Gazans can elect a "government" that is not a band of terrorist thugs. They made their bed, now, they have to lie in it. Actions have consequences.

 

[DC]

Here's a shocker for you---Arabs originated from...Arabia. Palestine is the Jewish homeland. The Arabian Peninsula is the Arab homeland. Let Saudi Arabia take in the West Bank and Gazan Arabs. But, they won't, because, they want nothing to do with them. Nice.

erm when i remember correctly, the Palestinians want independence, not becoming part of SA.

SA promised to give a big amount of money to rebuild gaza.

 

[Marc39]

erm when i remember correctly, the Palestinians want independence, not becoming part of SA.

SA promised to give a big amount of money to rebuild gaza.

A billion dollars in aid from Saudi Arabia? Ha, the Saudi Royal Family spends that much for jewelery in a year. SA should have resettled the Arab refugees years ago.

 

[Marc39]

erm when i remember correctly, the Palestinians want independence, not becoming part of SA.

SA promised to give a big amount of money to rebuild gaza.

Funny how they didn't want independence, nor granted independence, during 600 years of Muslim rule between the Mameluks and Turks. Nor, did they cry out for independence, more recently, during 20 years of Egyptian and Jordanian occupation. Why do you suppose that was?

 

[a_unique_person]

Funny how they didn't want independence, nor granted independence, during 600 years of Muslim rule between the Mameluks and Turks. Nor, did they cry out for independence, more recently, during 20 years of Egyptian and Jordanian occupation. Why do you suppose that was?

At least they got to keep their houses? Anyway, you are completely wrong on that. Arafat made himself very unpopular in Jordan. So I guess your question doesn't need an answer any more.

 

[Marc39]

When Israel accepted the 1947 Partition Plan, which gave the West Bank to the Arabs, they made it clear that they would accept a Jewish state without these lands.

The Arabs rejected the '47 partition plan and UN Res. 181 that would have granted them statehood.

 

[DC]

A billion dollars in aid from Saudi Arabia? Ha, the Saudi Royal Family spends that much for jewelery in a year. SA should have resettled the Arab refugees years ago.

hey full agreement, they could pay more, they have the money.
you will nto find me defending the SA scumbags aka royal family.

 

[DC]

Funny how they didn't want independence, nor granted independence, during 600 years of Muslim rule between the Mameluks and Turks. Nor, did they cry out for independence, more recently, during 20 years of Egyptian and Jordanian occupation. Why do you suppose that was?

i dont know, if they didnt want it, and why not etc.

but afaik they want now an own state.

why didnt the jews want to rebuild Israel much earlier? why wait so long, why did they live in Diaspora and out of a sudden they want an own nation?

 

[Marc39]

At least they got to keep their houses? Anyway, you are completely wrong on that. Arafat made himself very unpopular in Jordan. So I guess your question doesn't need an answer any more.

In many cases, they lost houses under the Ottoman Turks, who raised taxes in order to displace farmers who could not afford to pay those taxes, or they changed their status to tenant farmers, which, in effect, allowed the Zionists to buy the land out from under them. When you say Arafat made himself very unpopular in Jordan, you are aware that the majority of Jordan's population is "Palestinian" I assume you are also aware of the Black September murder of upwards of 35,000 Palestinians in three weeks. THAT was a Palestinian massacre that isn't discussed by anti-Israel propagandists.

 

[gdnp]

Here's a shocker for you---Arabs originated from...Arabia. Palestine is the Jewish homeland. The Arabian Peninsula is the Arab homeland. Let Saudi Arabia take in the West Bank and Gazan Arabs. But, they won't, because, they want nothing to do with them. Nice.

And you, of course, have genetic evidence that every "Jew" is directly descended from people who lived in biblical or pre-biblical Israel, and no "Arab" did?

Look, why don't you just come out and say it: Yahweh gave the land to the Jewish people, and thus we have the right to do with it as we wish, and do as we wish to any infidels living there. Isn't that what your argument comes down to?

ETA: BTW, could you let us know where you live? In the native american homeland, the Jewish homeland, the Australian aborigonal homeland, the Gaelic homeland, the Franks homeland, etc? Perhaps one of the Incan or Mayan homelands?