In addressing peace between the Palestinians the Israelis are rejecting the two conditions of UN Security Council Resolution 242 that established the foundation for a just peace between Israel and it's neighbors including the Palestinians. They're really resorting to outright lies in their arguments starting with the requirement to withdraw its military from the territories it occupied. Key provisions of UNSC 242: No border is "defensible" without a diplomatic peace. No one better expresses this than the late General Patton: Without condition (ii) of UNSC Resolution 242 that requires all nations to respect the territorial integrity of all nations and their right to live in peace no Israel border is defensible as fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man. Only by complying with UNSC Resolution 242 condition (i) can condition (ii) which ensures the security of Israel be accomplished. Whether Israel is 9 miles wide or 100 miles wide does not protect Israel from invasion and no border is secure if another nation wants to invade. These Israeli officials are lying about what it takes for Israel to live in peace in the future because it isn't the border but the diplomatic resolution that is important. Without a diplomatic peace there isn't any peace regardless of the borders and with a diplomatic peace the borders become irrelevant. Next is such a bald faced lie that it's hard to believe it was even stated. Israel was not attacked by Arab armies in the Six Day War. It was Israel that launched an attack and invaded Egypt under the false guise of being a "pre-emptive attack" (which is prohibited by the UN Charter) that started the Six Day War. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria had no intention of starting a war with Israel in 1967 and this is a well established historical fact. Israel, and Israel alone, started the Six Day War. How is anyone supposed to believe anything from the Israelis when they're blatant liars that attempt to change history whenever they choose? They don't even make any attempt at honesty in their arguments. They resort to deception and emotionalism (Auschwitz, Seriously?) in trying to do exactly what they set out to do in 1967 and that was to acquire land by acts of war that the United Nations specifically stated was inadmissible in UNSC Resolution 242. http://news.yahoo.com/auschwitz-borders-did-john-kerry-really-guarantee-israeli-135018289.html For over 45 years the UN Security Council has refused to enforce compliance with UNSC 242 and it long past time it should. The Security Council needs to stop delaying enforcement and put the full weight of economic sanctions in place to force Israel and the Palestinians to fully comply with UNSC 242.
Relying on UN Resolution 242 seems to have provided Israel with a defensible border with Egypt for decades. It would seem a regional peace deal like the Arab peace initiative would give Israel more security than a few thousand dunams in the Jordan valley.
1. What is "dunams" ? 2. Ya Arabs - even during the begining of the peace talks you continue to spread lies and pripaganda hatred. Your hatred was & still is the cause to your misery. No border is "defensible" without a diplomatic peace ? Trust me, Israelis will be stupid to trust that theory. Diplomatic peace is not valid in the Arab middle east - only fences, guards and a safety zones with mines.
A Dunam is an Ottoman measurement of land. E.g. acre or hectare. I'd have to disagree with you regarding the exclusive use of armed forces for national security and won't last in perpetuity. I still think that the pen is mightier than the sword.
In the 65 years since the founding of Israel the Israeli "plan for peace" hasn't worked and it meets the definition of insanity. What is required is simple. "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." That brings peace to the region and it is the only thing that will bring peace to the region. As was noted the Arab nations have presented the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002 to achieve this goal. The Arab Peace Initiative addressed not only the invasion of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria by Israel in 1967, which was addressed by the UN Security Council in Resolution 242, but goes further to address prior diplomatic problems arising from the 1948 Arab-Israeli War addressed by UN General Assembly Resolution 194. UNSC 242 is a mandatory resolution and is non-negotiable under the UN Charter. UNGA 194 is a recommendation that requires voluntary compliance. Both together would ensure a lasting peace between Israel, the Palestinians, and the Arab world. Combined they address and resolve all issues of dispute that has lead to 65 years of conflict. Or Israeli can continue to be a belligerent nation denying the Rights of the non-Jewish People in Palestine and the conflict will continue indefinitely as it has for the last 65 years. In this case the Israeli borders will always remain insecure because war and conflict is ever-present. The danger to Israel today is self-inflicted based upon 65 years of foreign policy based upon war where it refuses to address the conflict with the Arabs with a fair diplomatic solution that the United Nations began addressing even before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War was over. There will never be peace or security for Israel so long as it doesn't address this issue diplomatically and the requirements for that diplomatic resolution haven't changed in decades. If Israel ends it's insanity then the physical borders no longer matter because there will be no conflict between the Arab nations, the Palestinians, and the Israelis. Every border will be secure based upon the second criteria established by UNSC 242.
As noted the use of military force by Israel has not brought peace for Israel over the last 65 years......... nor will a dependency on military force ever bring peace for Israel. The pen is, indeed, mightier than the sword.
Why are settlements being built in the "safety zones". Wont a new safety zone need to keep safe the new settlement but then another settlement will be built in this news safety zone. Oh, we need another safty zone around this second settlement.......
Trust who? . What "peace talks" ? Israeli stupidity trusts former terrorists like Sharon, Shamir, and Begin to turn the Jewish state into a machine for the manufacture of human rights abuses then whines about fences, guards, apartheid walls, and land mines? Your misery is self-inflicted.
Israel will NEVER give up the WB or Jerusalem. Oh, they'll toss a few scraps from the table but anyone who knows the Zionists know this will never, never, ever, happen.
Does that mean Israel is an "Ethnocracy... a form of government where representatives of a particular ethnic group hold a number of government posts disproportionately large to the percentage of the total population that the particular ethnic group(s) represents and use them to advance the position of their particular ethnic group(s) to the detriment of others."
The cities and villages in the west bank are not settlements. They are not different from Liverpool or Cambridge ( just smaller ). The east Israeli safety zone was and is the Jordan river.
Palestinian moanings. Yes, 105000 dead Syrians and all you continue to do is to write about Israel... talk about self-inflicted.. I wish UK ( and the rest of Europe ) would stop illegal Muslims from entering our cities, same as Israel are trying to save itself from Arabs and Africans.
"What Happened in Latakia? "Just when it began becoming apparent that the US and its allies were facing serious regional setbacks in the Middle East and North Africa, reports began circulating about an explosion in Latakia. "Unverified reports, originating from anonymous sources in Israel in early July 2013, began claiming that Tel Aviv had launched an attack against the Syrian port of Latakia that caused a massive explosion. "As the rumours began to circulate in the media, it was dubiously claimed that the Israeli attacks were launched against shipments of Russian-made S-300 air defence systems that were in the process of being delivered to Syria by the Kremlin. "US officials would enter the picture by deliberately leaking more information about what happened in Latakia by claiming that Israel used its air force to bomb the port there to destroy a military depot filled with Russian-made Yakhont land-to-sea anti-ship missiles." http://www.globalresearch.ca/from-turkey-with-love-another-israeli-attack-on-syria/5343382 If 650,000 (mostly) European Zionists hadn't inflicted an ethnocracy on a majority of Palestinians in 1948, how many of those 105,000 dead Syrians you shed crocodile tears over would still be alive?
BS. Really BS. The irony is that non pro islamists opened important threads about the suffer of Syrians.. while during the last two years pro arabs openend evil and propaganda threads only about the west, Israel & USA ( maybe Egypt ). I wonder if the Israeli arab school thought you about 850000 Jews who were expelled from Arab countries between 1948 - 1973 THE JEWISH NAKBA. Also i'm sure nobody told you facts regarding the ONLY palestinian nakba which KUWAIT did to them in 1992 . Go learn history.
Good point. There's no difference between oppression of the two people. People generally revolt against oppression regardless of who's doing the oppressing. In Syria it's Assad's regime and in Palestine it's the oppression by the Zionist regime of Israel. Same oppression, same response by those oppressed... violence!!!!
There is no oppression here Shiva... come visit.... What you are rehashing is a myth. Please concentrate on your people and write about their misdeeds more frequently.
Yes, there is a serious problem with the United States providing "cover" which is more political cover than air cover for Israel and its coming back to haunt us. Here's a recent news story that reflects the US problem related to Israel. http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html This huge disparity is because the United States government doesn't address all "people" equally based upon the ideals upon which America was founded. The Israelis "love" us because the US government supports the tyranny and oppression by the Israeli government while the Palestinians "hate" us because the US government supports the tyranny and oppression of the Palestinian People by the Israeli government. There is a caveat that I also need to include related to this survey. Basically it's our government that is causing the negative approval ratings of the United States and not the American People. There was a time when Americans were some of the most respected people in the world but since WW II our government has been destroying that image of the American People. Our government has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars in destroying the image of the American People worldwide. Why we continue to allow this is beyond any rational belief. It's like a corporation employing an advertising agency to destroy it's corporate image.
Its not part of Israel , its illegally occupied territories - beyond Israel's internationally recognized borders. No country recognize it as part of Israel , Even US Israel's chief ally - consider the JEWISH Colonies , as illegal structures. .... .
Succinctly stated in this old oft repeated quote :"“Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can’t help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.” — John Sheehan, S.J -----
The problem /stumbling block seems to be US veto which renders the Security Council powerless/impotent . The United States has vetoed 35 UN resolutions related to the middle east. (Palestine/Israel; 24, Lebanon; 8, Syria; 1, Libya; 2) Shortly after the 1967 war, the US asserted that Israel had to comply with the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Territories, but it was only four years later, in 1971, that the US declared Israels actions there to be contrary to the Convention. It took another four years for the US to declare the building of settlements in the occupied territories as being illegal and an obstacle to peace. Yet, two days after declaring its position to the UN (1976), the US vetoed a resolution calling on Israel to stop changing the status of Jerusalem and put an end to settlement building on Arab land. It was only in March 1979 that the US allowed the Security Council to address the situation by abstaining on the UNSCR 446, which stated that the Fourth Geneva Convention applied to the Arab territories occupied by Israel, including Jerusalem ---- Israel continued to expand its control of Jerusalem, and eventually annexed the whole city. The US publicly condemned Israel. The UN General Assembly warned Israel not to change the status of the city with a Resolution in July, but neither of them made any reference to the Corpus Separatum. Israel ignored all criticism. In November 1967, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 242, which, although it made no reference to Jerusalem, stated that the Israeli armed forces should withdraw from territories occupied in the recent conflict [25]. In May 1968, the Security Council adopted Resolution 252, stating that the acquisition of territory by military conquest was inadmissible and in July 1969, SCR 267 condemned Israel for failing to comply[26]. Again, in September 1969, a Resolution condemned failure of Israel to comply with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and international law governing military occupation. Still, Israel ignored all criticism and refused to comply. In 1971, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution, supported by the US, declaring that both parties should negotiate the status of the city. The Israeli Cabinet rejected the resolution and said that their government would not negotiate ==== UNGA - can issue as many warnings / and condemnations , as they like, it wont make a scrap of difference as long as any US Government of whichever side , is prepared to continue acting as Israel's puppet in its ME policies. ...
An important distinction is made in this quotation from John Sheehan. A nation is not really affected in a positive manner by it's friends but instead it is adversely affected by it's enemies. A "neutral" relationship is just as good for a nation as a "friendly" relationship is for a nation. We don't need "friendly" nations but instead we don't need "enemy" nations. There is an inherent fact based upon history that any nation that divides its people based upon race, religion, ethnic heritage, social status, gender, or other invidious criteria is inherently tyrannical. There isn't a single nation in the Middle East that doesn't divide it's People based upon invidious criteria and that includes Israel. We can also note that the United States, and even the United Nations, does not have any authority to intervene in the sovereign affairs of a nation. That authority rests solely with those that live in that nation. The problems that the United States and the United Nations do have authority to deal with is when a nation imposes it's authority outside of the nation itself. The UN Charter addresses this authority and it is the role and responsibility of the United Nations Security Council to address these situations which is exactly what it did with UN Security Council Resolution 242. In fulfilling its role the United Nations Security Council cannot play "politics" where one situation is treated differently than another. When the UN Security Council issues a Resolution, and all such Resolutions are mandatory, then it must enforce those Resolutions without political bias. The UN Security Council has, over the years, issued numerous Resolutions and has subsequently imposed economic sanctions against nations that failed to comply with those Resolutions. Iran and N Korea can be cited where this has happened. And yet the UN Security Council issued Resolution 242 in 1967 and not a single attempt has been made to enforce it by the Security Council. UNSC 242 doesn't address just Israel but instead addresses all of the nations in the Middle East and all nations have a treaty obligation to comply with it. The Arab Nations have put forward a proposal in 2002 that would finally resolve all of the issues in Palestine based upon UNSC 242 as well as earlier recommendations provided by the UNGA going back to 1948. This proposal will meet all of the mandatory requirements of UNSC 242 and it is Israel, and Israel alone, that is blocking the implantation of this Arab proposal that would bring peace for Israel, the Palestinians, and the rest of the Middle East. It is time, in fact it is long since time, that the UN Security Council to fulfill it's role by taking the appropriate actions necessary to bring peace to the Middle East. The Arab nations and the Palestinian People are waiting for Israel to step forward and comply with all of the mandatory provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 242 that will finally bring peace to the Middle East. It is the responsibility of the UN Security Council to take those actions necessary for the implementation of a peace accord that fulfills both the letter and intent of UNSC 242.
The veto power of the permanent members of the Security Council is inherently problematic with the UN Charter as it allows the political bias of a single permanent member to control the actions of the Security Council and of the United Nations as a whole.
