unwise UN visa ban

Jordan's occupation of the West Bank was legal.

its the annexation that was illegal.

 

RoccoR;

Evidently not- as your own hackneyed rhetoric has continued unabated.
Of course, ' hackneyed rhetoric ' is an established grindstone, so forgive me if I cease to respond to yours. You believe that you have made your points. I assure you that you have not.
Regards,

 

Without the situation in Israel setting off the Muslim world, there would not have been Islamic terrorist groups to begin with. Also, notice that the Palestinian situation is still the most important rallying cry of the terrorists. And of course Palestinians are suffering terribly. Jews of course have also suffered terribly and are very frightened.

Most people can't imagine the horrors that both Jews and Palestinian Arabs have experienced.

 

dixon76710, et al,

I'm not sure where you picked-up this quote, or what context it was expressed in, but I won't deny I said it. It sounds like something I would say; as a bullet to a larger point. It even sounds like a bullet from the PLO-NAD position paper.

(COMMENT)

You are correct, in that the Israelis invaded sovereign Jordanian territory (not Palestinian Territory); with justifiable cause. However, justifiable cause then (in 1967) does not alter the fact that Israel did not have any sovereign claim to the territory beyond the 1949 Armistice Line. But now (47 years later), we have to look at the developments that have taken place over time, the impact of the critical events (again over time), and determine what the true ground conditions are as compared with the legal positions.

We have to look at the realities of today; and as a practical matter - what is real today. I know many arguments generally center on the Mandate era ( pre-1948 ), and many concepts of international protocols that have come into existence after 1967. But solutions come from the understandings and resources of the day.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

No, he isn't. War itself is illegal under international law and Israel was the aggressor.

 

WRONG!!!!!!

The United Nations voted to allow a Jewish State in Palestine, and the Arabs attacked this legal state the day after it declared independence.

The Arab attack on Israel was illegal as it violated the will of the international community.

 

Concentrate. The subject is the 1967 war.

 

the topic of this thread is the USA banning an Iranian ambassador to the UN from getting a Visa.

it is YOU who (again) derailed a thread into being about Israel.

 

moon, et al,

Well, we might have to agree to disagree.

(OBSERVATION)

(COMMENT)

It is my opinion that, the Arab League can attack the State of Israel as many times as it can muster the resources (and lose) without any international repercussions. But Israel needs only lose once, and it is the end of Israel. This is the dilemma Israel faces.

In June 1967, intelligence showed the massing of over a 100,000 Egyptian troops and 900 tanks poised to attack Israel. To the north, a similar military mobilization was taking place along the Syrian Border. Jordanian troops were already in the West Bank. Without regard to opinions to the contrary, it appeared an attack was eminent by the Arab League, having once before attacked using similar strategies.

Preemptive Strike: Israel had to make a determination as to initiate such operations as may be necessary, designed to neutralize a potential threat, and to gain a distinct advantage against a prepositioned and poised Arab Force from multiple directions. The Preemptive Strike was the solution that provided Israel with the greatest protection.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

I think an ambassador should be an embodiment of a certain country's people,
not with the leaders and ideals that held those people captive.

 

Unfortunately, this guy is.

 

Hell, so called international law is trying to set the border to that which was illegally occupied by Jordan. Cementing their gains in 1948 and pretending as if they won in 1967

 

dixon76710, et al,

There are many that would agree with you.

(COMMENT)

There is no question that much of post-1967 Humanitarian Law, UN Resolutions and various decrees are biased against Israel. But if the truth were known, none of the nations that voted to support the concepts "affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence" would actually agree to such an uprising in their own country. Certainly no country on the Security Council would agree to allowing a civil war and the formation of a separate set of nations. In fact, the trend is quite the opposite.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

They had little choice but to ensure the Arabs moved away from their borders as they, because of the almost exclusive reliance on reserves who for the most part were essential to a working economy, could not hold a war footing for longer than a couple of weeks hence, whatever was going to happen with the Arab forces be it a withdrawal or defeat had to happen soon. The Arabs understood this but did not count on Israel being able to dominate the battlefield and air so quickly.

 

They certainly do as Israel adhered to the resolution and negotiated with Egypt and Jordan and made peace returning lands in the process while the Palestinians who were not even mentioned by name did not. In fact, they have as part of their charter the policy of NOT NEGOTIATING which is in violation of 242.

 

He made some fine points and backed them up with links, logic and quotes.

Mod Edit ~ Off topic

 

Show the U.N. the exit from

San Paolo, Brazil would make a great new U.N. headquarters in the 21st Century.


Moi

No ​

 

Practically every square inch of land on the planet was taken illegally by force.

 

Not at all. War is illegal yet you support the Zionists for initiating one. You simply don't have a legal case.
Florid guff with the tawdry support of previously-discredited drone material isn't going to change that.

 

Most of it before the rule of law. It's wise to accept the rule of rule now that it exists. Those that don't will end up as victims of their own criminal fraternity.

 

which war did Israel start?

 

Israel initiated them all- with the exception of the Yom Kippur War of 1973. That was arab-initiated and failed to dislodge the Zionists from Palestinian Occupied Territory, unfortunately.

 

WRONG

Syria, Jordan, and Egypt started the 1967 War.

 

No, it was certainly initiated by Israel. The ' reasons ' for that initiation are unacceptable.

 

moon, et al,

You are mistaken entirely.

(COMMENT)

UN Resolution 181(II) was the outcome of selection from recommendations (a minority propsal and a majority proposal) made by the UN Special Committee on Palestine presented to the General Assembly. The General Assembly adopted the majority proposal that became known as the "Partition Plan" [Resolution 181(II), A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947]. In accordance with the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" outlined in Part I - Section B, of UN Resolution 181(II), the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC)(AKA: The Commission) was established to become the "Successor Government" to the Mandate. "The administration of Palestine" was to, as the mandatory Power withdraws its armed forces, be progressively turned over to the Commission; which was to "act in conformity with the recommendations of the General Assembly, under the guidance of the Security Council." During the period January 1948 through May 1948, the UNPC held a series of implementation meetings. On 9 January 1948, the UNPC extended invitations to the Government of the United Kingdom, as the Mandatory Power, to the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) - representing the Arab Palestinians, and to the Jewish Agency for Palestine. The AHC decline to participate in the implementation process.

The Jewish Agency for Palestine and the UNPC worked through the "Steps Preparatory for Independence" and on 14 May 1948, the last coordination was made. On the midnight between 14/15 May, 1948, (after the final withdrawal of UK Forces) the Jewish Agency for Palestine is declared "Independence." The UNPC notified the UN as required which facilitated public notification of the coordinated effort. You will no doubt note that the telegram to the UN Secretary General makes prominent reference to General Assembly 181(II). The official UN public notice states in part:

Let there be no mistake, to the extent possible, and to the portions agree to, the applicable portions of the 1947 Resolution was "implemented" as a matter of public record with the establishment of the State of Israel. The Jewish Agency for Palestine DID NOT unilaterally declared their own State in 1948 - or take by force any territory until the external interference of the Arab League Armies crossed over the international boundaries and initiated hostilities on the morning of 15 May 1948. This was a clear attempt by the Arab League to undermine the implementation process, and to take by force that territorial allocation which the General Assembly adopted for the Jews to exercise their right of self-determination, according to the Resolution of 1947.

Most Respectfully,
R