Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Such doe-eyed prostration at the altar of the UN is misplaced. I see nothing to suggest that the 1967 line would calm the Islamist gee-had.I could go on providing you with answers but we both know I will be unable to persuade you that Israel's border of 1967 is the proper one because it is the one proposed in the United Nations Security Council Resolution 242.
S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967
So let's call the whole thing off.
Yes.Oh dear. You think 242 delineates borders between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine?
Yes.Oh dear. You think 242 delineates borders between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine?
"1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:Oh my. Perhaps you can point to me where, exactly, in 242, it outlines the borders of the State of Palestine or even mentions such a thing.
Have it your own way, Shusha, the might is right approach.Oh please.
Be clear what you are attempting to argue here. You are claiming that this single line creates a new reality: Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from terratories (sic) occupied in the recent conflict;"
You are claiming that 242 creates a new sovereignty.
You are claiming that 242 delineates the extent and specific territory of that new sovereignty.
You are claiming that 242 creates an unchallengeable or unchangeable condition.
You are just plain wrong.
1. The UN can not create sovereignty.
2. The UN can not delineate borders between States.
3. The UN can not create treaties between Parties or States.
Have it your own way, Shusha, the might is right approach.
I prefer UN Resolutions and the principles of International law.
Gaza is still occupied. You do not understand that having a military on a border which is closed while children nearby are sniped at, controlling the airspace, forbidding fishermen to go beyond three miles in their own waters, and periodically massacring the civilian population so that the entire Gaza is like a concentration camp, is effective occupation.I offered a solution, namely the Israelis, both military and settlers, should return to Israel. This will render acts of resistance to the occupation obsolete.
It didn't work with Gaza. No part of Gaza is "occupied" by either military or settlers. The boundary between Gaza and Israel is clear. And yet the Gazans are still resisting.
Why is that, do you think?
Have it your own way, Shusha, the might is right approach.Oh please.
Be clear what you are attempting to argue here. You are claiming that this single line creates a new reality: Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from terratories (sic) occupied in the recent conflict;"
You are claiming that 242 creates a new sovereignty.
You are claiming that 242 delineates the extent and specific territory of that new sovereignty.
You are claiming that 242 creates an unchallengeable or unchangeable condition.
You are just plain wrong.
1. The UN can not create sovereignty.
2. The UN can not delineate borders between States.
3. The UN can not create treaties between Parties or States.
I prefer UN Resolutions and the principles of International law.
Creating settlements is forbidden in international law.What does Israel need to do to live in peace? What do the Palestinians and Gazans have to do?
The limited self-government allowed in the occupied territories is a sham, similar to the Judenräte of occupied Poland in the last century.
Israel and you need to understand these things.
You dodged my question. What should Israel do in order to have peace? What should the Palestinians and Gazans do in order to have peace?
(And no, creating settlements is not forbidden in international law. See my thread titled "Settlements Are Not Illegal".)
You are mistaken; the Israeli navy patrols the territorial waters of Gaza and prohibits by shooting Palestinian fishermen from going beyond 3 miles. The Israeli air force prevents Palestinians from using their own air space. The Israeli army are all around the Gaza border and keeps the Palestinians prisoners in their own land, controlling who and what can enter or leave.Eloy, et al,
This statement is so screwed-up, it cannot be salvaged.
(COMMENT)Gaza is still occupied. You do not understand that having a military on a border which is closed while children nearby are sniped at, controlling the airspace, forbidding fishermen to go beyond three miles in their own waters, and periodically massacring the civilian population so that the entire Gaza is like a concentration camp, is effective occupation.
The Gaza Strip has not been actually placed under the Israeli authority [the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) acting as] of hostile army.
As ruled by International Court of Justice, UN General Assembly, UN Security Council, EU and US state department, both Gaza & West Bank count as "Occupied Territories". This degree of control over the air space, territorial waters, and the blockade of the border amounts to occupation in the view of the International Court of Justice, Justice Meir Shamgar rejecting the Israeli bogus claim that Gaza was no longer occupied wrote that the "law of occupation did apply to the Gaza Strip, simply because Israel continued to control the area."
Oxford Public International Law: 8 The Israeli Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza
"We need to speak openly of the challenges and the unacceptable difficulties that the people of Gaza face. Of the humiliation of the occupation and the closures, but also of the division between Gaza and the West Bank."
Ban Ki-moon in Gaza: 'The UN will always be with you'
"Even though Israel unilaterally withdrew its troops and settlements from Gaza in 2005, it continues to have obligations as an occupying power in Gaza under the Fourth Geneva Convention because of its almost complete control over Gaza’s borders, sea and air space, tax revenue, utilities, population registry, and the internal economy of Gaza. At a minimum, Israel continues to be responsible for the basic welfare of the Palestinian population in Gaza." (Human Rights Council)
Human Rights Council Special Session on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, July 6, 2006 (Human Rights Watch, 6-7-2006)
Please forgive me for not answering all your statements but, as you can see, your first sentence was so full of error that time does not permit me to do more at this time.Nor has the IDF been in a position to extends it effective control or authority since the unilateral withdrawal in 2005. If it had, then the Occupation Police would have been able to prevent the construction of underground tunnels across the frontier and into Israel. The Occupation Force would have been able to prevented the UNRWA from hiding rockets in UN facilities. And, the Occupation Force would have been able to prevented the launching of rockets from the vicinity of protected facilities and across the frontier into Israel.
In the last half century, there has not been been but a handful of suspect incidents of murder committed by IDF Military Personnel. All suspicious incident have been investigated, and prosecuted when wrongful action was determined.
Since 2009, there has not been but a handful of suspicious incidents in which, in a total disregard for human life, instigators and provocateurs have attempted to challenged the blockade administrered under the Rules outlined in Section II - Methods of Warfare in the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994.
There has been no Massacre of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in the last half century.
Most Respectfully,
R
You appear to be unfamiliar with International Law.Eloy, et al,
This is another travesty of the truth.
(COMMENT)Creating settlements is forbidden in international law.
The limited self-government allowed in the occupied territories is a sham, similar to the Judenräte of occupied Poland in the last century.
Israel and you need to understand these things.
There is no law pertaining to the establishment of settlements in which Israel has full control over a recognized international agreement.
There is no comparison to the Israelis building settlements for themselves within their jurisdiction (Area "C") and the relocation of Jews into the Judenrat or Jewish Ghetto in Poland (WWII). This is drama queen ravings by over motional Arab Palestinians.
The Judenrat, or Jewish Council
When the German authorities herded the Jewish population of Poland first into urban areas, and subsequently into ghettos, they required each community to form a Jewish Council. In smaller cities the councils had twelve members, in larger towns the number was twenty-four.
Most often composed of former community leaders, the councils took on all the duties of a local government. Most importantly for the Germans, the councils acted as intermediaries to carry out the their increasingly oppressive dictates, such as providing forced labor battalions for German war factories, and eventually even delivering Jews directly to the trains bound for the death camps.
Return to:
- Conditions for Polish Jews
- Halina Ogrodzinska Story, Part 1
- Christine Damski Story, Part 5
Most Respectfully,
R
Please see my Post #1537 above.Gaza is still occupied. You do not understand that having a military on a border which is closed while children nearby are sniped at, controlling the airspace, forbidding fishermen to go beyond three miles in their own waters, and periodically massacring the civilian population so that the entire Gaza is like a concentration camp, is effective occupation.I offered a solution, namely the Israelis, both military and settlers, should return to Israel. This will render acts of resistance to the occupation obsolete.
It didn't work with Gaza. No part of Gaza is "occupied" by either military or settlers. The boundary between Gaza and Israel is clear. And yet the Gazans are still resisting.
Why is that, do you think?
Let's review. You said that the removal of military and settlers from territory will render acts of resistance obsolete and will therefore result in a peaceful solution to the conflict.
Israel unilaterally removed all military and all settlers from Gaza. And yet the Gazans still resist. It did not result in peace. It did not provide a solution.
Knowing this, why do you assert that these types of unilateral actions by Israel will bring peace? Definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting it will bring different results.
(And I fully agree with Rocco that your interpretation of the law is unsound).
Maybe Israel should take back all the processors for computers they made.
The answer to your first question is that the Israelis should end their brutal occupation of the State of Palestine and learn how to get along with their nearest neighbors.Creating settlements is forbidden in international law.What does Israel need to do to live in peace? What do the Palestinians and Gazans have to do?
The limited self-government allowed in the occupied territories is a sham, similar to the Judenräte of occupied Poland in the last century.
Israel and you need to understand these things.
You dodged my question. What should Israel do in order to have peace? What should the Palestinians and Gazans do in order to have peace?
(And no, creating settlements is not forbidden in international law. See my thread titled "Settlements Are Not Illegal".)
The answer to your second question is that the Palestinians should persuade the Israelis to go home.
And Yes, the Israeli settlements are in breach of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention which forbids an occupier from transferring its own civilians into the territory it occupies. "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."
ICRC service
All the countries of the world and top jurists are in agreement that the Jewish Settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal. Israel is a scofflaw rogue state, I'm afraid.The answer to your first question is that the Israelis should end their brutal occupation of the State of Palestine and learn how to get along with their nearest neighbors.
The answer to your second question is that the Palestinians should persuade the Israelis to go home.
And Yes, the Israeli settlements are in breach of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention which forbids an occupier from transferring its own civilians into the territory it occupies. "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."
ICRC service
Everything in your post depends on there being existing boundaries between Israel and Palestine. There are none. Until we define what territories are "occupied" and what is "home" your request is entirely meaningless.
Second, we must define what it means to be "occupied" as Israel withdrew from Gaza entirely but some people (in error) still consider it "occupied".
So define the territory. Define the conditions. Only then can we know if Israel has met them.
Expert jurists and international treaty conventions are hardly populum.All the countries of the world and top jurists are in agreement that the Jewish Settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal. Israel is a scofflaw rogue state, I'm afraid.The answer to your first question is that the Israelis should end their brutal occupation of the State of Palestine and learn how to get along with their nearest neighbors.
The answer to your second question is that the Palestinians should persuade the Israelis to go home.
And Yes, the Israeli settlements are in breach of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention which forbids an occupier from transferring its own civilians into the territory it occupies. "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."
ICRC service
Everything in your post depends on there being existing boundaries between Israel and Palestine. There are none. Until we define what territories are "occupied" and what is "home" your request is entirely meaningless.
Second, we must define what it means to be "occupied" as Israel withdrew from Gaza entirely but some people (in error) still consider it "occupied".
So define the territory. Define the conditions. Only then can we know if Israel has met them.
Then it should be super easy to tell me where the borders are between Israel and Palestine. And back up your claim with quotes to legal instruments outlining those boundaries.
(and btw, argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy)
Please study the map below.
And just so you can see that I put my money where my mouth is, here is a "top jurist" and his legal analysis of why the territory is under Israel sovereignty.
Forgive me but I will stick with the rest of the world, the United Nations, and experts in international law. It is your choice to disregard the overwhelming and cogent evidence regarding Israel's border. Perhaps you can get consolation from knowing that one member state of the United Nations believes as you do.
I could go on providing you with answers but we both know I will be unable to persuade you that Israel's border of 1967 is the proper one because it is the one proposed in the United Nations Security Council Resolution 242.
S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967
So let's call the whole thing off.
