Modern Israel's borders

[P F Tinmore]

Sovereignty is not granted. It is inherent.

That is a meaningless statement, if you have ever wrote one.

If sovereignty is INHERENT then Israel has sovereignty and you can't argue against it.

Sovereignty is automatically inherited by the people of the place. The Palestinians automatically became citizens of Palestine at the birth of their country.

The people from someplace else get their sovereignty there.

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

 

[Shusha]

Sovereignty is not granted. It is inherent.

That is a meaningless statement, if you have ever wrote one.

If sovereignty is INHERENT then Israel has sovereignty and you can't argue against it.

Sovereignty is automatically inherited by the people of the place. The Palestinians automatically became citizens of Palestine at the birth of their country.

The people from someplace else get their sovereignty there.

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

 

[P F Tinmore]

Sovereignty is not granted. It is inherent.

That is a meaningless statement, if you have ever wrote one.

If sovereignty is INHERENT then Israel has sovereignty and you can't argue against it.

Sovereignty is automatically inherited by the people of the place. The Palestinians automatically became citizens of Palestine at the birth of their country.

The people from someplace else get their sovereignty there.

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

Those aren't new.

 

[Shusha]

That is a meaningless statement, if you have ever wrote one.

If sovereignty is INHERENT then Israel has sovereignty and you can't argue against it.

Sovereignty is automatically inherited by the people of the place. The Palestinians automatically became citizens of Palestine at the birth of their country.

The people from someplace else get their sovereignty there.

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

Those aren't new.

They are qualifications to sovereignty being inherent.

See, I have no problem with the RIGHTS to sovereignty being inherent. We agree. (Though you apparently disagree that Jews have them too).

But the actual fact of sovereignty requires other things.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Ecocertifmrl]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

What a load of dry shit.

Most despectfully,
A christian

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, perpetual occupation.

Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

 

[theliq]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,I suppose,for Palestinians to RECLAIM THEIR LAND is your suggestion for resolution....With respect you are an IDIOT

 

[Shusha]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, perpetual occupation.

Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

You cant acquire sovereignty. It's inherent. Including inherent for the Jewish people. Remember?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, theliq, et al,

OK, in the first case, your are backward. And in the second case, you inject a solution for which is irrelevant.

Indeed, perpetual occupation.
Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Now that you bring up the "Occupation"; your statement is true. Occupation does not, by itself, confer sovereignty. However, when you concede that the territory is "Occupied" you are saying that someone other than the contemporary Arab Palestinian has maintained "effective control." It is that "effective control" that demonstrates that at no time in the last century (plus) has the contemporary Arab Palestinian has never established a time when they were "able to stand alone." (Article 22(4) LoNC) Nor have the contemporary Arab Palestinian ever been a governing body with the demonstrated ability to govern itself; able to "exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State."

• A territory that is under the effective control of Authority "A" (israel) cannot be, simultaneously, self-governing national authority "B" (Arab Palestinians) without the concent of Authority "A" (Israel).

• The factional governments of the (so-called) State of Palestine cannot stand alone without the financial support from the International Donor Group for Palestine.

"Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday called on the international community to generously support the activities of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which is facing “the worst financial crisis in its history.”

"Urging broader support for new financing mechanisms, delegates warned today of a humanitarian crisis should the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) be forced to scale back services because of a financing deficit, as the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) concluded its general debate on that Agency’s work."​

[QUOTE="theliq, post: 20395433, member: 31101
Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,I suppose,for Palestinians to RECLAIM THEIR LAND is your suggestion for resolution....With respect you are an IDIOT[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

Well, it does not surprise me that the pro-Arab Palestinians first solution, on-going solutions and recommended future solution would say something like: "let's drop a Bomb on Israel." Afterall, the recommendation that "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase." (Article 9, PLO-Charter)

The would "reclaim" is political propaganda. The contemporary Arab Palestinians did not have sovereignty. It has been a quarter of a century since the Article XV RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES options were put in place. Yet, the Arab Palestinians have consistently stalled and politically danced around the activation of good faith negotiations. The Arab Palestinian want violence --- and is addicted to violence. It is who they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[fncceo]

Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,

You don't have a bomb ... Australia doesn't even have a bomb.

Australian have to rely on Americans to defend them, like they did in the Battle of the Coral Sea (you're welcome).

So, if Zionists control the US, as you maintain, you might want to kiss the Zionist arse or maybe we'll decide you're not worth defending, again.

 

[theliq]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, theliq, et al,

OK, in the first case, your are backward. And in the second case, you inject a solution for which is irrelevant.

Indeed, perpetual occupation.
Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

Now that you bring up the "Occupation"; your statement is true. Occupation does not, by itself, confer sovereignty. However, when you concede that the territory is "Occupied" you are saying that someone other than the contemporary Arab Palestinian has maintained "effective control." It is that "effective control" that demonstrates that at no time in the last century (plus) has the contemporary Arab Palestinian has never established a time when they were "able to stand alone." (Article 22(4) LoNC) Nor have the contemporary Arab Palestinian ever been a governing body with the demonstrated ability to govern itself; able to "exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State."

• A territory that is under the effective control of Authority "A" (israel) cannot be, simultaneously, self-governing national authority "B" (Arab Palestinians) without the concent of Authority "A" (Israel).

• The factional governments of the (so-called) State of Palestine cannot stand alone without the financial support from the International Donor Group for Palestine.

"Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday called on the international community to generously support the activities of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which is facing “the worst financial crisis in its history.”

"Urging broader support for new financing mechanisms, delegates warned today of a humanitarian crisis should the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) be forced to scale back services because of a financing deficit, as the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) concluded its general debate on that Agency’s work."​

[QUOTE="theliq, post: 20395433, member: 31101
Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,I suppose,for Palestinians to RECLAIM THEIR LAND is your suggestion for resolution....With respect you are an IDIOT

(COMMENT)

Well, it does not surprise me that the pro-Arab Palestinians first solution, on-going solutions and recommended future solution would say something like: "let's drop a Bomb on Israel." Afterall, the recommendation that "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase." (Article 9, PLO-Charter)

The would "reclaim" is political propaganda. The contemporary Arab Palestinians did not have sovereignty. It has been a quarter of a century since the Article XV RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES options were put in place. Yet, the Arab Palestinians have consistently stalled and politically danced around the activation of good faith negotiations. The Arab Palestinian want violence --- and is addicted to violence. It is who they are.

Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
AND YOU DICKROCC ARE A TOTAL IRRELEVANCE

 

[theliq]

Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,

You don't have a bomb ... Australia doesn't even have a bomb.

Australian have to rely on Americans to defend them, like they did in the Battle of the Coral Sea (you're welcome).

So, if Zionists control the US, as you maintain, you might want to kiss the Zionist arse or maybe we'll decide you're not worth defending, again.

Idiot, Coral Sea that was 70 years ago...DUH

We can look after ourselves ZIONISTS are complete SHIT AND ZIONISTS ARE A BREED OF SHIT

 

[rylah]

Then let's drop a Bomb on Israel,

You don't have a bomb ... Australia doesn't even have a bomb.

Australian have to rely on Americans to defend them, like they did in the Battle of the Coral Sea (you're welcome).

So, if Zionists control the US, as you maintain, you might want to kiss the Zionist arse or maybe we'll decide you're not worth defending, again.

Idiot, Coral Sea that was 70 years ago...DUH

We can look after ourselves ZIONISTS are complete SHIT AND ZIONISTS ARE A BREED OF SHIT

The Greatest of All - Our 50 Top Australians

The Greatest of All - Our 50 Top Australians was a newspaper article published in The Australian on 27 June 2013,[1] coinciding with that year's Australia Day. Compiled by News Limited journalist Billy Rule, the article listed what he considered were the top 50 individuals (including one horse) who "have helped define who we are as a people and how Australia is perceived as a country", including 'trailblazers', those who left a legacy for others to admire or benefit from, and those that engendered inspiration.

7. Sir John Monash: Australian Army general and victor of the Battle of Hamel in the First World War (born 1865, Victoria; died 1931, Victoria)

General Sir John Monash, commander of the Australian corps in France from 1917. An Australian born Jew of Prussian parentage, Monash was credited with instigating the offensive which broke the Hindeburg Line thus winning the war. In peacetime, Monash came to be regarded as the greatest living Australian. In 1927 he was made foundation President of the Zionist Federation of Australia, having presided over the opening of the NSW Jewish War Memorial, or Maccabean Hall, in Darlinghurst, Sydney, on 11 November 1923.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Sovereignty is automatically inherited by the people of the place. The Palestinians automatically became citizens of Palestine at the birth of their country.

The people from someplace else get their sovereignty there.

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

Those aren't new.

They are qualifications to sovereignty being inherent.

See, I have no problem with the RIGHTS to sovereignty being inherent. We agree. (Though you apparently disagree that Jews have them too).

But the actual fact of sovereignty requires other things.

Not so. All of the Jews who normally lived there became citizens of Palestine with the same rights as everybody else.

 

[Hollie]

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

Those aren't new.

They are qualifications to sovereignty being inherent.

See, I have no problem with the RIGHTS to sovereignty being inherent. We agree. (Though you apparently disagree that Jews have them too).

But the actual fact of sovereignty requires other things.

Not so. All of the Jews who normally lived there became citizens of Palestine with the same rights as everybody else.

Oh my. You're back to promoting the fraud that the Treaty of Lausanne created your imagined "country of Pal'istan"?

 

[rylah]

You've already introduced several additional ideas to your initial claim that sovereignty is inherent. Adding qualifications.

Apparently it also requires the birth of a country. Tell me. How are countries born?

Also you claim sovereignties passes to the people of the place. How are they defined?

What qualifications have I added?

You've added three:

1. birth of a country
2. people of a place
3. citizenship

Those aren't new.

They are qualifications to sovereignty being inherent.

See, I have no problem with the RIGHTS to sovereignty being inherent. We agree. (Though you apparently disagree that Jews have them too).

But the actual fact of sovereignty requires other things.

Not so. All of the Jews who normally lived there became citizens of Palestine with the same rights as everybody else.

With the same civil rights,
the Jewish nation had an inherent right to sovereignty, remember?

 

[Hollie]

RE: Modern Israel's borders
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, the bottom line is: The Arab Palestinians are NOT owed anything. The Right to Sovereignty or Territorial Integrity does not guarantee a country. No one owes the Arab Palestinians a country simply based on their rights. And the Arab Palestinians are not entitled to take any territory based on these rights.

What qualifications have I added?

(COMMENT)

The implication all along has been that some territorial expanse, boundaries undefined, under which the Arab Palestinians have the authority of a state to govern itself (sovereign) is their state. They do not have any territory to which they hold the supreme authority; or which they can claim they stand alone. For more than a century, every square inch of the territory formerly under the Mandate, has been controlled by an authority other than the contemporary Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, perpetual occupation.

Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

Indeed, occupation by the Arab-islamist colonists.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Nor have the contemporary Arab Palestinian ever been a governing body with the demonstrated ability to govern itself;

Indeed, Palestine has always been a non self governing territory under colonial and alien rule.

 

[rylah]

Nor have the contemporary Arab Palestinian ever been a governing body with the demonstrated ability to govern itself;

Indeed, Palestine has always been a non self governing territory under colonial and alien rule.

Not always, but for quiet some time...
it's been 70 years since the indigenous nation got the government back.