No Palestinian State

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

They call for the peace in the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE not the nation of palestine

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

There was no stated goal to take over nothing.

They are the aggressors for several reasons, the first one being that they started killing/massacring Jews before any Arab was killed.

 

[Humanity]

I'm not sure that is a relevant question...

It does exist, so it is....

Finding a peaceful solution to what already exists is far better time spent than wasting time on debating the legitimacy of what is legitimate!

Tell it to the arab muslims as they are the ones with the NO JEWS charter

So what is Netanyahu's solution?

Without any flexibility for negotiation of a two state solution then there can never be peace in the region...

To suggest that a two state solution will "giving a base for attacks to the radical Islam against Israel" is ridiculous... So, there would be no change then!

Offer a two state solution, withdraw from occupied territories and I for one will stand with Israel against any Islamic radical attacks and support Israel and international intervention!

Netanyahu's comments simply prove that the Israeli right wing has no stomach for a peaceful solution.

Been tried and the arab muslims made sure it failed, so what has changed in the last 10 years to show it wont fail again. They have been offered a two state solution and turned it down every time. So now Israel is saying what the arab muslims have been saying for the last 66 years and the islamonazi stooges don't like it.

When was a real two state solution tried?

2005 when Israel left gaza willingly and were bombarded with rockets all day every day. That was the first step on the road to peace agreed in 1999 at Oslo. So what have the Palestinians done again towards a permanent peace ?

Unfortunately Israel leaving Gaza is not a real two state solution is it...

That was Israel pulling out of territory that does not belong to them... As Israel needs to pull out of all occupied territory.

There can then be proper discussions on a two state solution.

Read Oslo and see what the first steps were towards a lasting peace, then get back and explain what the arab muslims did towards promoting that lasting peace. There were a lot of Jews that owned land and property in gaza so you cant say that it did not belong to them. Israel will when the Palestinians agree peace terms and mutual borders as set down in the Geneva conventions. There can never be discusions on a two state solution while the arab muslims are making illegal demands and trying to force other nations into doing their dirty work for them. Doing so will lead to massive repurcusions for both parties.

I don't doubt that Jews owned land and property in Gaza...

But as I am sure you know, Oslo doesn't just mention Gaza does it.

There can never be a two state solution until occupied territory is unoccupied.

There will never be a two state solution whilst Israel remains right wing.

It is important to remember that it is not only the Arab Muslims who are the 'bad guys' here!

There will never be peace in the region until BOTH parties accept that they BOTH need to make some compromises!

 

[Humanity]

I'm not sure that is a relevant question...

It does exist, so it is....

Finding a peaceful solution to what already exists is far better time spent than wasting time on debating the legitimacy of what is legitimate!

Tell it to the arab muslims as they are the ones with the NO JEWS charter

So what is Netanyahu's solution?

Without any flexibility for negotiation of a two state solution then there can never be peace in the region...

To suggest that a two state solution will "giving a base for attacks to the radical Islam against Israel" is ridiculous... So, there would be no change then!

Offer a two state solution, withdraw from occupied territories and I for one will stand with Israel against any Islamic radical attacks and support Israel and international intervention!

Netanyahu's comments simply prove that the Israeli right wing has no stomach for a peaceful solution.

Been tried and the arab muslims made sure it failed, so what has changed in the last 10 years to show it wont fail again. They have been offered a two state solution and turned it down every time. So now Israel is saying what the arab muslims have been saying for the last 66 years and the islamonazi stooges don't like it.

When was a real two state solution tried?

2005 when Israel left gaza willingly and were bombarded with rockets all day every day. That was the first step on the road to peace agreed in 1999 at Oslo. So what have the Palestinians done again towards a permanent peace ?

Unfortunately Israel leaving Gaza is not a real two state solution is it...

That was Israel pulling out of territory that does not belong to them... As Israel needs to pull out of all occupied territory.

There can then be proper discussions on a two state solution.

Read Oslo and see what the first steps were towards a lasting peace, then get back and explain what the arab muslims did towards promoting that lasting peace. There were a lot of Jews that owned land and property in gaza so you cant say that it did not belong to them. Israel will when the Palestinians agree peace terms and mutual borders as set down in the Geneva conventions. There can never be discusions on a two state solution while the arab muslims are making illegal demands and trying to force other nations into doing their dirty work for them. Doing so will lead to massive repurcusions for both parties.

I don't doubt that Jews owned land and property in Gaza...

But as I am sure you know, Oslo doesn't just mention Gaza does it.

There can never be a two state solution until occupied territory is unoccupied.

There will never be a two state solution whilst Israel remains right wing.

It is important to remember that it is not only the Arab Muslims who are the 'bad guys' here!

There will never be peace in the region until BOTH parties accept that they BOTH need to make some compromises!

 

[Phoenall]

LOL ! You mean the agreements the were between Israel and four other countries, but NOT between 'Palestine'??

Where in those links does it say that Israel sits on Palestinian land.

This should be interesting

There is a lot of information in those agreements. Perhaps you should read them. Do you want me to hold your hand?

I've read them many times before. Nothing in there says what you claim..

Also, YOU made the claim and I asked you to back it up. So far, nothing at all.

Try again.

In the preamble all of the agreements have this statement:

Responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948,(2) calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, to negotiate an armistice;​

This one sentence says a few things.

They call for peace "in Palestine." They did not say peace in Israel or Israel/Palestine. Palestine was there. Where was Israel?

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. An armistice is when hostilities cease without anyone surrendering. Nobody lost the 1948 war.

They call for the peace in the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE not the nation of palestine

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

LINK..........

 

[Phoenall]

As many of you are aware, until this recent election victory I felt disdain & disgust for Netanyahoo. I even referred to him as Nutandyahoo for making peace offerings to Palestinians, building a security fence & granting Palestinians their their own Jew free Gaza to add fuel to this endless conflict. I even stated he should be tried & convicted for war crimes against his own Israeli citizens for what he has done. Finally Bibi has earned my full support & best wishes.

And for those of you who disagree that he has made the best move for Israel by denying a Palestifnian State, consider the rocket missiles Israel received for a thank you for giving them Gaza. And above all, just ask yourself would Egypt or Jordan who know the Palestinians best, care to offer the Palestinians a Palestinian State? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

Israel s PM Netanyahu No Palestinian state on my watch - CNN.com

oh oh, now he is back to a 2 state thing again.

love it Nutandyahoo. (he wears flip flops)

When did abbas last say that he wanted a two state solution and then deny a two state solution once he got home ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are not reading very well.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier.​

And more specific about land.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
3. It is further recognized that rights, claims or interests of a nonmilitary character in the area of Palestine covered by this Agreement...

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

The Avalon Project Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement April 3 1949
d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...​

BTW, there was no mention of a place called Israel. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned either.

(COMMENT)

First --- all the armistice arrangements were between Israel and one of the 4 Aggressor Arab Nations.
Each Armistice Arrangement has an official title and identifies the parties to the agreement.

UNTERM Registry --- Four General Armistice Agreements of 1949. The agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

• General Armistice Agreement between Egypt and Israel;
  • TITLE: EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF EGYPT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Lebanon and Israel;
  • TITLE: LEBANESE-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF LEBANON
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel;
  • TITLE: HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Syria.
  • TITLE: SYRIA-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SYRIA
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL

The Armistice lines were converted into borders between Egypt and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1979 and between Jordan and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1994. Jordan, however, had renounced in 1988 all legal and administrative ties to the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Israel had captured from Jordan in the 1967 war, so their disposition was not included in the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty.

No peace treaties have been signed between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon. The de facto dividing line between Israel and Lebanon is the “blue” line demarcated by the UN after Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000; and the line between Israel and Syria is the line around the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in 1967. (The line was amended in the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria following the 1973 war.)

During the course of the Armistice arrangements of 1949 (February thru July 1949), the only "Palestine" there was --- was the territory to which the British Mandate formerly applied. There was no Arab sovereignty as the opportunity had been rejected. By the time the last of the Armistice Arrangements were signed, the Security Council had recommended admission to the UN (S/RES/69) (Mar 1949), and the General Assembly had adopted and admitted Israel to the UN (A/RES/273 III) (May 1949). (It took the Arab Palestinians another 4 decades to accopmlish half of what the Israelis accomplished, and are still not able to stand alone as required by Article 22.) Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.

"The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition."

Most Respectfully,
R

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt. There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,​

Since the armistice lines are not boundaries they do not replace Palestine's international boundaries. The armistice lines around the West bank and Gaza do not separate anything. It is Palestine on both sides.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;​

Only the Palestinians have the right to change any of that.

But which Palestinians would they be. and what treaty set up the nation of Palestine and elected a leader of the Palestinian people ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are not reading very well.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier.​

And more specific about land.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
3. It is further recognized that rights, claims or interests of a nonmilitary character in the area of Palestine covered by this Agreement...

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

The Avalon Project Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement April 3 1949
d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...​

BTW, there was no mention of a place called Israel. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned either.

(COMMENT)

First --- all the armistice arrangements were between Israel and one of the 4 Aggressor Arab Nations.
Each Armistice Arrangement has an official title and identifies the parties to the agreement.

UNTERM Registry --- Four General Armistice Agreements of 1949. The agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

• General Armistice Agreement between Egypt and Israel;
  • TITLE: EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF EGYPT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Lebanon and Israel;
  • TITLE: LEBANESE-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF LEBANON
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel;
  • TITLE: HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Syria.
  • TITLE: SYRIA-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SYRIA
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL

The Armistice lines were converted into borders between Egypt and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1979 and between Jordan and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1994. Jordan, however, had renounced in 1988 all legal and administrative ties to the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Israel had captured from Jordan in the 1967 war, so their disposition was not included in the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty.

No peace treaties have been signed between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon. The de facto dividing line between Israel and Lebanon is the “blue” line demarcated by the UN after Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000; and the line between Israel and Syria is the line around the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in 1967. (The line was amended in the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria following the 1973 war.)

During the course of the Armistice arrangements of 1949 (February thru July 1949), the only "Palestine" there was --- was the territory to which the British Mandate formerly applied. There was no Arab sovereignty as the opportunity had been rejected. By the time the last of the Armistice Arrangements were signed, the Security Council had recommended admission to the UN (S/RES/69) (Mar 1949), and the General Assembly had adopted and admitted Israel to the UN (A/RES/273 III) (May 1949). (It took the Arab Palestinians another 4 decades to accopmlish half of what the Israelis accomplished, and are still not able to stand alone as required by Article 22.) Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.

"The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition."

Most Respectfully,
R

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria.

I've read them many times before. Nothing in there says what you claim..

Also, YOU made the claim and I asked you to back it up. So far, nothing at all.

Try again.

In the preamble all of the agreements have this statement:

Responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948,(2) calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, to negotiate an armistice;​

This one sentence says a few things.

They call for peace "in Palestine." They did not say peace in Israel or Israel/Palestine. Palestine was there. Where was Israel?

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. An armistice is when hostilities cease without anyone surrendering. Nobody lost the 1948 war.

Where was Israel ? Uhhh, the agreements are BETWEEN Israel and 4 other countries. Why wasn't there any agreement between Israel and Palestine Tinmore ?

Nothing in your post suggests that Israel is sitting on Palestinian land.

Don't get excited. I was just trying to keep it simple for you. Here is more.

The Avalon Project Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement July 20 1949
Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line...​

And more.

The Avalon Project Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement March 23 1949
1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.​

And more.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier.​

And more specific about land.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
3. It is further recognized that rights, claims or interests of a nonmilitary character in the area of Palestine covered by this Agreement...

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

The Avalon Project Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement April 3 1949
d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...​

BTW, there was no mention of a place called Israel. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned either.

Do read the header for these agreements and see where they do state Israel, as in this one

Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949 (1)

You are confusing Israel, a place, with Israeli, some people.

That is the wording on all the armistice agreements and it is a place duly recognised by the UN before the armistice agreements were written. MAKING IT THE NATION OF ISRAEL and never the nation of Palestine that did not exist until 1988

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

They call for the peace in the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE not the nation of palestine

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

Were was the UN, why In Geneva, Hague and Washington of course. Now were was the nation of Palestine and who was its legal representative prior to 1988

 

[Phoenall]

I'm not sure that is a relevant question...

It does exist, so it is....

Finding a peaceful solution to what already exists is far better time spent than wasting time on debating the legitimacy of what is legitimate!

Tell it to the arab muslims as they are the ones with the NO JEWS charter

Been tried and the arab muslims made sure it failed, so what has changed in the last 10 years to show it wont fail again. They have been offered a two state solution and turned it down every time. So now Israel is saying what the arab muslims have been saying for the last 66 years and the islamonazi stooges don't like it.

When was a real two state solution tried?

2005 when Israel left gaza willingly and were bombarded with rockets all day every day. That was the first step on the road to peace agreed in 1999 at Oslo. So what have the Palestinians done again towards a permanent peace ?

Unfortunately Israel leaving Gaza is not a real two state solution is it...

That was Israel pulling out of territory that does not belong to them... As Israel needs to pull out of all occupied territory.

There can then be proper discussions on a two state solution.

Read Oslo and see what the first steps were towards a lasting peace, then get back and explain what the arab muslims did towards promoting that lasting peace. There were a lot of Jews that owned land and property in gaza so you cant say that it did not belong to them. Israel will when the Palestinians agree peace terms and mutual borders as set down in the Geneva conventions. There can never be discusions on a two state solution while the arab muslims are making illegal demands and trying to force other nations into doing their dirty work for them. Doing so will lead to massive repurcusions for both parties.

I don't doubt that Jews owned land and property in Gaza...

But as I am sure you know, Oslo doesn't just mention Gaza does it.

There can never be a two state solution until occupied territory is unoccupied.

There will never be a two state solution whilst Israel remains right wing.

It is important to remember that it is not only the Arab Muslims who are the 'bad guys' here!

There will never be peace in the region until BOTH parties accept that they BOTH need to make some compromises!

Correct

No but gaza was the first step towards a lasting peace

Which the Palestinians don't want as they would lose the money they mooch. But the Geneva conventions say differently and they say the occupation ends once a peace deal is signed.

BULLSHIT

True but they seem to be the worst ones and the ones causing the most trouble.

Correct

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are not reading very well.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier.​

And more specific about land.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
3. It is further recognized that rights, claims or interests of a nonmilitary character in the area of Palestine covered by this Agreement...

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

The Avalon Project Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement April 3 1949
d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...​

BTW, there was no mention of a place called Israel. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned either.

(COMMENT)

First --- all the armistice arrangements were between Israel and one of the 4 Aggressor Arab Nations.
Each Armistice Arrangement has an official title and identifies the parties to the agreement.

UNTERM Registry --- Four General Armistice Agreements of 1949. The agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

• General Armistice Agreement between Egypt and Israel;
  • TITLE: EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF EGYPT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Lebanon and Israel;
  • TITLE: LEBANESE-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF LEBANON
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel;
  • TITLE: HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Syria.
  • TITLE: SYRIA-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SYRIA
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL

The Armistice lines were converted into borders between Egypt and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1979 and between Jordan and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1994. Jordan, however, had renounced in 1988 all legal and administrative ties to the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Israel had captured from Jordan in the 1967 war, so their disposition was not included in the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty.

No peace treaties have been signed between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon. The de facto dividing line between Israel and Lebanon is the “blue” line demarcated by the UN after Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000; and the line between Israel and Syria is the line around the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in 1967. (The line was amended in the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria following the 1973 war.)

During the course of the Armistice arrangements of 1949 (February thru July 1949), the only "Palestine" there was --- was the territory to which the British Mandate formerly applied. There was no Arab sovereignty as the opportunity had been rejected. By the time the last of the Armistice Arrangements were signed, the Security Council had recommended admission to the UN (S/RES/69) (Mar 1949), and the General Assembly had adopted and admitted Israel to the UN (A/RES/273 III) (May 1949). (It took the Arab Palestinians another 4 decades to accopmlish half of what the Israelis accomplished, and are still not able to stand alone as required by Article 22.) Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.

"The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition."

Most Respectfully,
R

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt. There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,​

Since the armistice lines are not boundaries they do not replace Palestine's international boundaries. The armistice lines around the West bank and Gaza do not separate anything. It is Palestine on both sides.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;​

Only the Palestinians have the right to change any of that.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are not reading very well.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier.​

And more specific about land.

The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
3. It is further recognized that rights, claims or interests of a nonmilitary character in the area of Palestine covered by this Agreement...

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

The Avalon Project Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement April 3 1949
d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...​

BTW, there was no mention of a place called Israel. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned either.

(COMMENT)

First --- all the armistice arrangements were between Israel and one of the 4 Aggressor Arab Nations.
Each Armistice Arrangement has an official title and identifies the parties to the agreement.

UNTERM Registry --- Four General Armistice Agreements of 1949. The agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

• General Armistice Agreement between Egypt and Israel;
  • TITLE: EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF EGYPT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Lebanon and Israel;
  • TITLE: LEBANESE-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF LEBANON
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel;
  • TITLE: HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL
• General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Syria.
  • TITLE: SYRIA-ISRAELI: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SYRIA
  • SIGNED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL

The Armistice lines were converted into borders between Egypt and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1979 and between Jordan and Israel by their Peace Treaty of 1994. Jordan, however, had renounced in 1988 all legal and administrative ties to the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Israel had captured from Jordan in the 1967 war, so their disposition was not included in the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty.

No peace treaties have been signed between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon. The de facto dividing line between Israel and Lebanon is the “blue” line demarcated by the UN after Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000; and the line between Israel and Syria is the line around the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in 1967. (The line was amended in the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria following the 1973 war.)

During the course of the Armistice arrangements of 1949 (February thru July 1949), the only "Palestine" there was --- was the territory to which the British Mandate formerly applied. There was no Arab sovereignty as the opportunity had been rejected. By the time the last of the Armistice Arrangements were signed, the Security Council had recommended admission to the UN (S/RES/69) (Mar 1949), and the General Assembly had adopted and admitted Israel to the UN (A/RES/273 III) (May 1949). (It took the Arab Palestinians another 4 decades to accopmlish half of what the Israelis accomplished, and are still not able to stand alone as required by Article 22.) Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.

"The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition."

Most Respectfully,
R

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt. There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,​

Since the armistice lines are not boundaries they do not replace Palestine's international boundaries. The armistice lines around the West bank and Gaza do not separate anything. It is Palestine on both sides.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;​

Only the Palestinians have the right to change any of that.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan. There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt. There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza

Wow Tinmore. I don't even have words to respond to this.

I do and I will ask who signed on behalf of Palestine to agree to the armistice lines, and can he produce a link to the signatures on the treaties ?

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

There was no stated goal to take over nothing.

They are the aggressors for several reasons, the first one being that they started killing/massacring Jews before any Arab was killed.

Firstly, there is no way to tell who killed first. Some histories state that Palestinian shepherds were killed by Europeans when their sheep wandered onto Jewish farms. But who killed who first has no bearing.

The aggressors are always those that come from elsewhere to settle land where people, that do not want foreign settlers, are already living. Your crazy notion would deem the Native Americans the aggressors because they may have killed a European before a European killed a Native American.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I went to the UN Central Registry for the information.

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt.
There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,​

Since the armistice lines are not boundaries they do not replace Palestine's international boundaries. The armistice lines around the West bank and Gaza do not separate anything. It is Palestine on both sides.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;​

Only the Palestinians have the right to change any of that.

(COMMENT)

This is entirely wrong.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt.

There is no Armistice between pre-1988 Palestine Territory and any other entity. There was no entity capable and competent to make an agreement other than the Madantory for the territory. In this case --- the government of the territory was the Mandatory and the border agreement is based off the Sykes-Picot agreement.

View attachment 38148

Based on the Convention of Paris, Britain and France set up a joint committee to clearly determine the demarcation of the border between Palestine and Syria and Lebanon. The committee was headed by the British officer Stewart Newcombe (a Lieutenant Colonel with mapping experience) and a French Lt. Col. named M. Paulet. The Newcombe-Paulet committee delineated the Israeli-Lebanese border and described it verbally, placing 38 piles of stone on the ground to mark the border from Rosh ha-Nikra to the Hasbani River. On March 23, 1923, based on the committee's work, the governments of Britain and France signed an agreement that established the border between Palestine and Syria and Lebanon. That border was internationally recognized in May 1935, when the League of Nations approved the 1923 border at the request of Britain and France.
SOURCE: IICC

Between 1948 and 1967, the West Bank was Jordanian Sovereign Territory; and the Gaza Strip was Egyptian Occupied Territory. --- But still geographically the Palestinian portion of the The Greater Levant.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine was not a part of the armistice agreements. They had no military and were not part of the 1948 war.

The armistice agreements did, however, mention Palestine's international borders as a reference to where the armistice lines were placed. The armistice lines are not borders so they did not change Palestine's international borders in any way.

Many arab muslim Palestinians fought with the combined arab armies against Israel, so took part as a military group not attached to any nation

Those borders are that of the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE as the treaty setting them up states. They were not the borders of any nation until such a time as they were mutually agreed between neighbouring nations. You are arguing now for arguments sake as you have been told and shown that your POV is wrong

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

They call for the peace in the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE not the nation of palestine

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

Because they did not come with the stated goal of taking over the country, they came with the stated goal of settling and living with the arab muslims as one nation. The arab muslims objected and decided that violence and aggression were the only answers.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I went to the UN Central Registry for the information.

agreements are:
A set of treaties signed in 1949 between Israel and its neighbours Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The Agreements ended the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established the armistice demarcation lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, which persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War. The individual agreements are the:​

That is a half truth i.e. misleading.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt.
There are also armistice lines through Palestine to define the West Bank and Gaza.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,​

Since the armistice lines are not boundaries they do not replace Palestine's international boundaries. The armistice lines around the West bank and Gaza do not separate anything. It is Palestine on both sides.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;​

Only the Palestinians have the right to change any of that.

(COMMENT)

This is entirely wrong.

There is an armistice line between Palestine and Lebanon.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Syria.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Jordan.
There is an armistice line between Palestine and Egypt.

There is no Armistice between pre-1988 Palestine Territory and any other entity. There was no entity capable and competent to make an agreement other than the Madantory for the territory. In this case --- the government of the territory was the Mandatory and the border agreement is based off the Sykes-Picot agreement.

View attachment 38148

Based on the Convention of Paris, Britain and France set up a joint committee to clearly determine the demarcation of the border between Palestine and Syria and Lebanon. The committee was headed by the British officer Stewart Newcombe (a Lieutenant Colonel with mapping experience) and a French Lt. Col. named M. Paulet. The Newcombe-Paulet committee delineated the Israeli-Lebanese border and described it verbally, placing 38 piles of stone on the ground to mark the border from Rosh ha-Nikra to the Hasbani River. On March 23, 1923, based on the committee's work, the governments of Britain and France signed an agreement that established the border between Palestine and Syria and Lebanon. That border was internationally recognized in May 1935, when the League of Nations approved the 1923 border at the request of Britain and France.
SOURCE: IICC

Between 1948 and 1967, the West Bank was Jordanian Sovereign Territory; and the Gaza Strip was Egyptian Occupied Territory. --- But still geographically the Palestinian portion of the The Greater Levant.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine was not a part of the armistice agreements. They had no military and were not part of the 1948 war.

The armistice agreements did, however, mention Palestine's international borders as a reference to where the armistice lines were placed. The armistice lines are not borders so they did not change Palestine's international borders in any way.

The armistice lines DID NOT mention Palestine's international borders, as they were non existent

Pasted from the actual documents with links.

No Palestinian State Page 4 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Argue with the documents. I am just posting what they say.

No you are manipulating what the say to meet with your POV. As you have been told and shown the borders were for the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and the armistice agreements were between Israel the nation and its neighbours. NO NATION OF PALESTINE IN EXISTENCE UNTIL 1988

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

There was no stated goal to take over nothing.

They are the aggressors for several reasons, the first one being that they started killing/massacring Jews before any Arab was killed.

Firstly, there is no way to tell who killed first. Some histories state that Palestinian shepherds were killed by Europeans when their sheep wandered onto Jewish farms. But who killed who first has no bearing.

The aggressors are always those that come from elsewhere to settle land where people, that do not want foreign settlers, are already living. Your crazy notion would deem the Native Americans the aggressors because they may have killed a European before a European killed a Native American.

Yes there is you just need to read the Koran and hadiths as it is detailed in them. The arab muslims invaded Palestine and set about the mass murder of all of the lands inhabitants who refused to convert. They were foreign settlers taking the land of the Jews. These were then run of by other foreign settlers who took the land from the Jews again, and so the story goes on and on, with successive foreign settlers taking the land of the Jews away from them. This last round on foreign settlers came form Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The European Jews have consistently shown that they are direct descendants of the original Jews of Israel while the foreign arab muslim invaders have shown they have no ties to the lands ancestors.


Another education for you from an Islamic source, the best there is the Koran and hadiths

 

[Humanity]

Tell it to the arab muslims as they are the ones with the NO JEWS charter

When was a real two state solution tried?

2005 when Israel left gaza willingly and were bombarded with rockets all day every day. That was the first step on the road to peace agreed in 1999 at Oslo. So what have the Palestinians done again towards a permanent peace ?

Unfortunately Israel leaving Gaza is not a real two state solution is it...

That was Israel pulling out of territory that does not belong to them... As Israel needs to pull out of all occupied territory.

There can then be proper discussions on a two state solution.

Read Oslo and see what the first steps were towards a lasting peace, then get back and explain what the arab muslims did towards promoting that lasting peace. There were a lot of Jews that owned land and property in gaza so you cant say that it did not belong to them. Israel will when the Palestinians agree peace terms and mutual borders as set down in the Geneva conventions. There can never be discusions on a two state solution while the arab muslims are making illegal demands and trying to force other nations into doing their dirty work for them. Doing so will lead to massive repurcusions for both parties.

I don't doubt that Jews owned land and property in Gaza...

But as I am sure you know, Oslo doesn't just mention Gaza does it.

There can never be a two state solution until occupied territory is unoccupied.

There will never be a two state solution whilst Israel remains right wing.

It is important to remember that it is not only the Arab Muslims who are the 'bad guys' here!

There will never be peace in the region until BOTH parties accept that they BOTH need to make some compromises!

Correct

No but gaza was the first step towards a lasting peace

Which the Palestinians don't want as they would lose the money they mooch. But the Geneva conventions say differently and they say the occupation ends once a peace deal is signed.

BULLSHIT

True but they seem to be the worst ones and the ones causing the most trouble.

Correct

BULLSHIT?

Ok Phoney... Like to tell me what Netanyahu has been quoted as saying about No Palestine?

What did the left of center parties have to say about No Palestine?

There are no "worst ones"...

Israel does not want peace... Because it will mean that they have to hand back occupied territory!

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

The armistice agreements were in 1949.

The Mandate left Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

Because they did not come with the stated goal of taking over the country, they came with the stated goal of settling and living with the arab muslims as one nation. The arab muslims objected and decided that violence and aggression were the only answers.

Of course the Zionists stated goal was the takeover of "the country". The first Zionist document was "The Jewish State, An Attempt for a Modern Solution to the Jewish Question', (Der Judenstaat) was published on February 14, 1896.

".....the Jews, once settled in their own State, would probably have no more enemies. As for those who remain behind, since prosperity enfeebles and causes them to dimin ish, they would soon disappear altogether. I think the Jews will always have sufficient enemies, such as every nation has. But once fixed in their own land, it will no longer be possible for them to scatter all over the world. The diaspora cannot be reborn, unless the civilization of the whole easth should collapse; and such a consummation could be feared by none but foolish men. Our present civilization possesses weapons powerful enough for its self-defence...."

The Jewish State Theodor Herzl Jewish Virtual Library

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

There was no stated goal to take over nothing.

They are the aggressors for several reasons, the first one being that they started killing/massacring Jews before any Arab was killed.

Firstly, there is no way to tell who killed first. Some histories state that Palestinian shepherds were killed by Europeans when their sheep wandered onto Jewish farms. But who killed who first has no bearing.

The aggressors are always those that come from elsewhere to settle land where people, that do not want foreign settlers, are already living. Your crazy notion would deem the Native Americans the aggressors because they may have killed a European before a European killed a Native American.

So now you're changing your opinion. When we first debated about this months ago, you said Jews were the first ones to kill Arabs, therefore they were the aggressors. Then I proved you wrong with links by showing you many massacres of Jews that took place before any Arab was killed, and now you change your opinion by saying it doesn't matter who killed who first.
Immigrating to another region is not aggression. That's the dumbest thing I've ever read. It's obvious by reading your post that you cannot handle the truth. But we already knew that.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The successor governments were generally hindered in their mission by the combatants to the conflict; predicated on the Arab Aggressor.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, you generally only tell half the story.

(COMMENT)

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

See Post #46:

Since that time, various elements of the pro-Arab Palestinian Community have attempted to assert that because the term "Palestine" was used and went unchanged after the Mandate terminated, that there must have been a country called "Palestine." And to an extent the successor government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission --- with the adopted resolution (A/RES/189 S-2) providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities.​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Successor Government to the Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission, which was succeeded by the UN Mediator.

You keep saying that. Where were they after May 15, 1948 when they were to protect the people and land under their trust?

Do you have some links?

(COMMENT)

The links are marked in "blue" in the previous postings.

The successor to the UNPC --- the Mediator --- was involved in the arrangement of the ceasefire and subsequent Armistice Arrangements through the Truce Commission. In the case of most conflicts, the parties to the conflict are generally not protected by the UN but fall under customary law. The UN, once the conflict is ignited, most often sets the conditions for peace negotiation for which an armistice is just one phase.

The conflict, both the civil war prior to May 15, and the war of independence after May 15, were a products initiated and aggravated by hostile Arab activity; intended to disrupt the implementation of Resolution 181(II) which the general Arab Community found unsatisfactory.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe with the stated goal of taking over the country. Then they proceeded to do just that.

I don't see how the Palestinians can be considered the aggressors.

Because they did not come with the stated goal of taking over the country, they came with the stated goal of settling and living with the arab muslims as one nation. The arab muslims objected and decided that violence and aggression were the only answers.

Of course the Zionists stated goal was the takeover of "the country". The first Zionist document was "The Jewish State, An Attempt for a Modern Solution to the Jewish Question', (Der Judenstaat) was published on February 14, 1896.

".....the Jews, once settled in their own State, would probably have no more enemies. As for those who remain behind, since prosperity enfeebles and causes them to dimin ish, they would soon disappear altogether. I think the Jews will always have sufficient enemies, such as every nation has. But once fixed in their own land, it will no longer be possible for them to scatter all over the world. The diaspora cannot be reborn, unless the civilization of the whole easth should collapse; and such a consummation could be feared by none but foolish men. Our present civilization possesses weapons powerful enough for its self-defence...."

The Jewish State Theodor Herzl Jewish Virtual Library

Where does it mention anything about taking over in your paragraph ?

 

[MJB12741]

I'm not sure that is a relevant question...

It does exist, so it is....

Finding a peaceful solution to what already exists is far better time spent than wasting time on debating the legitimacy of what is legitimate!

Tell it to the arab muslims as they are the ones with the NO JEWS charter

Been tried and the arab muslims made sure it failed, so what has changed in the last 10 years to show it wont fail again. They have been offered a two state solution and turned it down every time. So now Israel is saying what the arab muslims have been saying for the last 66 years and the islamonazi stooges don't like it.

When was a real two state solution tried?

2005 when Israel left gaza willingly and were bombarded with rockets all day every day. That was the first step on the road to peace agreed in 1999 at Oslo. So what have the Palestinians done again towards a permanent peace ?

Unfortunately Israel leaving Gaza is not a real two state solution is it...

That was Israel pulling out of territory that does not belong to them... As Israel needs to pull out of all occupied territory.

There can then be proper discussions on a two state solution.

Read Oslo and see what the first steps were towards a lasting peace, then get back and explain what the arab muslims did towards promoting that lasting peace. There were a lot of Jews that owned land and property in gaza so you cant say that it did not belong to them. Israel will when the Palestinians agree peace terms and mutual borders as set down in the Geneva conventions. There can never be discusions on a two state solution while the arab muslims are making illegal demands and trying to force other nations into doing their dirty work for them. Doing so will lead to massive repurcusions for both parties.

I don't doubt that Jews owned land and property in Gaza...

But as I am sure you know, Oslo doesn't just mention Gaza does it.

There can never be a two state solution until occupied territory is unoccupied.

There will never be a two state solution whilst Israel remains right wing.

It is important to remember that it is not only the Arab Muslims who are the 'bad guys' here!

There will never be peace in the region until BOTH parties accept that they BOTH need to make some compromises!

Got news for you. The "occupied territory" is that of the Palestinian squatters on on Israel's land with no deeds or titles whatsoever to the land they stole that they have now been living on for genereations.