Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Cool.
Interesting map.
It has the proposed 1947 partition plan borders that never happened. So take those out.
It has the 1949 armistice lines that are not borders. So take those out.
What is left?
Are you denying that the complaint is that Israel engaged in expansion?
You hapless dishonest fuckwit.
Of course not. Israel's expansionism is a fact.
Not really.
But the point is that such is the COMPLAINT.
So what the fuck are YOU denying that for, you double-talking babbling douche?
Cool.
Interesting map.
It has the proposed 1947 partition plan borders that never happened. So take those out.
It has the 1949 armistice lines that are not borders. So take those out.
What is left?
No. Leave the 1949 post war lines as is. The fruits of war.
Indeed, go so far as to include the land acquired thereafter too, as a result of war.
And that's the whole point.
Attack Israel, you cock-suckers, and pay the price. Israel just grows.
Good.
Of course not. Israel's expansionism is a fact.
Not really.
But the point is that such is the COMPLAINT.
So what the fuck are YOU denying that for, you double-talking babbling douche?
Where did I deny Israel's expansionism?
Interesting map.
It has the proposed 1947 partition plan borders that never happened. So take those out.
It has the 1949 armistice lines that are not borders. So take those out.
What is left?
No. Leave the 1949 post war lines as is. The fruits of war.
Indeed, go so far as to include the land acquired thereafter too, as a result of war.
And that's the whole point.
Attack Israel, you cock-suckers, and pay the price. Israel just grows.
Good.
Not so. The 1949 armistice lines were specifically not to be borders.
Israel is a sovereign state, and the historic homeland of the Jewish people.
It should be clear to all that efforts to chip away at Israel's legitimacy will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the United States.
Remarks by the President to the United Nations General Assembly | The White House
No. Leave the 1949 post war lines as is. The fruits of war.
Indeed, go so far as to include the land acquired thereafter too, as a result of war.
And that's the whole point.
Attack Israel, you cock-suckers, and pay the price. Israel just grows.
Good.
Not so. The 1949 armistice lines were specifically not to be borders.
Also over-stated. That is your schtick, dick.
Not so. The 1949 armistice lines were specifically not to be borders.
Also over-stated. That is your schtick, dick.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
Not so. The 1949 armistice lines were specifically not to be borders.
Also over-stated. That is your schtick, dick.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
Also over-stated. That is your schtick, dick.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
It IS a line not to be CONSTRUED as a boundary, but it is delineated without prejudice to rights and claims.
Thus, Israel is free to claim them as boundaries as regards the ultimate settlement.
And until then, they are what they are -- the lines that demark the area that is claimed by Israel (from which they choose to rightfully exclude outsiders).
As I said, you dick, your schtick was to overstate.
And you had overstated.
Happy to show you up yet again!
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
It IS a line not to be CONSTRUED as a boundary, but it is delineated without prejudice to rights and claims.
Thus, Israel is free to claim them as boundaries as regards the ultimate settlement.
And until then, they are what they are -- the lines that demark the area that is claimed by Israel (from which they choose to rightfully exclude outsiders).
As I said, you dick, your schtick was to overstate.
And you had overstated.
Happy to show you up yet again!
They could be Israel's borders when or if a peace agreement is made. Until then they are meaningless. They are not borders.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
It IS a line not to be CONSTRUED as a boundary, but it is delineated without prejudice to rights and claims.
Thus, Israel is free to claim them as boundaries as regards the ultimate settlement.
And until then, they are what they are -- the lines that demark the area that is claimed by Israel (from which they choose to rightfully exclude outsiders).
As I said, you dick, your schtick was to overstate.
And you had overstated.
Happy to show you up yet again!
They could be Israel's borders when or if a peace agreement is made. Until then they are meaningless. They are not borders.
It IS a line not to be CONSTRUED as a boundary, but it is delineated without prejudice to rights and claims.
Thus, Israel is free to claim them as boundaries as regards the ultimate settlement.
And until then, they are what they are -- the lines that demark the area that is claimed by Israel (from which they choose to rightfully exclude outsiders).
As I said, you dick, your schtick was to overstate.
And you had overstated.
Happy to show you up yet again!
They could be Israel's borders when or if a peace agreement is made. Until then they are meaningless. They are not borders.
When or if a peace agreement is made those lines indeed could be Israel's borders.
And until then, they are de facto borders.
They are (presently) FAR from being meaningless.
Deal wid it.
They could be Israel's borders when or if a peace agreement is made. Until then they are meaningless. They are not borders.
When or if a peace agreement is made those lines indeed could be Israel's borders.
And until then, they are de facto borders.
They are (presently) FAR from being meaningless.
Deal wid it.
Cool, then all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and all of those settlements are on the Palestinian side.
They could be Israel's borders when or if a peace agreement is made. Until then they are meaningless. They are not borders.
When or if a peace agreement is made those lines indeed could be Israel's borders.
And until then, they are de facto borders.
They are (presently) FAR from being meaningless.
Deal wid it.
Cool, then all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and all of those settlements are on the Palestinian side.
When or if a peace agreement is made those lines indeed could be Israel's borders.
And until then, they are de facto borders.
They are (presently) FAR from being meaningless.
Deal wid it.
Cool, then all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and all of those settlements are on the Palestinian side.
Are you referring JUST to that stuff from way back in 1949?
Have you forgotten that Israel had to fight to survive after that?
Are you overlooking the consequences of that?
Cool, then all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and all of those settlements are on the Palestinian side.
Are you referring JUST to that stuff from way back in 1949?
Have you forgotten that Israel had to fight to survive after that?
Are you overlooking the consequences of that?
Sure, but Israel has still won no land.
Cool, then all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and all of those settlements are on the Palestinian side.
Are you referring JUST to that stuff from way back in 1949?
Have you forgotten that Israel had to fight to survive after that?
Are you overlooking the consequences of that?
Sure, but Israel has still won no land.
Are you referring JUST to that stuff from way back in 1949?
Have you forgotten that Israel had to fight to survive after that?
Are you overlooking the consequences of that?
Sure, but Israel has still won no land.
I think that's a stretch too. A lot of the buffer areas they control they got by winning and winning and winning.
The Jordanian claims to the West Bank were also bogus and their willingness to "cede" jack shit to "Palestine" is thus of no legal value.
In any event, the Israelis claim Jerusalem as their capital. And they came by it via winning the Six Day War.
Aggression against Israel has consequences.
Good for Israel.
"Rep System Guidelines: Our reputation system is designed to provide a feedback and credibility mechanism."It is not a stretch at all. Israels big "win" was the 1948 war. What is said repeatedly is that the Arabs lost. That is not true. An armistice was called by a UN Security Council resolution. An armistice is where the fighting stops but nobody surrenders. Nobody lost that war. The borders for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Palestine remained the same as they were in 1922. None of them lost any land. Palestine was divided into three occupations by the armistice lines that were not borders.Sure, but Israel has still won no land.
I think that's a stretch too. A lot of the buffer areas they control they got by winning and winning and winning.
The Jordanian claims to the West Bank were also bogus and their willingness to "cede" jack shit to "Palestine" is thus of no legal value.
In any event, the Israelis claim Jerusalem as their capital. And they came by it via winning the Six Day War.
Aggression against Israel has consequences.
Good for Israel.
The [UN] vote in 1947 was viewed as Israel's basic title to independence and] statehood. The Palestinians and the Arab powers had rejected partition and chosen the path of war. Their choice was to prove calamitous.
By the time the guns had fallen silent, the Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine, had held its ground against the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. Its forces stood on the shores of the Red Sea in the south, and at the foot of the Golan Heights in the north. Palestinian society had collapsed under the pressure of war. The elites had made their way to neighboring lands. Rural communities had been left atomized and leaderless. The cities had fought, and fallen, alone. '"
Palestine had become a great Arab shame. Few Arabs were willing to tell the story truthfully, to face its harsh verdict. Henceforth the Palestinians would live on a vague idea of restoration and return. No leader had the courage to tell the refugees who had left Acre and Jaffa and Haifa that they could not recover the homes and orchards of their imagination.
Some had taken the keys to their houses with them to Syria and Lebanon and across the river to Jordan. They were no more likely to find political satisfaction than the Jews who had been banished from Baghdad and Beirut and Cairo, and Casablanca and Fez, but the idea of return, enshrined into a "right of return," would persist. (Wadi Abu Jamil, the Jewish quarter of the Beirut of my boyhood, is now a Hezbollah stronghold, and no narrative exalts or recalls that old presence.)
Fouad Ajami: The U.N. Can't Deliver a Palestinian State - WSJ.com
