Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What part of the third sentence/paragraph in my post did you fail to understand?Thanks for the map of Palestine. Look in the legend for the symbol for International Boundaries, then find them on the map.
BTW, the Green Line was specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.
The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...Thanks for the map of Palestine. Look in the legend for the symbol for International Boundaries, then find them on the map.
BTW, the Green Line was specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.
What part of the third sentence/paragraph in my post did you fail to understand?
Once the Muslim/Arab world declined to agree with the U.N. "two-state solution" than other matters like political or territorial boundaries are "out the window" and a matter to be determined by the winner.
We've seen this happen throughout history and around the world.
Perhaps in the distant past, however, the UN Charter calls military conquest illegal.other matters like political or territorial boundaries are "out the window" and a matter to be determined by the winner.
That would apply to Islamic Jihad as well then and the larger problem is with the Muslims, not Israel.Perhaps in the distant past, however, the UN Charter calls military conquest illegal.
The UN Charter was based on already existing international law,That would apply to Islamic Jihad as well then and the larger problem is with the Muslims, not Israel.
And for what it's worth, the U.N. lost it's credibility and legitimacy about 50+ years ago.
Link?Ceded it to the allies, not to a bunch of Arab squatters.
The Palestinians recognize the armistice line. It divides 1948 occupied Palestine from 1967 occupied Palestine.The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...
The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...
Link?
The Palestinians recognize the armistice line. It divides 1948 occupied Palestine from 1967 occupied Palestine.
The Treaty of Sèvres was never ratified, and after the Turkish War of Independence, most of the Treaty of Sèvres's signatories signed and ratified the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 and 1924.The Treaty of Sèvres (French: Traité de Sèvres) was a 1920 treaty signed between the Allies of World War I and the Ottoman Empire. The treaty ceded large parts of Ottoman territory to France, the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy, as well as creating large occupation zones within the Ottoman Empire. It was one of a series of treaties[3] that the Central Powers signed with the Allied Powers after their defeat in World War I. Hostilities had already ended with the Armistice of Mudros.
The treaty was signed on 10 August 1920 in an exhibition room at the Manufacture nationale de Sèvres porcelain factory[4] in Sèvres, France.[5]
The Treaty of Sèvres marked the beginning of the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire. The treaty's stipulations included the renunciation of most territory not inhabited by Turkish people and their cession to the Allied administration.[6]
Treaty of Sèvres - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
They were not a party to the 1948 war.The Palestinians weren't a party to any of those agreements.
Who cares if they claim, well after the fact, that they agree? DURR
The Treaty of Sèvres was never ratified, and after the Turkish War of Independence, most of the Treaty of Sèvres's signatories signed and ratified the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 and 1924.
From your link.
They were not a party to the 1948 war.
The armistice agreements were interesting. Nowhere in the agreements was there any mention of occupation of territory. The armistice lines simple limited troop movements. Since they were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries, there was no land or sovereignty implications. Palestine was divided into three areas.The Palestinians weren't a party to any of those agreements.
Who cares if they claim, well after the fact, that they agree? DURR
The armistice agreements were interesting. Nowhere in the agreements was there any mention of occupation of territory. The armistice lines simple limited troop movements. Since they were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries, there was no land or sovereignty implications. Palestine was divided into three areas.
Palestinian's international borders are uncontested by any of its neighbors.The armistice agreements were interesting.
And outdated.
Since then, which parties have made border agreements with Israel, Jordan or Egypt?
Were any of them Palestine? DURR
The Saudi peace initiative has been on the table since 2003. It guarantees Israel's security.There was a "two-state" solution @76 years ago with the U.N. partition into a Jewish State=Israel and an Arab/Islam 'State' = "Palestine".
Arab/Islam nations in the region rejected that solution, attacked Israel to eliminate it and the Jews, hence the first "conflict"/"war", in 1948.
Essentially that has continued, been on-going, and resolution will not be pleasant, or acceptable to Islam.
