Annexing West Bank

[Indeependent]

A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.

The territory in question (Area A) is disputed. By definition it has no sovereignty and therefore no nationality. By definition, then, there ARE no citizens. Try again.

Either BOTH Israelis and Arab Palestinians are citizens of the territory. Or neither are. To say that one group is and one group is not is biased.

An Arab settlement would be a new town or outpost built in the occupied/disputed territories, between the start of the Israeli settlement program and now. To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.

As to who are the settlers in the Jewish Quarter? I would say neither. War and subsequent policies caused considerable population shifts.

These to paragraphs contradict each other. On the one hand, you say that, due to the rules of your game, only Israelis can be settlers. On the other hand, you claim that neither are settlers. Please resolve your own contradiction.

A foreigner is some one who was not a resident there (or the progeny of) at the time it was occupied.

And this is yet another entirely different objective definition. Please resolve your own contradiction.

If you choose to define it broadly than Palestinians in refugee camps would have equal right to enter and settle those areas as well as Israel.

Well, I have no idea what refugee camps have to do with anything. But I agree in principle that Arab Palestinians have just as much right to build in Area C as Israelis. They just don't have the infrastructure and government and economy to do it. Largely because they can't focus on the right things. And since they created a security problem for Israel, well, Israel has to address it.

You keep asking me for a different definition. It is not my contradiction, it is your unwillingness to accept the definitions.

No. It is because your definitions contain internal contradictions. You need to resolve those internal contradictions first.

Arab sites have no contradictions, they have lies.

 

[Indeependent]

To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.

Only Israeli nationals can be settlers?

And you can't see the bias in that? You can't see the lack of objective definition in that?

How broad do you wish to make it? Ok. Foreign nationals then, involved in a governmental program to create transplant it’s citizens into territory occupied by their nation, by creating settlements.

People who use their dwellings to make weapons to kill Jews.
The jig is up.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?

Two reasons. 1. Israel has the ability to do it because they've invested in government and infrastructure and economy and peace for 100 years. 2. Israel has legal control over the territory by treaty.

So Arab Israeli’s are actively discriminated against when it comes to building settlements?

Both Arabs and Jews are discriminated against over building anywhere if they do not get the right permits for building.

And I have read where more Jewish buildings or even cities/settlements have been demolished than Arab ones.

You ask your questions in such an accusatory way when it comes to Israel doing far worse against its Jewish citizens than it does against the Arab ones who do not have the proper permits to build.

Arab Israelis live in Israel, and not in Judea and Samaria, aka, West Bank.

They must follow the same laws as the Jews, Druze, Bedouins and all others who are citizens or residents of the country.

 

[Shusha]

In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.

OKAY! Now we are getting somewhere. So, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, ONLY those resident at the time of occupation (and their descendants) have a right to live in that territory. Immigration is forbidden. See? THERE is an objective definition. (As long as we begin with the FIRST occupation and not the second one.)

There are still issues with this, but at least we've narrowed you down to a good objective definition. And I'll hold you to it. No more defining settlers as Israeli nationals.

The first problem, is obviously, this hasn't happened. On either side.

 

[Indeependent]

In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.

OKAY! Now we are getting somewhere. So, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, ONLY those resident at the time of occupation (and their descendants) have a right to live in that territory. Immigration is forbidden. See? THERE is an objective definition. (As long as we begin with the FIRST occupation and not the second one.)

There are still issues with this, but at least we've narrowed you down to a good objective definition. And I'll hold you to it. No more defining settlers as Israeli nationals.

The first problem, is obviously, this hasn't happened. On either side.

Does that mean that Syria has to stop taking land in Syrian occupied Lebanon?

 

[Coyote]

In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.

OKAY! Now we are getting somewhere. So, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, ONLY those resident at the time of occupation (and their descendants) have a right to live in that territory. Immigration is forbidden. See? THERE is an objective definition. (As long as we begin with the FIRST occupation and not the second one.)

There are still issues with this, but at least we've narrowed you down to a good objective definition. And I'll hold you to it. No more defining settlers as Israeli nationals.

The first problem, is obviously, this hasn't happened. On either side.

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

 

[Shusha]

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory. You go back to the initial dispute. Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.

 

[Indeependent]

In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.

OKAY! Now we are getting somewhere. So, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, ONLY those resident at the time of occupation (and their descendants) have a right to live in that territory. Immigration is forbidden. See? THERE is an objective definition. (As long as we begin with the FIRST occupation and not the second one.)

There are still issues with this, but at least we've narrowed you down to a good objective definition. And I'll hold you to it. No more defining settlers as Israeli nationals.

The first problem, is obviously, this hasn't happened. On either side.

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

Are you drinking kool aid?
Are you using sites that omit the 7 Day War?
5 nations attacked and lost land.

I asked for 3 sites...where’s your response?

 

[Coyote]

Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?

Two reasons. 1. Israel has the ability to do it because they've invested in government and infrastructure and economy and peace for 100 years. 2. Israel has legal control over the territory by treaty.

So Arab Israeli’s are actively discriminated against when it comes to building settlements?

Both Arabs and Jews are discriminated against over building anywhere if they do not get the right permits for building.

And I have read where more Jewish buildings or even cities/settlements have been demolished than Arab ones.

You ask your questions in such an accusatory way when it comes to Israel doing far worse against its Jewish citizens than it does against the Arab ones who do not have the proper permits to build.

Arab Israelis live in Israel, and not in Judea and Samaria, aka, West Bank.

They must follow the same laws as the Jews, Druze, Bedouins and all others who are citizens or residents of the country.

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

And for the record it has been well established that Arabs are far more likely to have illegal construction torn down and less likely to get permits. In addition many illegal Jewish settlements get tacit approval by the government and even investment in infrastructure and schools.

 

[Coyote]

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory. You go back to the initial dispute. Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.

Why just that far?

 

[Indeependent]

Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?

Two reasons. 1. Israel has the ability to do it because they've invested in government and infrastructure and economy and peace for 100 years. 2. Israel has legal control over the territory by treaty.

So Arab Israeli’s are actively discriminated against when it comes to building settlements?

Both Arabs and Jews are discriminated against over building anywhere if they do not get the right permits for building.

And I have read where more Jewish buildings or even cities/settlements have been demolished than Arab ones.

You ask your questions in such an accusatory way when it comes to Israel doing far worse against its Jewish citizens than it does against the Arab ones who do not have the proper permits to build.

Arab Israelis live in Israel, and not in Judea and Samaria, aka, West Bank.

They must follow the same laws as the Jews, Druze, Bedouins and all others who are citizens or residents of the country.

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

And for the record it has been well established that Arabs are far more likely to have illegal construction torn down and less likely to get permits. In addition many illegal Jewish settlements get tacit approval by the government and even investment in infrastructure and schools.

And I asked you a question that didn’t get answered.

 

[Shusha]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

 

[Indeependent]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

In the meanwhile, Egypt has Israel keeping Gazans out of Egypt and Jordan has Israel keeping Palis out of Jordan.
But that’s ok.

 

[Indeependent]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

Not to mention Syria occupying Lebanon and trying to blame their attacks on the Lebanese leadership.

 

[Shusha]

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory. You go back to the initial dispute. Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.

Why just that far?

Because before that it was all under Ottoman sovereignty and therefore, by definition, not occupied by anyone.

 

[Coyote]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

It is not nonsensical in the least, it is just uncomfortable.

How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?

How many Israeli Arab settlements?

 

[Indeependent]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

It is not nonsensical in the least, it is just uncomfortable.

How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?

How many Israeli Arab settlements?

How many Israeli Arab settlements have been dismantled due to being bomb manufacturing centers?

 

[Coyote]

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory. You go back to the initial dispute. Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.

Why just that far?

Because before that it was all under Ottoman sovereignty and therefore, by definition not occupied by anyone.

Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there. Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?

So who else occupied it?

 

[Lastamender]

I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical. Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.

It is not nonsensical in the least, it is just uncomfortable.

How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?

How many Israeli Arab settlements?

Did you know Israel is a Jewish state. That might answer your question.

 

[Indeependent]

When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go? You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point. I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.

You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory. You go back to the initial dispute. Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.

Why just that far?

Because before that it was all under Ottoman sovereignty and therefore, by definition not occupied by anyone.

Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there. Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?

So who else occupied it?

Link to details?
When did Jordan get back right to it’s West Bank that it lost in war?