Hamas Leader Killed

Israel has borders. Fictional Palestine has none.
1729634942732.webp
 
The conflict (civil war) began right after the UN passed the partition plan resolution, the Arabs said they would resist an imposed colonial state on Arab land and that's what they did once the partition plan was passed.
That was their choice

And the aftermath of the 1948 war has tormented the arabs to this day

75 years later the Pals are living in tents and depending on handouts for the food they eat
 

The above is factually incorrect.
  1. Israel is not required to "declare" borders as part of emerging or existing Statehood.
  2. Israel has defined borders and has since the moment she declared independence in 1948. It is an automated process according to customary international law. The borders follow the Mandate demarcation lines. Those borders have never been abrogated, ceded, changed, altered, dismantled, or indeed disputed.
  3. Peace Treaties with Egypt and Jordan confirm Israel's existing borders.
  4. The border between Israel and Lebanon is also determined by the 1923 Mandate demarcation lines. Note: not the 1949 Armistice Line. Those borders have never been abrogated, ceded, changed, altered, dismantled, or technically disputed. There is no border dispute between Lebanon and Israel. There IS a border dispute between Lebanon and Syria. (Two caveats to add: yes, there are some technical details having to do with various surveys conducted in the 1920s and yes, war has complicated things somewhat, BUT there is generally no dispute about where Israel ends and Lebanon starts and that line is the 1923 ratified Mandate demarcation line.)
  5. The border between Israel and Syria is also determined by the Mandate demarcation lines. Israel occupied and then annexed Syrian territory. (And Lebanese territory according to Lebanon.)
  6. Israel has no borders with "Palestine". The only legal way for Israel to have borders with "Palestine" is for Israel to negotiate a treaty with the emerging government of Palestine where Israel voluntarily cedes its own territory to the new sovereign.
  7. Jerusalem is not divided. Israel has no borders in Jerusalem with another sovereign. See above.
  8. Israel's borders have not changed over time. They are exactly the same as they were in 1948.
  9. Israel lost sovereign territory during the War of Independence when it was illegally and belligerently invaded by Jordan and Egypt (and others, but only Jordan and Egypt captured territory). Israel has become smaller over time, not larger.

The fact that so much misinformation has been adopted unquestioned by so many people does not change the legal facts.
 
I'd be curious how you are counting those. The way I count them is four (Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria) if you are Team Israel-doesn't-exist-its-all-Palestine and one/two (Israel) if you are Team Two-State.
 
1. I never contested that the text refers to "Jewish national home" and this is the first time you even mentioned this phrase.
The FIRST time? You haven't been paying attention then.
2. The LNC (league of nations covenant) does not identify any states only "their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized" but also continues "subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone". Yet the "mandatory" for Palestine does not identify a Jewish state, it refers only to Palestine and a "Jewish home" within that.
Yes. This is my point. Article 22, which is linked to the Jewish people in the Preamble of the Mandate for Palestine, indicates the intention of independent nations standing alone. It refers to the Jewish people as those who establish a national home in the Mandate for Palestine in alignment with Article 22. It only mentions the Jewish people as those receiving administrative advice and assistance to bring about the the necessary conditions where the Jewish people can "stand alone". Which became reality in 1948.

It is ridiculous to see it any other way.
Yet again, the document says nothing about "sovereignty" but does refer to "acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews" why would that be mentioned if it anticipates (as you claim) an independent Jewish state?
Because the conditions under which Arabs became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine was outlined in other documents. This document outlined the conditions for Jewish citizenship in the Mandate of Palestine.
Creating another state is hideous because the mandate makes no mention of it and we need only look to see what has come of the idea.
Well then, we agree. Only one State was intended to emerge from the Mandate for Palestine and only one State, in point of fact, did become "able to stand alone" and therefore became an independent State. That State was Israel and reconstituted by historic connection (right) and established the Jewish national home.
 
Originally posted by mac-7
That was their choice

And the aftermath of the 1948 war has tormented the arabs to this day

75 years later the Pals are living in tents and depending on handouts for the food they eat

75 years later, 3000 american civilians became hamburger meat because of their plight (with hopefully many more to come) and the international reputation of the jewish racial dictatorship continues to nosedive.

I'd say they are faring way better than most other peoples under colonial domination like the sadly forgotten cause of Tibetans, for example.
 
The Mandate allocated territory to the Jewish people (Israel) and to the Arab people (Jordan).

If you meant to say the UNGA recommended a Partition Plan, than say so. Accuracy matters.
Stop being so fucking selfish!
 
Back
Top Bottom