Hamas Threatens Another Attack
- Thread starter Hossfly
- Start date
ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDA and LIES, the rockets were being fired months before the Palestinians decided to get back together, they were warned about the repercussion way back in February before the talks took place. The members of team Palestine concocted the tale that the talks were why Israel retaliated to hamas violence and terrorism. Just a few weeks before the kidnapping hamas had discussed just that sort of thing. The people who murdered those boys were known and were hamas agents. The fact they were dead before the reprisals have no bearing on the last straw that forced Israels hand. Like all ISLAMONAZO PROPAGANDISTS you clutch at straws at look for excuses to blame Israel for the violence and terrorism. The whole evidence is there if you bother to look, but doing that will burst your bubble and destroy your beliefs. The terrorism started in January, hamas were warned about reprisals if they did not stop. The boys were kidnapped by hamas agents just 3 weeks after hamas discussed kidnapping Israeli boys. The Israelis went looking for the boys and their kidnappers, the boys bodies were found and that triggered the attacks on hamas rocket sites in gaza.
LINK from a non partisan source, you forget that Google Earth can be purchased live
How so tinny, how about a verifiable link that shows no Israelis are civilians. Because if you do you just open up a whole heap of whupass for the Palestinians not being civilians as well
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 86,351
- 4,873
- 1,815
I have posted it before but y'all believe Israel's bullshit more than my documents.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 86,351
- 4,873
- 1,815
You need to stop reading documents with Israel's glasses.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think this was all addressed before, but just in case it has not, let's make sure.
(COMMENT)
Your observation is 100% wrong.
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform you that an armistice agreement between Egypt and Israel has been signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes. EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT: S/1264/Corr.1 23 February 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform the Security Council that a General Armistice Agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Syria at Hill 232, near Mahanayim on 20 July 1949. The text of the Agreement is as follows:ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1353 20 July 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have honour to inform the Security Council that a general armistice agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of sixteen November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Lebanon at Ras En Naqura on twentythree March 1949. The text of the agreement is as follows:LEBANESE-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1296 23 March 1949
The 1949 Armistice Agreements, of which there are four (4) cited above, where individually drawn-up between the principle four aggressor nations (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) that crossed their borders into the neighboring state (Israel). The parties to the Armistice are individually named in capital letters.
- For the President of the Security Council: I have the honour to inform you that an Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, at Rhodes. The text of the Agreement is as follow: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN AND ISRAEL S/1302 4 April 1949
(COMMENT)
Relative to the current territorial dispute between the Israeli's and the Palestinians (West Bank and Gaza Strip), the "Treaties" which are applicable are:
The importance if this cannot be over emphasized. Both Armistice Agreements, having been orchestrated by the same influence of Truce Supervision Organization, use the same format and language:
Originally Posted by shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved
The important phrase is behind the meaning of: "establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2 Israeli-Jordanian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paraagraph 3 of this article.
Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2, Israeli-Egyptian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
THUS: The Armistice Arrangement is no longer "in force" once a peaceful settlement is achieved (Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979 - and the - State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 26 October 1994). Remembering that there was no Armistice signed with the Palestinians (not a party to the conflict and not a state able to enter into agreement under the Treaty Law Convention), the Armistice Lines between were dissolved by the agreement and were replaced by international boundaries stipulated permanent peace agreements in:
Originally Posted by TREATY EXCERPTS
Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II
The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary
1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
So, the next question is: What holds the boundaries we commonly refer to as the 1949 Armistice Line between Israel and Palestine? That would be the "Oslo Accords" the basic framework document and interim agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Because the 1949 Armistice Lines applied to Israel with Egypt and Jordan; and not the Palestinian as a concerned party. The Palestinians were not party to the Agreements.
Most Respectfully,
R
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
An armistice was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody won that war.
There was to be peace in Palestine. Not in Israel. Not in Israel and Palestine. In Palestine.
Armistice lines were drawn around and through Palestine. These lines were specifically not political or territorial borders. They did not change Palestine's existing international borders.
Palestine was still there and its defined territory remained intact.
RoccoR
Gold Member
P F Tinmore, et al,
YOU are intentionally attempting to justify and inciting violence against people ("civilians") protected under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), which is a violation itself under A/RES/2/110:
While it is true that Article 4 of the the Fourth Geneva Convention defines "protected persons" as those "in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals," applying in this case to the Arab Palestinians in the zone in which is occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army (effective control under Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Convention), any attack on those who are not members of the armed forces (in this case the Israeli Defense Force)("any person who is not a member of armed forces is considered to be a civilian") is defined by Rule #5 and protected under Rule #6 of the ICRC Customary IHL and the Additional Protocol I, Articles 48, 49 & 50 Part IV - Section 1 - Chapter 1 (cited Vol. 1125,1-175I2, Ch. 1, § 705) UN Treaties Series Page 25 & 26 ...
Additionally, it is unconscionable to suggest that you are presenting authoritative documentary evidence when you purposefully and unscrupulously twist the definition to fit a hostile Arab Palestinian agenda. Your opinion is one thing, but your implication that there is some legal foundation to attacking the civilian population of Israel, or that the citizens of Israel somehow do not enjoy the protection of "civilians" accorded under Treaty bound and Customary IHL is outside the decency normally expected of someone involved in a serious debate.
Most Respectfully,
R
YOU are intentionally attempting to justify and inciting violence against people ("civilians") protected under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), which is a violation itself under A/RES/2/110:
The General Assembly
1.
Condemns all forms of propaganda, in whatsoever country conducted, which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression;
(COMMENT)
While it is true that Article 4 of the the Fourth Geneva Convention defines "protected persons" as those "in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals," applying in this case to the Arab Palestinians in the zone in which is occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army (effective control under Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Convention), any attack on those who are not members of the armed forces (in this case the Israeli Defense Force)("any person who is not a member of armed forces is considered to be a civilian") is defined by Rule #5 and protected under Rule #6 of the ICRC Customary IHL and the Additional Protocol I, Articles 48, 49 & 50 Part IV - Section 1 - Chapter 1 (cited Vol. 1125,1-175I2, Ch. 1, § 705) UN Treaties Series Page 25 & 26 ...
Additionally, it is unconscionable to suggest that you are presenting authoritative documentary evidence when you purposefully and unscrupulously twist the definition to fit a hostile Arab Palestinian agenda. Your opinion is one thing, but your implication that there is some legal foundation to attacking the civilian population of Israel, or that the citizens of Israel somehow do not enjoy the protection of "civilians" accorded under Treaty bound and Customary IHL is outside the decency normally expected of someone involved in a serious debate.
Most Respectfully,
R
docmauser1
Gold Member
- Oct 8, 2010
- 7,274
- 698
- 190
How so, if said documents are categorized as bullshit?
teddyearp
Gold Member
Tinmore, the pretzel maker, is probably implying that since all (most) Israelis join the armed forces at adulthood and may stay in the reserves for quite a while, that this twist makes none of them civilians.
docmauser1
Gold Member
- Oct 8, 2010
- 7,274
- 698
- 190
Yeah, right. Old bullshit and drivel about a never-existed sovereign state of palestine.
Nope you have not posted a link that states no Israelis are civilians, you have posted a partial C&P that has no bearing on your claim.
So produce your evidence using those exact words ................ No Israelis are civilians
You need to stop reading documents with Israel's glasses.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think this was all addressed before, but just in case it has not, let's make sure.
(COMMENT)
Your observation is 100% wrong.
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform you that an armistice agreement between Egypt and Israel has been signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes. EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT: S/1264/Corr.1 23 February 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform the Security Council that a General Armistice Agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Syria at Hill 232, near Mahanayim on 20 July 1949. The text of the Agreement is as follows:ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1353 20 July 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have honour to inform the Security Council that a general armistice agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of sixteen November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Lebanon at Ras En Naqura on twentythree March 1949. The text of the agreement is as follows:LEBANESE-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1296 23 March 1949
The 1949 Armistice Agreements, of which there are four (4) cited above, where individually drawn-up between the principle four aggressor nations (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) that crossed their borders into the neighboring state (Israel). The parties to the Armistice are individually named in capital letters.
- For the President of the Security Council: I have the honour to inform you that an Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, at Rhodes. The text of the Agreement is as follow: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN AND ISRAEL S/1302 4 April 1949
(COMMENT)
Relative to the current territorial dispute between the Israeli's and the Palestinians (West Bank and Gaza Strip), the "Treaties" which are applicable are:
The importance if this cannot be over emphasized. Both Armistice Agreements, having been orchestrated by the same influence of Truce Supervision Organization, use the same format and language:
Originally Posted by shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved
The important phrase is behind the meaning of: "establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2 Israeli-Jordanian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paraagraph 3 of this article.
Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2, Israeli-Egyptian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
THUS: The Armistice Arrangement is no longer "in force" once a peaceful settlement is achieved (Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979 - and the - State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 26 October 1994). Remembering that there was no Armistice signed with the Palestinians (not a party to the conflict and not a state able to enter into agreement under the Treaty Law Convention), the Armistice Lines between were dissolved by the agreement and were replaced by international boundaries stipulated permanent peace agreements in:
Originally Posted by TREATY EXCERPTS
Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II
The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary
1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
So, the next question is: What holds the boundaries we commonly refer to as the 1949 Armistice Line between Israel and Palestine? That would be the "Oslo Accords" the basic framework document and interim agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Because the 1949 Armistice Lines applied to Israel with Egypt and Jordan; and not the Palestinian as a concerned party. The Palestinians were not party to the Agreements.
Most Respectfully,
R
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
An armistice was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody won that war.
There was to be peace in Palestine. Not in Israel. Not in Israel and Palestine. In Palestine.
Armistice lines were drawn around and through Palestine. These lines were specifically not political or territorial borders. They did not change Palestine's existing international borders.
Palestine was still there and its defined territory remained intact.
Yes the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE as it was termed in 1921 not the nation of Palestine as you claim. Still waiting for your evidence of a nation of Palestine before 1988.
Lipush
Gold Member
Meh, we're cruel occupiers.
See my little cousins in my avatar? The boy is 6 years old, and the little one just turned 4 (precious angels)
They're not civilians, either.
Darn occupying Zionists!
Meh, we're cruel occupiers.
See my little cousins in my avatar? The boy is 6 years old, and the little one just turned 4 (precious angels)
They're not civilians, either.
Darn occupying Zionists!
Did you get my PM?
You need to stop reading documents with Israel's glasses.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think this was all addressed before, but just in case it has not, let's make sure.
(COMMENT)
Your observation is 100% wrong.
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform you that an armistice agreement between Egypt and Israel has been signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes. EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT: S/1264/Corr.1 23 February 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have the honour to inform the Security Council that a General Armistice Agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Syria at Hill 232, near Mahanayim on 20 July 1949. The text of the Agreement is as follows:ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1353 20 July 1949
- For the President of the Security Council: “I have honour to inform the Security Council that a general armistice agreement, in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of sixteen November 1948, was signed by the delegations of Israel and Lebanon at Ras En Naqura on twentythree March 1949. The text of the agreement is as follows:LEBANESE-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT S/1296 23 March 1949
The 1949 Armistice Agreements, of which there are four (4) cited above, where individually drawn-up between the principle four aggressor nations (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) that crossed their borders into the neighboring state (Israel). The parties to the Armistice are individually named in capital letters.
- For the President of the Security Council: I have the honour to inform you that an Armistice Agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, at Rhodes. The text of the Agreement is as follow: GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN AND ISRAEL S/1302 4 April 1949
(COMMENT)
Relative to the current territorial dispute between the Israeli's and the Palestinians (West Bank and Gaza Strip), the "Treaties" which are applicable are:
The importance if this cannot be over emphasized. Both Armistice Agreements, having been orchestrated by the same influence of Truce Supervision Organization, use the same format and language:
Originally Posted by shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved
The important phrase is behind the meaning of: "establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2 Israeli-Jordanian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paraagraph 3 of this article.
Originally Posted by Article XII, Para 2, Israeli-Egyptian Armistice
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
THUS: The Armistice Arrangement is no longer "in force" once a peaceful settlement is achieved (Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979 - and the - State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 26 October 1994). Remembering that there was no Armistice signed with the Palestinians (not a party to the conflict and not a state able to enter into agreement under the Treaty Law Convention), the Armistice Lines between were dissolved by the agreement and were replaced by international boundaries stipulated permanent peace agreements in:
Originally Posted by TREATY EXCERPTS
Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II
The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary
1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
So, the next question is: What holds the boundaries we commonly refer to as the 1949 Armistice Line between Israel and Palestine? That would be the "Oslo Accords" the basic framework document and interim agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Because the 1949 Armistice Lines applied to Israel with Egypt and Jordan; and not the Palestinian as a concerned party. The Palestinians were not party to the Agreements.
Most Respectfully,
R
This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
An armistice was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody won that war.
There was to be peace in Palestine. Not in Israel. Not in Israel and Palestine. In Palestine.
Armistice lines were drawn around and through Palestine. These lines were specifically not political or territorial borders. They did not change Palestine's existing international borders.
Palestine was still there and its defined territory remained intact.
You are absolutely 100% incorrect, as usual. So you realize how stupid you are making yourself to be ? Think about what you're saying. Egypt and Israel signed an armistice agreement in which an armistice line was drawn, but the line was in 'Palestine' ?
Also, why do you keep mentioning that Israel was not mentioned in the agreements? The agreements were between several countries and ISRAEL. The title of the treaty has the word Israeli in it. Palestine had NOTHING to do with the armistice agreements. You need to stop making up Palestinian lies.
Meh, we're cruel occupiers.
See my little cousins in my avatar? The boy is 6 years old, and the little one just turned 4 (precious angels)
They're not civilians, either.
Darn occupying Zionists!
Tinmore is a massive idiot. He makes things like this up yet he has ZERO shred of evidence to back it up.
Where does it say ANYWHERE that there must be treaty in order for Israel to acquire land ? Answer: Nowhere, because you completely made that up. Needing a treaty to acquire land is a TINMORE prerequisite. Then you act as if you are correct because no one can provide this made up treaty.The 1949 UN Armistice Agreements call all of Palestine Palestine. There is not even a hint of a place called Israel present on that land. This is in compliance with international law that forbids the acquisition of land by war.Nice duck.You are the one who cannot prove your point.
You're a moron.
Because there's nothing to prove. It's an idiotic statement. It's called Israel. Not occupied Israel. Only a moron would think what you think. I have no problem debatingpid things up for debate, but I will not stoop to your low level and debate something as stupid as this.
You're a moron Tinmore. Even the Palestinian government recognizes Israel .
I feel stupid even discussing this
What's your proof that Israel is occupied (this should be fun)
Israel can only acquire land through treaty defining exactly what land is being acquired.
So far, nobody has been able to produce such a document.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 86,351
- 4,873
- 1,815
Then where should Israel get its land? It cannot take it by force. It is illegal to acquire land in war.Where does it say ANYWHERE that there must be treaty in order for Israel to acquire land ? Answer: Nowhere, because you completely made that up. Needing a treaty to acquire land is a TINMORE prerequisite. Then you act as if you are correct because no one can provide this made up treaty.The 1949 UN Armistice Agreements call all of Palestine Palestine. There is not even a hint of a place called Israel present on that land. This is in compliance with international law that forbids the acquisition of land by war.
You're a moron Tinmore. Even the Palestinian government recognizes Israel .
I feel stupid even discussing this
What's your proof that Israel is occupied (this should be fun)
Israel can only acquire land through treaty defining exactly what land is being acquired.
So far, nobody has been able to produce such a document.
Then where should Israel get its land? It cannot take it by force. It is illegal to acquire land in war.Where does it say ANYWHERE that there must be treaty in order for Israel to acquire land ? Answer: Nowhere, because you completely made that up. Needing a treaty to acquire land is a TINMORE prerequisite. Then you act as if you are correct because no one can provide this made up treaty.The 1949 UN Armistice Agreements call all of Palestine Palestine. There is not even a hint of a place called Israel present on that land. This is in compliance with international law that forbids the acquisition of land by war.
You're a moron Tinmore. Even the Palestinian government recognizes Israel .
I feel stupid even discussing this
What's your proof that Israel is occupied (this should be fun)
Israel can only acquire land through treaty defining exactly what land is being acquired.
So far, nobody has been able to produce such a document.
We've been through this 100 times. Acquiring land is a real estate issue. Self determination/ following steps to independence laid out by the U.N is how Israel came into existence. If that were illegal, then the U.N of all organizations would not have recognized Israel after they declared independence.
How is that taking land by force?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
Now we help Ecuador blast narco terrorists in Ecuador.- Started by BackAgain
- Replies: 1
-
-
In One Speech Biden Manages to Pander to and Insult a Mostly Black Crowd- Started by Dont Taz Me Bro
- Replies: 8
