Israel does not exist

[P F Tinmore]

Israel sits on land designated by the last enforceable treaty for the creation of a Jewish homeland.

Which was?

This is why you were on ignore. We've been over that a thousand times and you still pretend more than adequate validation to the point has not been offered.

Israel is a sovereign state. its borders are fixed. Right smack where you'd pretend that fictional state of palestine once was.

Put me back on ignore, please. I get the same tired old Israeli talking points from too many people already.

It was nice.

 

[Shusha]

Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

Where some government of Palestine, other than the Israeli one, signed a treaty with another nation? Links? Be specific.

 

[Boston1]

Have there been any treaties with Palestine since 1949 that have changed that status?

You keep saying "treaties with Palestine" as though one can make a treaty with soil. You can't. States make treaties. Israel, as a State, has made treaties. Since 1948, including the 1949 Armistice Agreements!

You keep acting as though there is another legal entity here. There is not. In 1948/1949 the only entities were Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

There is. Palestine has been a state since the Treaty of Lausanne.

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

 

[Penelope]

Apparently it does now, since 1948 it declared itself a nation, at the expense of those who lived there.

 

[Humanity]

Argueing over facts simply doesn't work...

Israel exists, end of story!

Would it have better to have called 'Israel' 'Palestine' and have 'Palestine' as a Jewish state?

For me, I would say no... Simply because 'Israel' is the 'correct' name for a Jewish state! Further, had the name been 'Palestine' it could have led to the 'extinction' of 'Palestinians' as we know them and the state would have been what I choose to call 'Greater Israel'...

Of course, the flip side is ... Had the name been 'Palestine' would be actually have a conflict at all?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Have there been any treaties with Palestine since 1949 that have changed that status?

You keep saying "treaties with Palestine" as though one can make a treaty with soil. You can't. States make treaties. Israel, as a State, has made treaties. Since 1948, including the 1949 Armistice Agreements!

You keep acting as though there is another legal entity here. There is not. In 1948/1949 the only entities were Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

There is. Palestine has been a state since the Treaty of Lausanne.

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria.

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

 

[Boston1]

You keep saying "treaties with Palestine" as though one can make a treaty with soil. You can't. States make treaties. Israel, as a State, has made treaties. Since 1948, including the 1949 Armistice Agreements!

You keep acting as though there is another legal entity here. There is not. In 1948/1949 the only entities were Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

There is. Palestine has been a state since the Treaty of Lausanne.

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria.

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

Ludicrous, Arabs stole 77% of the mandated area intended for the creation of the state of Israel and then demanded more ;-) By your count 22% of the remaining 23% Bringing the Israeli area down to about 18% of the original territory allotted. Arabs are occupying roughly 82% of Israel ;-)

The area has been under hostile Arab occupation since its designation as the area for the Jewish homeland. Oh the horrors, when will this unjust Arab occupation end.

Lets try and get the story strait Tiny old man

 

[ProudVeteran76]

You are exactly right. Only a treaty can cede land or change borders. As such, the territory in question is still intact.

Which State (government) has sovereignty over that territory, on behalf of which people?

Occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

Look it up.

Too bad the Arabs didn't feel that way before 1967. Look it up

 

[Hollie]

You keep saying "treaties with Palestine" as though one can make a treaty with soil. You can't. States make treaties. Israel, as a State, has made treaties. Since 1948, including the 1949 Armistice Agreements!

You keep acting as though there is another legal entity here. There is not. In 1948/1949 the only entities were Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

There is. Palestine has been a state since the Treaty of Lausanne.

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria.

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

Did the Arab armies not read the notice back in 1973 that "It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force."?

 

[Boston1]

You are NOT suggesting that the Arab armies entertained thoughts of expanding their occupation are you ?

Cause that would be illegal

 

[P F Tinmore]

There is. Palestine has been a state since the Treaty of Lausanne.

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria.

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

Ludicrous, Arabs stole 77% of the mandated area intended for the creation of the state of Israel and then demanded more ;-) By your count 22% of the remaining 23% Bringing the Israeli area down to about 18% of the original territory allotted. Arabs are occupying roughly 82% of Israel ;-)

The area has been under hostile Arab occupation since its designation as the area for the Jewish homeland. Oh the horrors, when will this unjust Arab occupation end.

Lets try and get the story strait Tiny old man

Oh jeese, more BS Israeli talking points.

Put me back on ignore.

 

[Boston1]

You are wrong. Because the Treaty of Lausanne did not fulfill the four criteria you provided. States did not come into being until there was a government and a capacity to enter into relations with other States. (That WAS the entire point of the Mandate!) None of the states actually came into being until they declared independence and fulfilled the four criteria. I DO agree with you that the criteria for a defined territory was established in the Treaty of Lausanne. But Statehood was not.

However, even so, the state of "Palestine" had a government, a defined territory as you describe above, and had the capacity to enter into treaties. It declared independence in 1948. It fulfills all the criteria. Why would it NOT be a State?

Britain established a Palestinian government that was separate from the Mandate. Palestine entered agreements in regards to citizenship, nationality, and travel. There was even a trade agreement with the US in 1932.

When Britain left, local Palestinian leaders got together and declared independence in 1948. Even though recognition by other states is not required, Palestine was recognized by five other states.

In what dystopian fantasy did that happen ?

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria. A set of criteria that apparently escapes the pali mythos entirely

So you are saying that a mythical state that never existed and has no discernible borders and no distinct people or culture was recognized by the recently defeated surrounding Arab armies in an effort to spare themselves from admitting defeat.

Tell me more ;-)

As I recall this thread was about ISRAEL and its glorious existence by virtue of it having met certain criteria.

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

Ludicrous, Arabs stole 77% of the mandated area intended for the creation of the state of Israel and then demanded more ;-) By your count 22% of the remaining 23% Bringing the Israeli area down to about 18% of the original territory allotted. Arabs are occupying roughly 82% of Israel ;-)

The area has been under hostile Arab occupation since its designation as the area for the Jewish homeland. Oh the horrors, when will this unjust Arab occupation end.

Lets try and get the story strait Tiny old man

Oh jeese, more BS Israeli talking points.

Put me back on ignore.

But don't you want to, um, what was your point again ? I guess it didn't make any sense the first time.

 

[Shusha]

Not so. There is this bugaboo about a defined territory.

Israel took control and occupied 78% of Palestine, by military force, in '47-'48. It is illegal to acquire territory through the threat or use of force. This was a process that was separate from the 1948 war.

There is no bugaboo about a defined territory. You, yourself, have proven quite satisfactorily that the territory in question (we'll call it "Palestine" for convenience sake) had a clearly defined territory. It had a clearly defined territory from 1924 with the Treaty of Lausanne, according to you.

It also had a government (supported by the British, as was their mandate), a permanent population and, at the time of declaration of independence, the ability to have relations with other states. It acquired no territory by force. It acquired sovereignty in exactly the same way Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon acquired territory -- through treaty and other legal instruments, including your precious Treaty of Lausanne. There is no difference between the way "Palestine" was formed and the way Syria was formed. (Except, of course, no one attacked Syria).

Again, I will point out the actors who existed at the time. They were Palestine, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq. Every one of those actors had a defined territory. Who crossed into other's defined territories?! Who attempted to take by force what did not belong to them -- but belonged to another national entity (a full State, according to you)?! Not Palestine. Not once in 1947/48 did Palestine cross its own defined territory. The other actors entered and invaded Palestine -- a territory which was OUTSIDE of THEIR defined territory.

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.



And I'm still waiting for those links I asked for. Or are you giving up on that line of reasoning?

 

[Shusha]

Argueing over facts simply doesn't work...

Israel exists, end of story!

Of course it does.

But I think it is also important to examine the context of WHY people make assertions so in contrary to facts. I mean, why would people DO that?

In this case, it is a legal fiction in order to excuse and justify the murder of Jews. It is a common thread that lurks beneath the surface of what appears to be a legal argument. And it exists in members of this board, as well as in the Arab Palestinian community. It is a very dangerous idea and one that needs to be recognized and dealt with if we ever want to solve this conflict.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.

Links?

 

[Shusha]

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.

Links?

What?! That's it?! Are you done?! You are bailing?!

You are the one who has provided proof that Palestine has a defined territory, which is the only one of the four criteria even under dispute, again according to your own claims.

Shall I link to your own quotes?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.

Links?

What?! That's it?! Are you done?! You are bailing?!

You are the one who has provided proof that Palestine has a defined territory, which is the only one of the four criteria even under dispute, again according to your own claims.

Shall I link to your own quotes?

It is irrefutable that Palestine has territory defined by international borders. And the Palestinians, as all peoples, have the inalienable right to territorial integrity.

Now, where is Israel and what is Israel?

 

[Shusha]

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.

Links?

What?! That's it?! Are you done?! You are bailing?!

You are the one who has provided proof that Palestine has a defined territory, which is the only one of the four criteria even under dispute, again according to your own claims.

Shall I link to your own quotes?

It is irrefutable that Palestine has territory defined by international borders. And the Palestinians, as all peoples, have the inalienable right to territorial integrity.

Now, where is Israel and what is Israel?

Israel is the government of Palestine, which is in full accordance with the treaties made at the time of her re-constitution and all treaties since.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine (renamed Israel) meets all of the criteria you provided. You have no case.

Links?

What?! That's it?! Are you done?! You are bailing?!

You are the one who has provided proof that Palestine has a defined territory, which is the only one of the four criteria even under dispute, again according to your own claims.

Shall I link to your own quotes?

It is irrefutable that Palestine has territory defined by international borders. And the Palestinians, as all peoples, have the inalienable right to territorial integrity.

Now, where is Israel and what is Israel?

Israel is the government of Palestine, which is in full accordance with the treaties made at the time of her re-constitution and all treaties since.

That does not answer my questions.

 

[Shusha]

Sure it does. You just don't like the answer.

I'll simplify.

Israel is Palestine. Palestine is Israel. Wherever there is Palestine, it's Israel.