Obama to Urge UN to Break up Israel

[Kondor3]

That has nothing to do with presenting empirical evidence that the US fought Gulf War I and the Iraq War as proxies for Israeli interests rather than for its own reasons.

Yeah, it's just a coincidence that all these Jewish NeoCons keep agitating for us to go to war with Israel's reprieved enemies.

Come on, guy, you nutters have spun much fancier conspiracy theories out of nothing.

Translation: "I am unable to substantiate my claims with hard evidence."

Understood.

Expected.

 

[JoeB131]

Translation: "I am unable to substantiate my claims with hard evidence."

Understood.

Expected.

Yeah, other than AIPAC and PNAC and all the other Zionist conspirators... no evidence at all.

 

[Kondor3]

Translation: "I am unable to substantiate my claims with hard evidence."

Understood.

Expected.

Yeah, other than AIPAC and PNAC and all the other Zionist conspirators... no evidence at all.

Naming a pro-Israeli lobbying group and a now-defunct neo-Conservative think-tank and spraying-out references to 'all the other Zionist conspirators' is NOT the same as serving-up empirical evidence that the United States fought either Gulf War I or the Iraq War primarily as proxies for Israel and Israeli interests.

Just admit it... you have no such evidence to substantiate your claims... and be done with it, fer Crissakes.

You keep digging that hole for yourself, deeper and deeper.

I submit that it is time to stop digging, and climb out, while you still can.

Enough, already.

Sheeeesh...

 

[BlindBoo]

The UN made Israel, in case some of you have forgotten.

I disagree. The UN doesn't have the authority to establish nations. The UN General assembly had a non-binding vote on the proposed partition plan in Nov, 1947. The UNSC never took the matter up after that because the violent backlash of the partition vote evolved into the Israeli war for independence. It was the men and weapons that made Israel.

 

[BlindBoo]

...Actually, the ZIonists haven't won a war without the US bailign their asses out since 1967...

What did the US do in 1967 to bail their asses out? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to undermine the French arms embargo and hold ourselves out as willing to sell them arms, and, if memory serves correctly, we made good on munitions they'd burned off.

...The Arabs almost drove their asses into the sea until Nixon rescued them...

What did the US do in 1973 to rescue their asses? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to make good on the munitions they'd burned off and to provide some basic reconnaissance and intelligence services.

...I'd like an ally that doesn't drag us into wars over religious bullshit...

Yes, there IS that danger, being allied to Egypt, or Pakistan, or even Turkey.

...Or manipulate our politicians into fighting their wars for them...

What war(s) have we fought as proxies for Israel?

Who was manipulated into doing that?

And how?

The US pledged to resupply their army, so they were able to commit their reserves into the battle and win.

 

[BlindBoo]

So what?

It's not like we put boots on the ground or combat planes in the air.

Besides, out of the 24,000 (-ish) tons of supplies that we sent them, only 9,000 (-ish) tons arrived prior to the end of the war.

Nice try.

Point is, without us bailing them out, the Zionshit Entity would have been wiped out.

Well no, they had a nuclear option........which was one of the considerations.

 

[Kondor3]

...Actually, the ZIonists haven't won a war without the US bailign their asses out since 1967...

What did the US do in 1967 to bail their asses out? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to undermine the French arms embargo and hold ourselves out as willing to sell them arms, and, if memory serves correctly, we made good on munitions they'd burned off.

...The Arabs almost drove their asses into the sea until Nixon rescued them...

What did the US do in 1973 to rescue their asses? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to make good on the munitions they'd burned off and to provide some basic reconnaissance and intelligence services.

...I'd like an ally that doesn't drag us into wars over religious bullshit...

Yes, there IS that danger, being allied to Egypt, or Pakistan, or even Turkey.

...Or manipulate our politicians into fighting their wars for them...

What war(s) have we fought as proxies for Israel?

Who was manipulated into doing that?

And how?

The US pledged to resupply their army, so they were able to commit their reserves into the battle and win.

They would have burned off their stockpiles, regardless; it's something one does in extremis.

 

[JoeB131]

Naming a pro-Israeli lobbying group and a now-defunct neo-Conservative think-tank and spraying-out references to 'all the other Zionist conspirators' is NOT the same as serving-up empirical evidence that the United States fought either Gulf War I or the Iraq War primarily as proxies for Israel and Israeli interests.

Uh, yeah, actually, it is. And the reason why PNAC is defunct is because the war they advocated turned into such a shit sandwich. The same lot are trying the same shit another way.

In 2013, AIPAC was at it again, trying to get us to take out Assad for them over imaginary chemical attacks.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

......and not a peep about your debunked 'military action against Israel' idiocy.

You can learn.

You can't "debunk" a straw man, sploogy.

No one said 'military action" except you.

Hey, you may be a liar and a scumbag, but that makes you a good democrat...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ethnic cleansing is a war crime. And Israel's supreme court has already ruled its criminal even by Israeli law.

Yet your Al Qaeda buddies do it all the time.

Say Comrade, what if Israel put a tax on anyone who isn't a Jew? Would you be okay with that?

 

[BlindBoo]

...Actually, the ZIonists haven't won a war without the US bailign their asses out since 1967...

What did the US do in 1967 to bail their asses out? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to undermine the French arms embargo and hold ourselves out as willing to sell them arms, and, if memory serves correctly, we made good on munitions they'd burned off.

...The Arabs almost drove their asses into the sea until Nixon rescued them...

What did the US do in 1973 to rescue their asses? Did we put troops on the ground? Did we provide combat air sorties? The most I remember us doing was to make good on the munitions they'd burned off and to provide some basic reconnaissance and intelligence services.

...I'd like an ally that doesn't drag us into wars over religious bullshit...

Yes, there IS that danger, being allied to Egypt, or Pakistan, or even Turkey.

...Or manipulate our politicians into fighting their wars for them...

What war(s) have we fought as proxies for Israel?

Who was manipulated into doing that?

And how?

The US pledged to resupply their army, so they were able to commit their reserves into the battle and win.

They would have burned off their stockpiles, regardless; it's something one does in extremis.

The other option was to go nuclear.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I disagree. The UN doesn't have the authority to establish nations. The UN General assembly had a non-binding vote on the proposed partition plan in Nov, 1947. The UNSC never took the matter up after that because the violent backlash of the partition vote evolved into the Israeli war for independence. It was the men and weapons that made Israel.

Britain DID have the authority to create nations per the 1919 armistice with Turkey (in lue of the defunct Ottoman Empire). Simply put, the Empire which had ruled these lands ceased to exist. Britain had both the moral and legal right to administer these lands.

 

[BlindBoo]

Britain DID have the authority to create nations per the 1919 armistice with Turkey (in lue of the defunct Ottoman Empire). Simply put, the Empire which had ruled these lands ceased to exist. Britain had both the moral and legal right to administer these lands.

They failed miserably and the consequences of their ineptitude in Palestine reverberates to this day. They quit the Mandate and turned the whole mess over to the UN. Non of that mattered in 1948 after the Britts quit when Israel declared themselves a sovereign state.

 

[bendog]

The UN made Israel, in case some of you have forgotten.

I disagree. The UN doesn't have the authority to establish nations. The UN General assembly had a non-binding vote on the proposed partition plan in Nov, 1947. The UNSC never took the matter up after that because the violent backlash of the partition vote evolved into the Israeli war for independence. It was the men and weapons that made Israel.

The UN can vote to recognize a state. It did so with Israel in 48, after Israel agreed to recognize the partition resolution ... which it has now rejected with Bibi apparently ruling out any two state solution and any limits on "settlements." The UN also recognized Palestine. However, absent some action by the security council, I don't think the UN can enforce any boundaries.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They failed miserably and the consequences of their ineptitude in Palestine reverberates to this day. They quit the Mandate and turned the whole mess over to the UN. Non of that mattered in 1948 after the Britts quit when Israel declared themselves a sovereign state.

Ineptitude in allowing Kafir to control lands that you say belong to Allah.

You democrats and your Al Qaeda allies demand that not one grain of sand be ruled by the Infidels. Israel has a right to exist, and to take ANY action to survive.

 

[BlindBoo]

The UN made Israel, in case some of you have forgotten.

I disagree. The UN doesn't have the authority to establish nations. The UN General assembly had a non-binding vote on the proposed partition plan in Nov, 1947. The UNSC never took the matter up after that because the violent backlash of the partition vote evolved into the Israeli war for independence. It was the men and weapons that made Israel.

The UN can vote to recognize a state. It did so with Israel in 48, after Israel agreed to recognize the partition resolution ... which it has now rejected with Bibi apparently ruling out any two state solution and any limits on "settlements." The UN also recognized Palestine. However, absent some action by the security council, I don't think the UN can enforce any boundaries.

Cambridge Professor, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, Judge ad hoc of the International Court of Justice, a renowned expert on international law, clarified that from a legal standpoint, the 1947 UN Partition Resolution had no legislative character to vest territorial rights in either Jews or Arabs. In a monograph relating to one of the most complex aspects of the territorial issue, the status of Jerusalem, Judge, Sir Lauterpacht wrote that any binding force the Partition Plan would have had to arise from the principle pacta sunt servanda, [In Latin: treaties must be honored – the first principle of international law] that is, from agreement of the parties at variance to the proposed plan. In the case of Israel, Judge, Sir Lauterpacht explains: “The coming into existence of Israel does not depend legally upon the Resolution. The right of a State to exist flows from its factual existence-especially when that existence is prolonged shows every sign of continuance and is recognised by the generality of nations.

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/10/resolution-181.pdf

 

[BlindBoo]

They failed miserably and the consequences of their ineptitude in Palestine reverberates to this day. They quit the Mandate and turned the whole mess over to the UN. Non of that mattered in 1948 after the Britts quit when Israel declared themselves a sovereign state.

Ineptitude in allowing Kafir to control lands that you say belong to Allah.

You democrats and your Al Qaeda allies demand that not one grain of sand be ruled by the Infidels. Israel has a right to exist, and to take ANY action to survive.

Baseless allegations, again, Unhinged2008? Land on earth can not belong to supernatural beings.

Truman, a Democrat was the first leader to recognize Israel. But that decision was mostly due to domestic politics.

WRMEA Truman Adviser Recalls May 14 1948 US Decision to Recognize Israel

An "insider's account" of the discussions leading up to these decisions has just been published by former Secretary of Defense Clark Clifford, one of the few living parties to the discussions leading to partition.

Most people who knew the Middle East at first hand opposed the partition plan, adopted by the United Nations on November 29, 1947. Patently unfair, it awarded 56 percent of Palestine to its 650,000 Jewish inhabitants, and 44 percent to its 1,300,000 Muslim and Christian Arab inhabitants.

Partition was adopted only after ruthless arm-twisting by the US government and by 26 pro-Zionist US senators who, in telegrams to a number of UN member states, warned that US goodwill in rebuilding their World War II-devastated economies might depend on a favorable vote for partition.

In a Nov. 10, 1945 meeting with American diplomats brought in from their posts in the Middle East to urge Truman not to heed Zionist urgings, Truman had bluntly explained his motivation:

"I'm sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism: I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents."

Immediately after the plan was adopted, however, extensive fighting broke out between Jews and Arabs, just as US diplomats had predicted. The Arab states categorically rejected the partition by outside parties of an overwhelmingly Arab land.

David Ben-Gurion, soon to be Israel's first prime minister, had ordered his representatives at the UN to accept the plan, but not to enter into any discussion or agreement defining the new Jewish state's borders. To his followers, who, like the Arabs, laid claim to the entire land, Ben-Gurion promised that his acceptance was only tactical.

As well-organized Jewish militias seized Village after village assigned by the UN plan to the Arabs, and badly organized Arab villagers retaliated with bloody but purposeless attacks on Jewish vehicles and convoys, Secretary of State George C. Marshall urged Truman to reconsider.

The British Army was resolved to withdraw from Palestine on May 15, 1948 regardless of the outcome of events in the UN. The fighting was spreading all over the mandate, including Jerusalem, which was supposed to remain a "corpus separatum" under international control and not be assigned either to the Jewish or the Arab state.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Baseless allegations, again, Unhinged2008? Land on earth can not belong to supernatural beings.

Truman, a Democrat was the first leader to recognize Israel. But that decision was mostly due to domestic politics.

The basis of the war of Islam against Israel is the "not one grain of sand" doctrine, which holds that any land that was under the dominion of Islam can never be under the dominion of the Kafir.

Truman was a very different type of democrat than you Obamunists are - there is little relation.

WRMEA Truman Adviser Recalls May 14 1948 US Decision to Recognize Israel

An "insider's account" of the discussions leading up to these decisions has just been published by former Secretary of Defense Clark Clifford, one of the few living parties to the discussions leading to partition.

Most people who knew the Middle East at first hand opposed the partition plan, adopted by the United Nations on November 29, 1947. Patently unfair, it awarded 56 percent of Palestine to its 650,000 Jewish inhabitants, and 44 percent to its 1,300,000 Muslim and Christian Arab inhabitants.

Partition was adopted only after ruthless arm-twisting by the US government and by 26 pro-Zionist US senators who, in telegrams to a number of UN member states, warned that US goodwill in rebuilding their World War II-devastated economies might depend on a favorable vote for partition.

In a Nov. 10, 1945 meeting with American diplomats brought in from their posts in the Middle East to urge Truman not to heed Zionist urgings, Truman had bluntly explained his motivation:

"I'm sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism: I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents."

Immediately after the plan was adopted, however, extensive fighting broke out between Jews and Arabs, just as US diplomats had predicted. The Arab states categorically rejected the partition by outside parties of an overwhelmingly Arab land.

David Ben-Gurion, soon to be Israel's first prime minister, had ordered his representatives at the UN to accept the plan, but not to enter into any discussion or agreement defining the new Jewish state's borders. To his followers, who, like the Arabs, laid claim to the entire land, Ben-Gurion promised that his acceptance was only tactical.

As well-organized Jewish militias seized Village after village assigned by the UN plan to the Arabs, and badly organized Arab villagers retaliated with bloody but purposeless attacks on Jewish vehicles and convoys, Secretary of State George C. Marshall urged Truman to reconsider.

The British Army was resolved to withdraw from Palestine on May 15, 1948 regardless of the outcome of events in the UN. The fighting was spreading all over the mandate, including Jerusalem, which was supposed to remain a "corpus separatum" under international control and not be assigned either to the Jewish or the Arab state.

I take issue with a so-called study that openly lies.

{adopted by the United Nations on November 29, 1947. Patently unfair, it awarded 56 percent of Palestine to its 650,000 Jewish inhabitants, and 44 percent to its 1,300,000 Muslim and Christian Arab inhabitants.}

Now that is just a flat out lie.

In fact, more of what was called "Palestine" was ceded to Jordan than to both Muslims and Jews in Israel.

Because what you cited openly lies about this, nothing it purports can be viewed as accurate.

 

[BlindBoo]

The basis of the war of Islam against Israel is the "not one grain of sand" doctrine, which holds that any land that was under the dominion of Islam can never be under the dominion of the Kafir.

Nice little sidestep when in fact your claim was "Ineptitude in allowing Kafir to control lands that you say belong to Allah."

My answer: No land belongs to any supernatural being.

I take issue with a so-called study that openly lies.

That is not a study.

Truman Adviser Recalls May 14, 1948 US Decision to Recognize Israel

The numbers are correct.

I also let slide your little dig insinuating an alliance with al Qaeda because that stupid shit is just par for your course.

Nice punt.

 

[bgr39]

At some point, the zionists are either going to have to have a two-state solution, or they are going to have to live in a state where Jews are in the minority.
But they can't go on being an apartheid state forever.

Indeed.
The choices are three:

1. Absorb the people living in Gaza and The West Bank into Israeli society.
2. Annihilate the people living in Gaza and The West Bank.
3. Free the people living in Gaza and The West Bank to pursue their own destiny.
​

It's way past time for Israel to poop or get off the pot - this decades old war of attrition is REALLY getting old.

​

Seems that Israel already gave "land for peace" the Gaza strip and the west bank.
What did the Israelis get in return for giving those areas to the Palestinians???
Israel just gave the Palestinians more area to launch missiles into Israeli settlements.
WHEN are the Palestinians gonna bargain in good faith?????