Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border

[rylah]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you missed my question!

(COUNTER-QUESTION)

And just where does the Hostile Arab Palestinian derive the authority to make credible threats and THEN use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the newly formed State of Israel???

Most Respectfully,
R

Where was Israel's territory?

Got a map?

(ANSWER)

At Midnight 14/15 May 1948, at the initial declaration of Independence, the official territory conformed to that annotated in:

Annex A

Plan of Partition with Economic Union
Annex B

City of Jerusalem
Boundaries Proposed By The Ad Hoc Committee On The Palestinian Question
* *** *
​

However that all change immediately upon the observation of movement towards that boundary. Israel redeployed forward to defendable positions to meet the imminent attack, by Arab League Forces. which came in the daylight hours of 15 May.

At the conclusion of hostilities in 1949, by Armistice Arrangement through the efforts of the UN Mediator by Dr. Ralph Bunche. Dr Bunche became a 1950 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for his efforts. The Armistice Lines represented the Forward Edge of the Battle Areas.

More permanent arrangements have been established since that time, with the parties to the conflict; which did not include the Hostile Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

No territory acquired by Israel is beyond the border of the territory vested with the sovereignty of the Jewish Nation.

Resolution 181 was the first time an Arab state was suggested on the west bank of the territory that was alloted to the Jewish Nation under international law, not the other way around.
With or without the resolution Jews had all the legal claim to independence in that territory, Arabs still don't, and that's the grasp at 181 as a bluff pretending it gives them any right to dominate any more territory beyond the 99% given to them in the middle east.

Was not implemented, was denied by the Arab league, therefore no territory was EVER legally alloted to an Arab state.

While You keep obsessively trying to turn every fact on its head , the territory alloted to the Jewish Nation is recognized even by the"Palestinian Academic Society for The Study of International Affairs" website:

PASSIA - MAPS - Palestine - PALESTINE UNDER THE BRITISH MANDATE

Was not implemented, was denied by the Arab league, therefore no territory was EVER legally alloted to an Arab state.

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

77% of the land intended for the Jewish Nation was partitioned for the Hashemite Kingdom,
an Arab state that bans all Jews by law.

Partition indeed happened, You just obsess, at the expense of all involved, about chipping away at the little left for Jews.

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you missed my question!

(COUNTER-QUESTION)

And just where does the Hostile Arab Palestinian derive the authority to make credible threats and THEN use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the newly formed State of Israel???

Most Respectfully,
R

Where was Israel's territory?

Got a map?

(ANSWER)

At Midnight 14/15 May 1948, at the initial declaration of Independence, the official territory conformed to that annotated in:

Annex A

Plan of Partition with Economic Union
Annex B

City of Jerusalem
Boundaries Proposed By The Ad Hoc Committee On The Palestinian Question
* *** *
​

However that all change immediately upon the observation of movement towards that boundary. Israel redeployed forward to defendable positions to meet the imminent attack, by Arab League Forces. which came in the daylight hours of 15 May.

At the conclusion of hostilities in 1949, by Armistice Arrangement through the efforts of the UN Mediator by Dr. Ralph Bunche. Dr Bunche became a 1950 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for his efforts. The Armistice Lines represented the Forward Edge of the Battle Areas.

More permanent arrangements have been established since that time, with the parties to the conflict; which did not include the Hostile Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

No territory acquired by Israel is beyond the border of the territory vested with the sovereignty of the Jewish Nation.

Resolution 181 was the first time an Arab state was suggested on the west bank of the territory that was alloted to the Jewish Nation under international law, not the other way around.
With or without the resolution Jews had all the legal claim to independence in that territory, Arabs still don't, and that's the grasp at 181 as a bluff pretending it gives them any right to dominate any more territory beyond the 99% given to them in the middle east.

Was not implemented, was denied by the Arab league, therefore no territory was EVER legally alloted to an Arab state.

While You keep obsessively trying to turn every fact on its head , the territory alloted to the Jewish Nation is recognized even by the"Palestinian Academic Society for The Study of International Affairs" website:

PASSIA - MAPS - Palestine - PALESTINE UNDER THE BRITISH MANDATE

Was not implemented, was denied by the Arab league, therefore no territory was EVER legally alloted to an Arab state.

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

Oh, my. Here you are again claiming the existence of something you invented as the "State" of Pal'istan. This was the state you insist was created by the Treaty of Lausanne, right?

 

[Sixties Fan]

If Israel shot at a group of civilians, how can it be that the only people killed are terrorists?

At approximately 14:45, Israeli warplanes launched a missile at a car driven by Hamed Ahmed Abdul Khudari (34), from al-Tuffah neighborhood, east of Gaza City. The targeting was in the vicinity of al-Sedrah area in the abovementioned neighborhood. As a result, al-Khudari , who works in Currency Exchange, was killed.Here is that currency trader, who also happened to be a field commander for the Al Qassam Brigades and had a terrorist since 2003.



Also, Hamas had an event to celebrate the deaths of two of its members the previous Friday, which included these disturbing photos showing what is presumably one of their sons in full terrorist gear.

(full article online)

More on the "civilians" killed last weekend ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh → come now. The question keeps reverberating → trying to suggest that the UN had no authority facilitate the disposition of the territory formerly under Mandate. Well, reality is a consequence of several independent actions. None of these actions taken or decisions made (from 1939 to 1948) can be contested by the Arab Palestinian since there was no sovereign entity (a state) that was consulted → or for that matter → even existed. They were not even considered a party to any Armistice or Treaty conceived and executed between the Actual Parties to the conflict.

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

So say we all!

• A/43/827-S/20278 of 18 November 1988 •
Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

SOURCE: Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the international community and represented in the United Nations...

(COMMENT)

You can be in denial all you want. The fact of the matter is the PLO have spoken. GAME OVER

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian State DID NOT come about simply because the Arab Palestinians rejected any attempt to bring them into the commercial, industrial, economic development of a self-sustaining environment …¬

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered.

​

Where was Israel's territory?
Got a map?

At the end of the day → and when the smoke cleared → it is what it is...

The Arab Palestinians realize that they want, what they perceive, as that which the Israeli have. They have decided to use force to get it.

Today's Territories

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

The remaining territory of Palestine (after carving off the Hashemite Kingdom) was to become the Jewish National Home for the Jewish people as a re-constitution of their Nation based on existing historical rights with settlement upon the land by the Jewish people and led by a Jewish government.

An additional Arab state was not mentioned. But a Jewish State certainly was.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh → come now. The question keeps reverberating → trying to suggest that the UN had no authority facilitate the disposition of the territory formerly under Mandate. Well, reality is a consequence of several independent actions. None of these actions taken or decisions made (from 1939 to 1948) can be contested by the Arab Palestinian since there was no sovereign entity (a state) that was consulted → or for that matter → even existed. They were not even considered a party to any Armistice or Treaty conceived and executed between the Actual Parties to the conflict.

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

So say we all!

• A/43/827-S/20278 of 18 November 1988 •
Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

SOURCE: Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the international community and represented in the United Nations...

(COMMENT)

You can be in denial all you want. The fact of the matter is the PLO have spoken. GAME OVER

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian State DID NOT come about simply because the Arab Palestinians rejected any attempt to bring them into the commercial, industrial, economic development of a self-sustaining environment …¬

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered.

​

Where was Israel's territory?
Got a map?

At the end of the day → and when the smoke cleared → it is what it is...

The Arab Palestinians realize that they want, what they perceive, as that which the Israeli have. They have decided to use force to get it.

Today's Jewish State of Israel
View attachment 260697
​

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

 

[Hollie]

If Israel shot at a group of civilians, how can it be that the only people killed are terrorists?

At approximately 14:45, Israeli warplanes launched a missile at a car driven by Hamed Ahmed Abdul Khudari (34), from al-Tuffah neighborhood, east of Gaza City. The targeting was in the vicinity of al-Sedrah area in the abovementioned neighborhood. As a result, al-Khudari , who works in Currency Exchange, was killed.Here is that currency trader, who also happened to be a field commander for the Al Qassam Brigades and had a terrorist since 2003.



Also, Hamas had an event to celebrate the deaths of two of its members the previous Friday, which included these disturbing photos showing what is presumably one of their sons in full terrorist gear.

(full article online)

More on the "civilians" killed last weekend ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

I can't help but notice that the islamic terrorist "field commanders" get younger as the Israeli "Hellfire Missile Early Retirement Program" cleans out the ranks of the more excitable gee-had slugs.

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh → come now. The question keeps reverberating → trying to suggest that the UN had no authority facilitate the disposition of the territory formerly under Mandate. Well, reality is a consequence of several independent actions. None of these actions taken or decisions made (from 1939 to 1948) can be contested by the Arab Palestinian since there was no sovereign entity (a state) that was consulted → or for that matter → even existed. They were not even considered a party to any Armistice or Treaty conceived and executed between the Actual Parties to the conflict.

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

So say we all!

• A/43/827-S/20278 of 18 November 1988 •
Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

SOURCE: Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the international community and represented in the United Nations...

(COMMENT)

You can be in denial all you want. The fact of the matter is the PLO have spoken. GAME OVER

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian State DID NOT come about simply because the Arab Palestinians rejected any attempt to bring them into the commercial, industrial, economic development of a self-sustaining environment …¬

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered.

​

Where was Israel's territory?
Got a map?

At the end of the day → and when the smoke cleared → it is what it is...

The Arab Palestinians realize that they want, what they perceive, as that which the Israeli have. They have decided to use force to get it.

Today's Jewish State of Israel
View attachment 260697
​

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

Addressed multiple times for you.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh → come now. The question keeps reverberating → trying to suggest that the UN had no authority facilitate the disposition of the territory formerly under Mandate. Well, reality is a consequence of several independent actions. None of these actions taken or decisions made (from 1939 to 1948) can be contested by the Arab Palestinian since there was no sovereign entity (a state) that was consulted → or for that matter → even existed. They were not even considered a party to any Armistice or Treaty conceived and executed between the Actual Parties to the conflict.

You keep bringing up Resolution 181 like it means something. Israel also mentioned Resolution 181 in its declaration of independence. Even in fake history it is said that Israel acquired territory beyond that what was allotted in Resolution 181.

However, there was no Resolution 181. There was no territory allotted to a Jewish state. There was no legitimacy given to a Jewish state. Resolution 181 was not implemented by the Security Council as required by the resolution.

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

So say we all!

• A/43/827-S/20278 of 18 November 1988 •
Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

SOURCE: Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the international community and represented in the United Nations...

(COMMENT)

You can be in denial all you want. The fact of the matter is the PLO have spoken. GAME OVER

Palestine was already there. It was multi ethnic, multi religious state. The "Arab" state and "Jewish" state were products of the partition that didn't happen. So yeah, there was no "Arab" state.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian State DID NOT come about simply because the Arab Palestinians rejected any attempt to bring them into the commercial, industrial, economic development of a self-sustaining environment …¬

So my question remains unanswered. You ducked it again.

(COMMENT)

Asked and answered.

​

Where was Israel's territory?
Got a map?

At the end of the day → and when the smoke cleared → it is what it is...

The Arab Palestinians realize that they want, what they perceive, as that which the Israeli have. They have decided to use force to get it.

Today's Jewish State of Israel
View attachment 260697
​

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

Addressed multiple times for you.

Usual duck.

 

[The Original Tree]

I laugh at Muslims who try to say they are somehow related to Abraham and then try to say God did not make The Abrahamic Covenant with Abraham and his offspring through Sarah.

These people are so full of Hate for The Jew, they are Insane.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I grasp this; but, don't see the reason for the confusing.

The Security Council resolution neither endorses nor precludes these armistice lines as the definitive political boundaries. However, it calls for withdrawal from occupied territories, the nonacquisition of territory by war, and the establishment of secure and recognized boundaries.

Green Line

The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated
the area under Jewish control in Palestine.

The border of Israel prior to the June 1967 Six-Day War delineated as a result of the truce agreements that followed the 1948–1949 Israeli War of Independence. The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated the area under Jewish control in Palestine. The Green Line encompassed about 78 percent of Palestinian territory in 1947 before the Israeli War of Independence. Although it delineated a military boundary only, in effect the Green Line actually defined the de facto state borders between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. The sole exception was the municipality of Jerusalem. Israel claimed as sovereign territory the parts of the city administered by Jordan until 1967.

Drawing of the Green Line was based almost exclusively on military considerations. As such, it wreaked havoc on a number of communities, dividing towns and villages and separating farmers from their fields. Jerusalem was especially impacted, being divided into West and East Jerusalem. The Jordanian city of Qalqilyah became virtually an enclave within Israel, while Kibbutz Ramat Rachel was left almost entirely outside of Israeli territory.

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

(COMMENT)

The Armistice Lines are instruments to neutralize hostile fire (disengage contact between opposing forces) between the belligerents. The Armistic Lines are not intended to be establishing permanent international boundaries between states. At the time of the creation of the Armistice Line, there was NO Independent Government of Palestine. All the territory that was not controlled by Israel, was under the control of one of the four principle Arab League Countries. The Armitice Lines were, by arrangement between the opposing parties, where only to remain in force until a negotiated permanent international boundary was agreed upon by the bellegerents and documented by treaty.

All parties to the conflict → recognise their right and obligation to live in peace with each other as well as with all states within secure and recognised boundaries. The two states affirmed their respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area. This is the meaning of Article XII of the Armistice Agreements: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."

And that is exactly what happented.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I grasp this; but, don't see the reason for the confusing.

The Security Council resolution neither endorses nor precludes these armistice lines as the definitive political boundaries. However, it calls for withdrawal from occupied territories, the nonacquisition of territory by war, and the establishment of secure and recognized boundaries.

Green Line

The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated
the area under Jewish control in Palestine.

The border of Israel prior to the June 1967 Six-Day War delineated as a result of the truce agreements that followed the 1948–1949 Israeli War of Independence. The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated the area under Jewish control in Palestine. The Green Line encompassed about 78 percent of Palestinian territory in 1947 before the Israeli War of Independence. Although it delineated a military boundary only, in effect the Green Line actually defined the de facto state borders between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. The sole exception was the municipality of Jerusalem. Israel claimed as sovereign territory the parts of the city administered by Jordan until 1967.

Drawing of the Green Line was based almost exclusively on military considerations. As such, it wreaked havoc on a number of communities, dividing towns and villages and separating farmers from their fields. Jerusalem was especially impacted, being divided into West and East Jerusalem. The Jordanian city of Qalqilyah became virtually an enclave within Israel, while Kibbutz Ramat Rachel was left almost entirely outside of Israeli territory.

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

(COMMENT)

The Armistice Lines are instruments to neutralize hostile fire (disengage contact between opposing forces) between the belligerents. The Armistic Lines are not intended to be establishing permanent international boundaries between states. At the time of the creation of the Armistice Line, there was NO Independent Government of Palestine. All the territory that was not controlled by Israel, was under the control of one of the four principle Arab League Countries. The Armitice Lines were, by arrangement between the opposing parties, where only to remain in force until a negotiated permanent international boundary was agreed upon by the bellegerents and documented by treaty.

All parties to the conflict → recognise their right and obligation to live in peace with each other as well as with all states within secure and recognised boundaries. The two states affirmed their respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area. This is the meaning of Article XII of the Armistice Agreements: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."

And that is exactly what happented.

Most Respectfully,
R

All the territory that was not controlled by Israel, was under the control of one of the four principle Arab League Countries.

The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I grasp this; but, don't see the reason for the confusing.

The Security Council resolution neither endorses nor precludes these armistice lines as the definitive political boundaries. However, it calls for withdrawal from occupied territories, the nonacquisition of territory by war, and the establishment of secure and recognized boundaries.

Green Line

The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated
the area under Jewish control in Palestine.

The border of Israel prior to the June 1967 Six-Day War delineated as a result of the truce agreements that followed the 1948–1949 Israeli War of Independence. The Green Line, so-named because it was drawn with green marker on the maps at the time, designated the area under Jewish control in Palestine. The Green Line encompassed about 78 percent of Palestinian territory in 1947 before the Israeli War of Independence. Although it delineated a military boundary only, in effect the Green Line actually defined the de facto state borders between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. The sole exception was the municipality of Jerusalem. Israel claimed as sovereign territory the parts of the city administered by Jordan until 1967.

Drawing of the Green Line was based almost exclusively on military considerations. As such, it wreaked havoc on a number of communities, dividing towns and villages and separating farmers from their fields. Jerusalem was especially impacted, being divided into West and East Jerusalem. The Jordanian city of Qalqilyah became virtually an enclave within Israel, while Kibbutz Ramat Rachel was left almost entirely outside of Israeli territory.

So then, why armistice lines and not borders?

(COMMENT)

The Armistice Lines are instruments to neutralize hostile fire (disengage contact between opposing forces) between the belligerents. The Armistic Lines are not intended to be establishing permanent international boundaries between states. At the time of the creation of the Armistice Line, there was NO Independent Government of Palestine. All the territory that was not controlled by Israel, was under the control of one of the four principle Arab League Countries. The Armitice Lines were, by arrangement between the opposing parties, where only to remain in force until a negotiated permanent international boundary was agreed upon by the bellegerents and documented by treaty.

All parties to the conflict → recognise their right and obligation to live in peace with each other as well as with all states within secure and recognised boundaries. The two states affirmed their respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area. This is the meaning of Article XII of the Armistice Agreements: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved."

And that is exactly what happented.

Most Respectfully,
R

All the territory that was not controlled by Israel, was under the control of one of the four principle Arab League Countries.

The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

Your comment about three areas of occupation is nonsense.

Your shrill whining is at a frequency that causes all the dogs in my neighborhood to start barking.

Why do you post here when you know so little?

 

[Shusha]

The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

All of the occupations ended with peace treaties between the Parties involved in the conflict.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I will limit my response to consider only the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip and their relation and status with respect to Israel.

​

[
The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

(COMMENT)

The 1967 Occupation of the sovereign Hashemite Kingdom Holdings of the West Bank and Jerusalem ended on 1 August 1988. The Hashemite Kingdom cut all ties and politically abandon ending the occupation status of the territory.

The Occupation of Egyptian the Gaza Strip holding ending 26 March 1979 with the Peace Agreement.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I will limit my response to consider only the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip and their relation and status with respect to Israel.

View attachment 260754
​

[
The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

(COMMENT)

The 1967 Occupation of the sovereign Hashemite Kingdom Holdings of the West Bank and Jerusalem ended on 1 August 1988. The Hashemite Kingdom cut all ties and politically abandon ending the occupation status of the territory.

The Occupation of Egyptian the Gaza Strip holding ending 26 March 1979 with the Peace Agreement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Whose sovereign territory was occupied by Jordan and Egypt before 1967?

 

[Shusha]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I will limit my response to consider only the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip and their relation and status with respect to Israel.

View attachment 260754
​

[
The armistice lines divided Palestine into three areas of occupation.

When did those occupations end?

(COMMENT)

The 1967 Occupation of the sovereign Hashemite Kingdom Holdings of the West Bank and Jerusalem ended on 1 August 1988. The Hashemite Kingdom cut all ties and politically abandon ending the occupation status of the territory.

The Occupation of Egyptian the Gaza Strip holding ending 26 March 1979 with the Peace Agreement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Whose sovereign territory was occupied by Jordan and Egypt before 1967?

The only other sovereign which existed in the territory at that time was Israel. So that is the only possible answer.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, this is rediculous. You know the answer.

Whose sovereign territory was occupied by Jordan and Egypt before 1967?

(REFERENCE)

1 The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;

b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and

c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.

2 It will be a matter for subsequent agreement as to which territories in the foregoing categories will be brought under the trusteeship system and upon what terms.

(COMMENT)

Of course you have to remember that the Arab League, as aggressors, to possession before the implementation of the Article 77 Obligations could be put into effect.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

No matter how you want to frame nit, the Arab League Aggressors in the 1948-49 Arab - Israeli War was just a pretext for the four principal actors to sweep-in and grab as much territory that they could.


(COMMENT)

Of course, you have to remember that the Arab League, as aggressors, to possession before the implementation of the Article 77 Obligations could be put into effect. However, the Arab League Arggessors bungled that pretty much.

The ethical question is, given that the Arab Palestinians have twisted the facts up so much, where do they get their authority, even as much as the ability for frivolous complaints against the Israelis.

The nature of the complaint completely change when the Treaty is understood to say:

•• "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."

(The Arabs of Palestine WERE NOT concerned parties to the Treaty.)​

Nothing was promised to the Arabs of Palestine, as they were part of the enemy inhabitants of the area. It is not normally the case that the surrender documents after a war, bequeath rewards to the loser population.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

No matter how you want to frame nit, the Arab League Aggressors in the 1948-49 Arab - Israeli War was just a pretext for the four principal actors to sweep-in and grab as much territory that they could.


(COMMENT)

Of course, you have to remember that the Arab League, as aggressors, to possession before the implementation of the Article 77 Obligations could be put into effect. However, the Arab League Arggessors bungled that pretty much.

The ethical question is, given that the Arab Palestinians have twisted the facts up so much, where do they get their authority, even as much as the ability for frivolous complaints against the Israelis.

The nature of the complaint completely change when the Treaty is understood to say:

•• "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."

(The Arabs of Palestine WERE NOT concerned parties to the Treaty.)​

Nothing was promised to the Arabs of Palestine, as they were part of the enemy inhabitants of the area. It is not normally the case that the surrender documents after a war, bequeath rewards to the loser population.

Most Respectfully,
R

•• "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."

Where does it say who were the parties concerned?