Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered

[Sixties Fan]

The UN is full of countries which recognized Israel's right to its ancestral land.

I know. But they don't recognize the land Israel took in the '67 war.

Don't worry, they will come around eventually.
After all, it is the most ancestral of all the Jewish homeland.
The Jordanians took it in a war of aggression in 1948 wanting to annex it and changing the names from Judea and Samaria to West Bank.

The Jordanians have since given the land up.

It is disputed until proper negotiations with the Arab leaders, if they ever come to the table again.

Arafat and Abbas were offered 93 to 98% of the "West Bank" before in negotiations and refused it.
But you don't really know why.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Hamas has effective control of Gaza. Just ask Egypt which has the same issues with Gaza that Israel has had since 2007.

Then why can't they leave? Why can't they have weapons? Why are their imports and exports restricted? Why can't they fish and farm without getting shot at?

Many leave, for the USA or Europe.

Here is how they have no weapons at all. How do you think they got all of that?

IN PICTURES: Hamas shows off its weapons in military parade marking anniversary


And here are the main places where they store them

Why Hamas stores its weapons inside hospitals, mosques and schools

 

[Slyhunter]

Germany lost it's war, Israel didn't.

So you agree with Hitler, might makes right?

Hitler lost.

 

[Slyhunter]

THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....

Except in your mind.

If there is no military occupation, why can't Gazans leave? If there is no military occupation, then what are the over 300 roadblocks and checkpoints restricting Palestinian movement?

You're not making the world a better place by lying about the facts.

I would let them leave. I wouldn't let them come back.

 

[USAF 2023]

The UN is full of countries which recognized Israel's right to its ancestral land.

I know. But they don't recognize the land Israel took in the '67 war.

Don't worry, they will come around eventually.
After all, it is the most ancestral of all the Jewish homeland.
The Jordanians took it in a war of aggression in 1948 wanting to annex it and changing the names from Judea and Samaria to West Bank.

The Jordanians have since given the land up.

It is disputed until proper negotiations with the Arab leaders, if they ever come to the table again.

Arafat and Abbas were offered 93 to 98% of the "West Bank" before in negotiations and refused it.
But you don't really know why.

They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem

 

[Shusha]

How you love to exaggerate.

You are full of hateful ignorance towards the Jewish People.

I would suggest stop feeding your very hungry Catholic Irish self.

That is what Catholicism has been feeding all Christians since Christianity was founded.

Hate those Jews. And you do it to perfection.

Why would I hate Jews?

And give me one country, just one, who recognizes Israel's right to that land.

You really need to decide what land, specifically, you are arguing against in terms of Israeli sovereignty. You keep bouncing around discussing events of 1967, events of 1948, events of 1920s and events earlier. You should pick a target and stick with it. At least then you'll be consistently wrong.

Meantime, let me remind you that international law is not a popularity contest. And let me also remind you that MOST countries recognize Israel's absolute right to sovereignty in some portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine. Further MOST countries recognize that final borders between Israel and a new State of Palestine can only be determined by negotiation and treaty, which is in line with all recognized international law.

As can be seen in recent developments many Arab nations are also supporting Israeli rights to peaceful sovereignty.

Palestinians are running out of supporters.

 

[Shusha]

Hum. Have you not read the Mandate for Palestine?

The entire territory was set aside for the NATIONal homeland for the Jewish people.

There was no division made. And there was no other peoples mentioned.

Now, you could very well argue that this was an egregious oversight and needs to be corrected. I wouldn't argue with you. The WAY to correct the oversight is to negotiate for peace and sovereignty for both peoples in a way that is fair and reasonable and NOT in a way which insists on narratives and propaganda.

You ******* shoot Palestinian children in the head for throwing a rock! Don't even talk to me about what's fair and reasonable.

Theoretically then, you would fully support Israeli citizens entering Gaza through the fence with wire cutters, yes?

You would agree that Gaza has no right to defend her border with Israel and that Israelis should be able to pass freely between Israel and Gaza?

And that would include Israelis who make threats against the lives of Gazan citizens, right?

 

[Billo_Really]

It does not matter what the "International Community" has to say. Christian and Muslim haters of Jews have no say in what is legal or illegal when it comes to Israel and the Jewish People.

Stop using Judaism as an excuse to treat people like garbage. This has nothing to do with Jews. BTW, I also quoted the Israeli High Court. Is the Israeli High Court Jew haters?

The Wall cut down 90 % of the suicide attacks against Israelis.
One can see why you and the Arabs do not like it.

The wall is illegal and on land that is not Israel's. Furthermore, according to the Red Cross...

[the wall] not only violates IHL but further undermines the living conditions of the affected communities – depriving them of normal economic and social connections, and hindering their access to their jobs, their fields, their schools, their health-care centres, and their places of worship. The fact that the Barrier now reaches deep into Palestinian territory, with a projected total length of more than twice that of the 315 km Green Line, is seriously curtailing freedom of movement in certain areas of the West Bank and effectively cutting the land into small isolated parcels. The simultaneous expansion of settlements throughout the West Bank, served by those settlements’ own road network, is effectively increasing the isolation of Palestinian communities.​

Check my posts on the other thread. It is full of photos and videos of proof of what you don't like to deal with.

I'd have to care not to like it.

First you accuse Rocco, with the "figurative You", now me.
Really smart.

I thought so.

You know nothing about the Tamimi Clan.

And you know nothing about the truth.

By all means, equate Israel with Fascist and the Arab Muslim countries.

I don't have to. Albert Einstein already did.

Your last sentence is illogical.
There is video of her aggression against law enforcement. She did it because she was raised to behave that way. It came the price for her to pay the price for attacking Law enforcement for a change. She had gotten away with similar behavior before. Not anymore.
Do not worry, she will not have learned the lesson. She has the whole Tamimi clan to make sure she, and her sister as well, will continue to be aggressive to IDF soldier anytime there is a camera nearby.

You make such a fine German.

 

[Billo_Really]

So you claim Palestinians are living under a declaration of martial law, which does not exist imposed by their elected government, the terrorist group Hamas.

You're a hoot!

When you were a kid, did you have to wear hockey equipment, but you weren't on a team?

Because your post was a little mental.

 

[Billo_Really]

You are full of it.
Israel declared Independence only over the land where they had worked infrastructure since 1920 and where the Jews were a majority.

According to UN records...

From writings of Zionist leaders, it is evident that Zionist policy was to occupy, during the period of withdrawal, as much territory as possible (including the "West Bank") beyond the boundaries assigned to the Jewish State by the partition resolution.​

 

[Billo_Really]

Don't worry, they will come around eventually.
After all, it is the most ancestral of all the Jewish homeland.
The Jordanians took it in a war of aggression in 1948 wanting to annex it and changing the names from Judea and Samaria to West Bank.

The Jordanians have since given the land up.

It is disputed until proper negotiations with the Arab leaders, if they ever come to the table again.

Arafat and Abbas were offered 93 to 98% of the "West Bank" before in negotiations and refused it.
But you don't really know why.

What do you mean, "come around"?

Was Germany allowed to keep Poland?

 

[Billo_Really]

Hitler lost.

It's still the same philosophy.

 

[Billo_Really]

They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem

Can't offer what you don't have. East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.

 

[Billo_Really]

You really need to decide what land, specifically, you are arguing against in terms of Israeli sovereignty. You keep bouncing around discussing events of 1967, events of 1948, events of 1920s and events earlier. You should pick a target and stick with it. At least then you'll be consistently wrong.

Meantime, let me remind you that international law is not a popularity contest. And let me also remind you that MOST countries recognize Israel's absolute right to sovereignty in some portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine. Further MOST countries recognize that final borders between Israel and a new State of Palestine can only be determined by negotiation and treaty, which is in line with all recognized international law.

As can be seen in recent developments many Arab nations are also supporting Israeli rights to peaceful sovereignty.

Palestinians are running out of supporters.

I have been very clear that it was the land seized in the '67 war. There was no "bouncing" around.

If you think there is a country that recognizes Israel's right to that land, then lets see the evidence. Post one. Just one country. I'll wait.

You didn't answer my question. Why would I hate Jews?

 

[Billo_Really]

Theoretically then, you would fully support Israeli citizens entering Gaza through the fence with wire cutters, yes?

You would agree that Gaza has no right to defend her border with Israel and that Israelis should be able to pass freely between Israel and Gaza?

And that would include Israelis who make threats against the lives of Gazan citizens, right?

Your position is absurd. The Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land. And the fact that you have no problem shooting unarmed children in the head, says a lot about your lack of humanity.

 

[USAF 2023]

They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem

Can't offer what you don't have. East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.

Sorry, but Israel has control of E. Jerusalem now and is never going to give it up. Can’t offer what you don’t have? Then the Palestinians don’t have the right to demand passage between Gaza and the W. Bank on Israeli land. Two can play that game!

 

[admonit]

They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem

Can't offer what you don't have.

Cannot demand what you never have.

East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.

I'm sure you can provide your land ownership certificate.

 

[Shusha]

Your position is absurd. The Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.

I agree. Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land. But for the same reasons Israel does not occupy Palestinian land. Why? Because it is yet to be determined what IS Israeli land and what IS Palestinian land. The negotiation and peace treaty has not yet occurred. The territory is disputed.

We also agree that by convention, if not by formal treaty, there is a definitive, undisputed (international) boundary between Israel and Gaza, yes? So what gives Gazan, especially hostile Gazans, the right to cross an international boundary into territory which is NOT THEIRS? And what removes Israel's right to defend her sovereignty at that boundary?

 

[Shusha]

I have been very clear that it was the land seized in the '67 war. There was no "bouncing" around.

Not true. You have introduced arguments from the 1948 war, from 1945 and from the pre-Mandate period. But, still, I appreciate your clarity. Any further presentation, by you, of arguments from times other than 1967 can be dismissed as being inconsistent with your own claim.

However, given that Israel HAD sovereign title, in law, to the territory in its entirety; and given that the conflict between 1948 and 1967 and right up to 1988 when Palestine declared independence, was between Israel and the States of Jordan and Egypt and has since been resolved; and given that there is no possible legal claim for an existing international boundary (other than Oslo) your claim is without merit.

 

[Shusha]

And the fact that you have no problem shooting unarmed children in the head, says a lot about your lack of humanity.

Aren't you one of those who insist that Gazans and Palestinians have access to lethal weapons in order to 'defend themselves'? I'm smelling the rank and nasty odor of double standards here.

Objectively, do people have the right to use lethal force to defend themselves or their territory? Yes or no?

If YOUR standard is that lethal force can only be used when life is immanently threatened then you SHOULD be championing an end to rockets, mortars, suicide bombings, rock-throwing, stabbings, car-rammings, fire-bombings, wire-cutting, fence-crossing etc, etc, etc.

So why aren't you?