Should Jerusalem be made an international city?

[Saigon]

are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?

Obviously not, but Israel is the dominant party here. Israel controls the situation both on the ground and around the hallways of the UN, US and EU governments.

Israel has to play the lead role in determining the shape of the outcome, because at the moment no one in Palestine has the mandate, the power nor in some cases the will to do so.

 

[Roudy]

The UN has an excellent record...

Ha ha ha!

I must have accidentally come across the comedy and humor section of the board.

 

[Roudy]

Kondor -

Israel would never be asked to "give up Jerusalem". The issue only involves the Old City, and even then it would be shared under UN supverision.

Understood, Saigon. I simply do not foresee circumstances under which Israel would cede any aspect of control, sovereignty, oversight, whatever, which they now possess, in connection with Jerusalem - East, West, Old, New, whatever.

Whomever controls Jerusalem (Jews, Christians, Muslims... Byzantines, Franks, Arabs, Turks, British, Israelis, whatever) is considered (by tradition) to have a sacred trust to make the Holy Places accessible to all and to provide safe passage to-and-from same.

The Jews (Israelis) are every bit as capable of fulfilling that role as anyone else.

Given UN intransigence and ambivalence towards Israel at best, and UN General Assembly animosity and bias against Israel at worst, and given the failure of UN peace initiatives and land-for-peace deals over time, the Israelis have little reason to trust the UN.

Given that the Jews waited 1900 years to reclaim the Holy City and finally achieved that as a result of the 1967 Six-Day War, and given their poisoned relationship with the UN, my own 'take' on this is that UN control of Jerusalem - any part of it - is a nonstarter.

- forgotten by a world much-relieved to see those all-but-insane and combative folk dispersed and neutralized;

At times in history people said the same about Jews; not to mention Kurds, Sikhs, Hmong or East Timorese. Of those peoples - which ones have disappeared and been forgotten?

None of the examples that you provided had disappeared.

The Jews held-out because they had a unique and advanced (for ancient times) monotheistic religious belief-system which allowed them to weather a two-millennia -long Diaspora.

The rest because they always had at least some land on which to dwell as an organized people.

The so-called 'Palestinian People' are - organizationally speaking - an artificial construct which has only surfaced to distinguish them from their otherwise entirely indistinguishable regional ethnic brethren in recent decades - insufficient history and depth and traction to endure a Disaspora of 200 years, never mind 2000.

Many 'Losing-Side' populations and population-fragments end-up assimilating into the surrounding countryside and quickly disappear as a separately distinguishable 'People'; including many not mentioned in your earlier examples, such as Canaanites, Philistines, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Samaritans, Scythians, Parthians, Sumerians, Akkadians, etc..

Genetically, they're still 'there', so-to-speak - embedded within the present-day populations of their former regions - but they no longer exist as a functional (or even nominal) polity, from an organizational standpoint.

Such is likely to be the fate of this Johnny-Come-Lately artificial construct known as the so-called 'Palestinian'. They will still 'be there', so-to-speak, genetically embedded in the surrounding countryside populations. It's just that they will have disappeared off the scope as a functional (or even nominal) polity. Insufficient history, depth and traction.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong... full of $hit clean up to my ears... over this, but, stepping-back for the 5000-foot view, and looking at the multi-generational, multi-century long-haul, my money is on me being more right than wrong, on this one.

Our descendants will know whether there was any merit to such speculation, but we won't live long enough to learn the answers.

Plus you missed the part that he deceptively tried to make today's Arabs that call themselves Palestinians an ancient people that go back over 3000 years in the land of Israel. That is more outlandish than science fiction.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

hes free versing a history book from god knows where, and becauseIdon'tknow cannot read...greatest thread, best evah!!!!!

Talk about being off your meds, Trojan.

We all know that Quantum Witless is incapable of anything other than being a troll, but you put together a cogent argument. Okay, rarely, but at least often enough to convince me that it's not a fluke.

So forget about your divine pronouncements and defend your decision. That is, if you're not afraid to.

wow, gee thx dad......


theres not a thing wrong with QW's questions, maybe you can take a shot at them.

and exactly what decision do you think I have to defend?

You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"

 

[Trajan]

are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?

Obviously not, but Israel is the dominant party here. Israel controls the situation both on the ground and around the hallways of the UN, US and EU governments.

Israel has to play the lead role in determining the shape of the outcome, because at the moment no one in Palestine has the mandate, the power nor in some cases the will to do so.

I have to say thats the first time I have heard that Israel controls anything at the UN, aside from us as a proxy veto, they get hammered routinely.


as to the second part, I am not sure what they can at this point do. if there is little taste for compromise or even some general conciliatory attitude, its like sitting at the table by yourself.

 

[Trajan]

Talk about being off your meds, Trojan.

We all know that Quantum Witless is incapable of anything other than being a troll, but you put together a cogent argument. Okay, rarely, but at least often enough to convince me that it's not a fluke.

So forget about your divine pronouncements and defend your decision. That is, if you're not afraid to.

wow, gee thx dad......


theres not a thing wrong with QW's questions, maybe you can take a shot at them.

and exactly what decision do you think I have to defend?

You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"

I have no idea what that post is supposed to mean......

 

[Trajan]

Sounds like you play the Israel Victim Card like the usual cry babies....Israel's army not only matched and exceeded all the Arab forces but the US technological weapons made the six day war an easy victory...You don't like Wikipedia... it is a legitimate source used by many on this board and the world...If you have better info on the numbers post them...


Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Arab preparations

On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[78]

At the same time some Egyptian troops (15,000–20,000) were still fighting in Yemen.[79][80][81] Nasser's ambivalence about his goals and objectives was reflected in his orders to the military. The general staff changed the operational plan four times in May 1967, each change requiring the redeployment of troops, with the inevitable toll on both men and vehicles.[82]

Towards the end of May, Nasser finally forbade the general staff from proceeding with the Qahir ("Victory") plan, which called for a light infantry screen in the forward fortifications with the bulk of the forces held back to conduct a massive counterattack against the main Israeli advance when identified, and ordered a forward defense of the Sinai.[82] In the meantime, he continued to take actions intended to increase the level of mobilization of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, in order to bring pressure on Israel.

Syria's army had a total strength of 75,000 and amassed them along the Syrian border.[83] Jordan's army had 55,000 troops[84] and 300 tanks along the Jordanian border, 250 of which were U.S. M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper battalion trained in the new U.S.-built school. They also had 12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and 120 mm mortars.[85]

Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian command posts record orders from the end of May for the Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai'in in a night raid, codenamed "Operation Khaled". The aim was to establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The "go" codeword was Sa'ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians planned for the capture of Motza and Sha'alvim in the strategic Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27 camped near Ma'ale Adummim: "The reserve brigade will commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy it to the foundation, and won't leave a remnant or refugee from among its 800 residents".[85]

100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21, were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.[85]

On June 2, Jordan called up all reserve officers, and the West Bank commander met with community leaders in Ramallah to request assistance and cooperation for his troops during the war, assuring them that "in three days we'll be in Tel-Aviv".[85]

The Arab air forces were aided by volunteer pilots from the Pakistan Air Force acting in independent capacity, and by some aircraft from Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia to make up for the massive losses suffered on the first day of the war. The PAF Pilots shot down several Israeli planes.[2]

Israeli preparations

you are challenged when it comes to reading comprehension as well, I will take one more shot at this- there is no victim mentality pointing out facts, the fact is your numbers are wrong, you are bucketing Israels forces all on one front, they had more than one front to fight on...hello, Jordanians, Syrians to the east etc., taken in the whole they were heavily out numbered in every facet...... look at Bhunters post. this is fact, I am sorry if thats inconvenient for you.

I never said wiki wasn't Wikipedia... " a legitimate source" wiki is a poster board of snippets, unless you have actually read BOOKs and deep dive into the personalties involved etc. 2-3 sentences does not lend context to the whole, I can pick a few sentences out of almost anything to make it appear the one and only view fact and utterance to make a specific point viable, its a too convenient way for folks like you, whom I call "Google Rangers" to pretend to be informed after running out to perform a 2-3 minute search to find a link that they may be able to pull some nugget tpo make it appear as if they have a handle on the background.

if wiki is your back stop, fine here ya go-

israel
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed



Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

thats from bhunters post and its from wiki......so what now?

The song and dance goes on...Israel was in no danger of being invaded, its the same ME posturing of today...Israel's Pre-Emptive strike was a war of aggression planned to conquor the West Bank and Sinai...It was a War Of aggression and not your Victim Hood bullshit stories you pass for truth.

why yes of course, they told nasser to chase the UN out, move his troops right to the edge, close the straits of tiran where in they import 75% of their fuel, told jordan and iraq to mobilize forces to assist syria, create then call off operation dawn only after it the secret was blown etc etc etc .

you're obviously delusional..and willfully so it appears.


Oh and did you take out a calculator btw and do the math on the troops counts etc.?

 

[toastman]

Sounds like you play the Israel Victim Card like the usual cry babies....Israel's army not only matched and exceeded all the Arab forces but the US technological weapons made the six day war an easy victory...You don't like Wikipedia... it is a legitimate source used by many on this board and the world...If you have better info on the numbers post them...


Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Arab preparations

On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[78]

At the same time some Egyptian troops (15,000–20,000) were still fighting in Yemen.[79][80][81] Nasser's ambivalence about his goals and objectives was reflected in his orders to the military. The general staff changed the operational plan four times in May 1967, each change requiring the redeployment of troops, with the inevitable toll on both men and vehicles.[82]

Towards the end of May, Nasser finally forbade the general staff from proceeding with the Qahir ("Victory") plan, which called for a light infantry screen in the forward fortifications with the bulk of the forces held back to conduct a massive counterattack against the main Israeli advance when identified, and ordered a forward defense of the Sinai.[82] In the meantime, he continued to take actions intended to increase the level of mobilization of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, in order to bring pressure on Israel.

Syria's army had a total strength of 75,000 and amassed them along the Syrian border.[83] Jordan's army had 55,000 troops[84] and 300 tanks along the Jordanian border, 250 of which were U.S. M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper battalion trained in the new U.S.-built school. They also had 12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and 120 mm mortars.[85]

Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian command posts record orders from the end of May for the Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai'in in a night raid, codenamed "Operation Khaled". The aim was to establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The "go" codeword was Sa'ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians planned for the capture of Motza and Sha'alvim in the strategic Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27 camped near Ma'ale Adummim: "The reserve brigade will commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy it to the foundation, and won't leave a remnant or refugee from among its 800 residents".[85]

100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21, were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.[85]

On June 2, Jordan called up all reserve officers, and the West Bank commander met with community leaders in Ramallah to request assistance and cooperation for his troops during the war, assuring them that "in three days we'll be in Tel-Aviv".[85]

The Arab air forces were aided by volunteer pilots from the Pakistan Air Force acting in independent capacity, and by some aircraft from Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia to make up for the massive losses suffered on the first day of the war. The PAF Pilots shot down several Israeli planes.[2]

Israeli preparations

you are challenged when it comes to reading comprehension as well, I will take one more shot at this- there is no victim mentality pointing out facts, the fact is your numbers are wrong, you are bucketing Israels forces all on one front, they had more than one front to fight on...hello, Jordanians, Syrians to the east etc., taken in the whole they were heavily out numbered in every facet...... look at Bhunters post. this is fact, I am sorry if thats inconvenient for you.

I never said wiki wasn't Wikipedia... " a legitimate source" wiki is a poster board of snippets, unless you have actually read BOOKs and deep dive into the personalties involved etc. 2-3 sentences does not lend context to the whole, I can pick a few sentences out of almost anything to make it appear the one and only view fact and utterance to make a specific point viable, its a too convenient way for folks like you, whom I call "Google Rangers" to pretend to be informed after running out to perform a 2-3 minute search to find a link that they may be able to pull some nugget tpo make it appear as if they have a handle on the background.

if wiki is your back stop, fine here ya go-

israel
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed



Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

thats from bhunters post and its from wiki......so what now?

The song and dance goes on...Israel was in no danger of being invaded, its the same ME posturing of today...Israel's Pre-Emptive strike was a war of aggression planned to conquor the West Bank and Sinai...It was a War Of aggression and not your Victim Hood bullshit stories you pass for truth.

Pbel, this is one of the most ridiculous, out-of-reality statements I've seen here. It's up there with some of Sherri's comments.
What's the matter with you ? Only feeble minded people believe in this kind of Arab propaganda bullshit that attempts to re-write history.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Talk about being off your meds, Trojan.

We all know that Quantum Witless is incapable of anything other than being a troll, but you put together a cogent argument. Okay, rarely, but at least often enough to convince me that it's not a fluke.

So forget about your divine pronouncements and defend your decision. That is, if you're not afraid to.

wow, gee thx dad......


theres not a thing wrong with QW's questions, maybe you can take a shot at them.

and exactly what decision do you think I have to defend?

You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"

I count 4 separate religions under the banner of Islam alone.

• Ahmadiyya
• Shi'a
• Sufism
• Sunni

It seems to me that you don't think people that kill each other over religious disagreements are part of a different religion, which is absurd. That leads to the inevitable question, where did you learn to count?

 

[Roudy]

you are challenged when it comes to reading comprehension as well, I will take one more shot at this- there is no victim mentality pointing out facts, the fact is your numbers are wrong, you are bucketing Israels forces all on one front, they had more than one front to fight on...hello, Jordanians, Syrians to the east etc., taken in the whole they were heavily out numbered in every facet...... look at Bhunters post. this is fact, I am sorry if thats inconvenient for you.

I never said wiki wasn't Wikipedia... " a legitimate source" wiki is a poster board of snippets, unless you have actually read BOOKs and deep dive into the personalties involved etc. 2-3 sentences does not lend context to the whole, I can pick a few sentences out of almost anything to make it appear the one and only view fact and utterance to make a specific point viable, its a too convenient way for folks like you, whom I call "Google Rangers" to pretend to be informed after running out to perform a 2-3 minute search to find a link that they may be able to pull some nugget tpo make it appear as if they have a handle on the background.

if wiki is your back stop, fine here ya go-

israel
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed



Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

thats from bhunters post and its from wiki......so what now?

The song and dance goes on...Israel was in no danger of being invaded, its the same ME posturing of today...Israel's Pre-Emptive strike was a war of aggression planned to conquor the West Bank and Sinai...It was a War Of aggression and not your Victim Hood bullshit stories you pass for truth.

why yes of course, they told nasser to chase the UN out, move his troops right to the edge, close the straits of tiran where in they import 75% of their fuel, told jordan and iraq to mobilize forces to assist syria, create then call off operation dawn only after it the secret was blown etc etc etc .

you're obviously delusional..and willfully so it appears.


Oh and did you take out a calculator btw and do the math on the troops counts etc.?

These guys who lie like this forget that there are recordings of Nasser and other Arab leaders going on national TV and radio declaring that they will be "driving the Jews into the sea, blah blah blah. " but then again if they had any shame they wouldn't be making these kinds of claims in the first place.

 

[MHunterB]

are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?

Obviously not, but Israel is the dominant party here. Israel controls the situation both on the ground and around the hallways of the UN, US and EU governments. Israel has to play the lead role in determining the shape of the outcome, because at the moment no one in Palestine has the mandate, the power nor in some cases the will to do so.

Thanks for the laugh, Saigon.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

wow, gee thx dad......


theres not a thing wrong with QW's questions, maybe you can take a shot at them.

and exactly what decision do you think I have to defend?

You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"

I have no idea what that post is supposed to mean......

Nor do I have any idea what QW's post is supposed to mean, but you quoted it. Maybe you should ask the troll; he already knows I have him on ignore and yet remains very preoccupied with me.

 

[MHunterB]

You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"

I have no idea what that post is supposed to mean......

Nor do I have any idea what QW's post is supposed to mean, but you quoted it. Maybe you should ask the troll; he already knows I have him on ignore and yet remains very preoccupied with me.

That is a new definition of 'troll' with which I was previously unfamiliar. Seems to me that the one calling 'troll' was admiring his own reflection and got confused.......

 

[Indofred]

What an interesting idea.
A city run for all and anyone by people of all three major religions.
A city where all can respect each other.

Never work - too many bloody idiots around.

 

[Saigon]

I have to say thats the first time I have heard that Israel controls anything at the UN, aside from us as a proxy veto, they get hammered routinely.

At the UN they do, because they are outnumbered by the Arab lobby, but only on issues on which the EU countries abstain or vote against Israel.

Should Israel present a viable peace plan at UN level for some reason, it would automatically have the support of the 28 EU nations, plus those of most of the rest of the western world.

Although the EU is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, the EU also hasa strong Jewish lobby, and will always support Israel's existance.

Palestine simply does not have the networks, lobbyists or influence that Israel has in London, Paris, Berlin or Rome - let alone Washington.

 

[Saigon]

The UN has an excellent record...

Ha ha ha!

I must have accidentally come across the comedy and humor section of the board.

Both UNIFIL and the UN operation in Golan(Qunietra) have been extremely succesful for decades.

I have visited both operations personally and spoken to local people about the operations. In both cases people were full of praise for the work the soldiers have done in bridge building.

Any problem you have with the operations is likely not with the UN, but with the limited mandate they have from the member states - meaning they can not, for instance, round up terrorists.

 

[Roudy]

The UN has an excellent record...

Ha ha ha!

I must have accidentally come across the comedy and humor section of the board.

Both UNIFIL and the UN operation in Golan(Qunietra) have been extremely succesful for decades.

I have visited both operations personally and spoken to local people about the operations. In both cases people were full of praise for the work the soldiers have done in bridge building.

Any problem you have with the operations is likely not with the UN, but with the limited mandate they have from the member states - meaning they can not, for instance, round up terrorists.

Yeah right, last I checked the UN was considered to be a joke.

 

[Saigon]

Roudy -

Yeah right, last I checked the UN was considered to be a joke.

I can not imagine who you checked with who would reduce the activities of an organisation involved in everything from election monitoring and promoting democracy, to vaccines to fresh water to promoting womens' rights to peacekeeping and from mosquito control to safeguarding cultural treasures as "a joke".

No one is going to consider UNICEF, WHO, UNIMOG and UNOSOM in the same breath, when they are involved in entirely different areas and in different parts of the world. They have virtually nothing in common.

Within UN Peacekeeping alone there have been more than 70 missions. There have been 15 - 20 missions in the Middle East alone. One or two of those have been failures, but a good fifty of them have been very significant successes, and I would count UNIFIL and UNDOF amongst them.

If you would not, by all means explain why not.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy -

Yeah right, last I checked the UN was considered to be a joke.

I can not imagine who you checked with who would reduce the activities of an organisation involved in everything from election monitoring and promoting democracy, to vaccines to fresh water to promoting womens' rights to peacekeeping and from mosquito control to safeguarding cultural treasures as "a joke".

No one is going to consider UNICEF, WHO, UNIMOG and UNOSOM in the same breath, when they are involved in entirely different areas and in different parts of the world. They have virtually nothing in common.

Within UN Peacekeeping alone there have been more than 70 missions. There have been 15 - 20 missions in the Middle East alone. One or two of those have been failures, but a good fifty of them have been very significant successes, and I would count UNIFIL and UNDOF amongst them.

If you would not, by all means explain why not.

UN does good humanitarian work, although even in that there is so much waste, corruption and cronyism it would make a third world dictator blush.

Preventing wars and genocides and promoting peace, their record is dismal and in many cases they have made things worse.

 

[Saigon]

Roudy -

In actual fact, there is very little waste these days in organisations such as the WHO, UNICEF or UNESCO. Some, perhaps, but in general it is not a major issue. And I based that on discussions with people who work for organisations both within and outside the UN, such as CARE and STC.

Preventing wars and genocides and promoting peace, their record is dismal and in many cases they have made things worse.

I mentioned earlier that the UN has run 70 missions based on peacekeeping, and in that list I see 2 or 3 that I would consider failures for one reason or another.

I see about 50 I would consider successes and UNIFIL is one of them.

How has UNIFIL made things worse? How about UNDOF?

Are you actually familiar with their work, or do you simply oppose them because they are run by the UN?