U.S. should declare "Peace process" dead and recognize Palestine

[Dot Com]

we need to stop all monetary (military) aid to israel until isreal denounces Bibi's divisive message.

I'm still unable to see what it has to do with Bibi's reelection..

He announced during his reelection that he would not be a part to any two-state solution. What bubble have you been living in?

Netanyahu No Palestinian state on my watch - CNN.com

You're welcome

 

[martybegan]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

 

[Bleipriester]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

 

[martybegan]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

 

[Daniyel]

we need to stop all monetary (military) aid to israel until isreal denounces Bibi's divisive message.

I'm still unable to see what it has to do with Bibi's reelection..

He announced during his reelection that he would not be a part to any two-state solution. What bubble have you been living in?

Netanyahu No Palestinian state on my watch - CNN.com

You're welcome

Netanyahu backs off from pre-election stance ruling out Palestinian state World news The Guardian
Sorry but I still don't get it, this was a maneuver - a inner right wing maneuver - that was intended for swaying other right wing "radicals" for him while intimidating left wingers that decided to vote for the 'Zionist Camp' to vote for smaller "radical" left parties instead, classic and brilliant move indeed but what is that have to do with the US recognition in Palestine?

 

[Correll]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

Except when the target is Israel.

Then, attacks with military grade weapons across the border is considered part of normal peaceful co-existence, and anyone who says otherwise is the one who is causing the trouble.

 

[Bleipriester]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

The government is in duty to forestall such attacks. But it is not responsible for the attacks, as long as it doesn´t order or tolerate them. The attacked state, on the other hand, is in duty to refrain from actions that make people that angry that they make rockets and fire them at it.

 

[martybegan]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

The government is in duty to forestall such attacks. But it is not responsible for the attacks, as long as it doesn´t order or tolerate them. The attacked state, on the other hand, is in duty to refrain from actions that make people that angry that they make rockets and fire them at it.

Nice attempt, but fail. If any government is unable to control its border in such a way as to prevent its citizens from shelling a neighboring State, it is not fit to govern.

It also has to catch and punish any citizens that do it, or the neighboring country is 100% justified to protect itself as it sees fit.

 

[Bleipriester]

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

The government is in duty to forestall such attacks. But it is not responsible for the attacks, as long as it doesn´t order or tolerate them. The attacked state, on the other hand, is in duty to refrain from actions that make people that angry that they make rockets and fire them at it.

Nice attempt, but fail. If any government is unable to control its border in such a way as to prevent its citizens from shelling a neighboring State, it is not fit to govern.

It also has to catch and punish any citizens that do it, or the neighboring country is 100% justified to protect itself as it sees fit.

Protecting itself is one side of the medal. The other side is the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza with thousands of dead and wounded civilians (75 % of all causalities in Israel´s campaign in 2014, according to UN, 50 % according to Israel).

 

[martybegan]

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

The government is in duty to forestall such attacks. But it is not responsible for the attacks, as long as it doesn´t order or tolerate them. The attacked state, on the other hand, is in duty to refrain from actions that make people that angry that they make rockets and fire them at it.

Nice attempt, but fail. If any government is unable to control its border in such a way as to prevent its citizens from shelling a neighboring State, it is not fit to govern.

It also has to catch and punish any citizens that do it, or the neighboring country is 100% justified to protect itself as it sees fit.

Protecting itself is one side of the medal. The other side is the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza with thousands of dead and wounded civilians (75 % of all causalities in Israel´s campaign in 2014, according to UN, 50 % according to Israel).

Still dodging the question of what would happen if they were made a State and still let their people shell across a border.

and when you hide your fighters in a civilian population, you bring civilian casualties on yourself.

 

[Bleipriester]

Still dodging the question of what would happen if they were made a State and still let their people shell across a border.

If a Palestinian sovereign state is acknowledged by Israel, no rockets will fly at Israel. If rockets still fly, the states of Palestine and Israel should cooperate in fighting those terrorists.

and when you hide your fighters in a civilian population, you bring civilian casualties on yourself.

Is that all you have to say? What if Syria would shell civilians in the hope to hit one or two terrorists?

 

[martybegan]

Still dodging the question of what would happen if they were made a State and still let their people shell across a border.

If a Palestinian sovereign state is acknowledged by Israel, no rockets will fly at Israel. If rockets still fly, the states of Palestine and Israel should cooperate in fighting those terrorists.

and when you hide your fighters in a civilian population, you bring civilian casualties on yourself.

Is that all you have to say? What if Syria would shell civilians in the hope to hit one or two terrorists?

If you want to debate the core of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, there are threads for that. This is about Statehood, and the fact that if they do get it, a few weeks later they would be invaded because they won't be able to control their own citizens (and would not want to).

 

[Bleipriester]

Still dodging the question of what would happen if they were made a State and still let their people shell across a border.

If a Palestinian sovereign state is acknowledged by Israel, no rockets will fly at Israel. If rockets still fly, the states of Palestine and Israel should cooperate in fighting those terrorists.

and when you hide your fighters in a civilian population, you bring civilian casualties on yourself.

Is that all you have to say? What if Syria would shell civilians in the hope to hit one or two terrorists?

If you want to debate the core of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, there are threads for that. This is about Statehood, and the fact that if they do get it, a few weeks later they would be invaded because they won't be able to control their own citizens (and would not want to).

Israel will never tolerate another state on soil it wants to make part of Israel, anyway.

 

[Slyhunter]

Palestinians should be wiped off the map.

 

[Dot Com]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

you made my point. They get their promised state (promised in 1967) and they'll have no reason to attack illegal settlements because they won't exist.

 

[Dot Com]

we need to stop all monetary (military) aid to israel until isreal denounces Bibi's divisive message.

I'm still unable to see what it has to do with Bibi's reelection..

He announced during his reelection that he would not be a part to any two-state solution. What bubble have you been living in?

Netanyahu No Palestinian state on my watch - CNN.com

You're welcome

Netanyahu backs off from pre-election stance ruling out Palestinian state World news The Guardian
Sorry but I still don't get it, this was a maneuver - a inner right wing maneuver - that was intended for swaying other right wing "radicals" for him while intimidating left wingers that decided to vote for the 'Zionist Camp' to vote for smaller "radical" left parties instead, classic and brilliant move indeed but what is that have to do with the US recognition in Palestine?

sooo.... giving the US the finger so that he could get some of his eXtreme rw fringer votes is AOK in your book. Go away kid, you're wasting my time Daniyel

 

[martybegan]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

you made my point. They get their promised state (promised in 1967) and they'll have no reason to attack illegal settlements because they won't exist.

Most of the rocket fire comes from Gaza. where are the illegal settlements in Gaza?

 

[irosie91]

we need to stop all monetary (military) aid to israel until isreal denounces Bibi's divisive message.

I'm still unable to see what it has to do with Bibi's reelection..

He announced during his reelection that he would not be a part to any two-state solution. What bubble have you been living in?

Netanyahu No Palestinian state on my watch - CNN.com

You're welcome

yes he did -----and hamas ---the elected reps of da palis announced that it would never recognize a jewish state---as did abu mamzer

 

[irosie91]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

you made my point. They get their promised state (promised in 1967) and they'll have no reason to attack illegal settlements because they won't exist.

no----you made your point, dotty. Your point------that Netanyahu rejects the "Palestine state" is the reason that there is no peace AND that arabs and muslims world over reject the existence of a jewish state anywhere in the middle east is perfectly ok with you

 

[irosie91]

Dotty----how would such a move change the existing situation?

it would at least give Palestine the recognition it deserves and then they could seek to have the illegal settlements removed.

and when one of the citizens of this new state decides to lob mortar shells over the new border, Israel will have Causus belli for an actual war against the new state.

Not really. In the world, states are not considered responsible for private persons deeds. Israel also doesn´t launch a war on itself when an Israeli citizen commits a crime.

Actually that's the whole purpose of an international border, and in most cases the citizens of a country aren't crazy enough to start shelling their neighbors. A government is responsible for the actions of its citizens if they decide to attack across an international border.

Islamo Nazi scum have a loophole-----they do not put their murderers and pimps and whores into uniform and they use teenaged girl whores with bombs on their stinking asses to serve the glory of allah