What Would Happen if Israel Cedes Territory to Jordan?

[Coyote]

You can't expel 4.4 million people simply because you want to take their land.

Your premise is incorrect.

You are assuming it is "their land".

The area west of the Jordan has never been adjudicated as anyones land beyond the British mandate period. In which case it reverts to sovereign control. The Jordanians abandoned the area and IMHO illegally stripped its inhabitants of Jordanian citizenship. Israel controls the area which places it under the auspices of the Israeli courts by virtue of the Geneva conventions.

Under those conventions any combatants, including those who assist combatants or are suspected of assisting or participating in acts agains the state, forfeit their protected persons status. In which case Israel can detain them as prisoners of war.

Prisoners of war must be repatriated to their countries of origin. In which case Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq or Egypt are the responsible parties.

I think you are assuming the Arabs remaining within Israeli controlled areas are all civilians. The hard reality is anyone committing acts against the state in war time are combatants and forfeit their protected persons status.

They originated where they are. There is no country of "origin" to "repatriot" them to. That's just another name for ethnic cleansing.

WRONG as the evidence shows the arab muslims were in the minority during the Ottoman rule of the area. Then after the defeat of 1916 the arab muslims flooded into Palestine in an attempt at forcing the LoN to change its mind. They came from the surrounding area hoping to steal the land the Jews had made fertile and get some sex slaves. This state of affairs has been going on ever since, and only the terminally stupid would believe that arab girls gave birth to triplets and quads every nine months from the age of 12 till they were 60 years old with no mortalities. This would mean that they had a worlds first and a population of super humans to achieve the population explosion they did. Even the civilised west cant come close to these figures and we have better health and medical care than the third world arabs in Palestine. Want to show how the population increased exponentially every time the arab muslims were defeated, and more Syrian and Egyptian family names entered the register as refugee's.

Your "evidence" was debunked in another thread.

WAS IT or was it just ignored because it shows the arab muslims have no legal right to the land. Explain how with a pool of only 100,000 women of child bearing age the muslims managed to increase their population by over 30% every year, with no recorded infant deaths in a 15 year period ?

No. It was thoroughly debunked.

 

[Coyote]

That's a really interesting thought - I wasn't thinking along those lines but rather that Palestinians would become part of Jordan. That adds a whole new dimension to this and makes it seem like a better alternative than I thought. I wonder how possible it is?

It really is the only way to get a nation state for Palestine. These folks are in the same position they were during the British Mandate. It was noted then that the "palestinians" were not even CLOSE to being capable of self-rule. And some kind of "protectorate" would be required to transition them to statehood. Not a thing has changed. Except that the Palis blew the opportunity while Jordan was hosting them, and have blown away every attempt at electing representation leading to statehood.

The world just doesn't recognize unorganized indigenous populations for statehood.

Israel's error is letting this go on WAY too long. 50 year occupations are immoral and destructive. Israel's expectation always was that the Palis would get their act together and select responsible leadership. And barring that -- Israel doesn't want to be their MENTOR.. So --- some other nation(s) need to step up and volunteer. Preferably a neighbor or two. It's just obvious..

In parent language -- they need a strong talking to about insisting on getting Haifa back.. Or returning to Haifa as non-Israeli citizens. They cannot waste another 50 years. NOBODY has that much patience.

Agree with much of that.
I think though, that Israel also has a desire to keep some of the land and that has probably stalled the process as well.

50 years after the 67 war when Israel acquired that territory. Life goes on. See my post above.

And after the "Gaza experience" of dragging Israeli settlers kicking and screaming totally out of Gaza to do a clean handover to "palestinian government" ---- that mistake is not likely to get repeated..

IN FACT -- when Israel launched Gaza on a path to autonomy -- they were also preparing to launch a few northern sections of the West Bank into autonomy with FURTHER settler evictions.. But the Gaza deal died after only MONTHS when the PA was forced into elections and crashed and burned.

Gazans fleeing into Jordan after the '67 war are TODAY treated as garbage compared to the original Palestinian influx in '48. And if sitting on your ass being denied rights in a Jordanian camp isn't enough to make a "Zionist" nationalist out of you --- there's not a lot of hope for their cause. They just see no freaking USE for organization and government and forming a real nation..

The Gaza experience would not have happened if Israel hadn't built settlements on occupied territory. That's part of the problem that can't be ignored - they build settlements on Occupied Territory and impedes efforts towards peace.

I'm trying to ignore all the flag-waving and "noise" on this thread -- maybe moderation needs to wake up..

Quite possibly - I'm going through "alerts" and haven't reviewed the whole thread - it's moved very quickly.

But Israel did the right thing and disassembled EVERY trace of Israeli life in Gaza before they turned it over to the PA.. That's the important part. And look how it turned out.

Not to mention the Palis wasted a lot of party time desecrating Synagogues in Gaza rather than focusing on running the state..

Agree on the first count - they had no right to build there in the first place, and should not have allowed it, or allowed the settlers to hope for permenance - that's the problem with occupied territories.

Agree - the Palestinians wasted a good opportunity there.

 

[Coyote]

Guys - just so the topic doesn't get derailed - I'm moving some posts to the Mandate thread where they can be discussed more appropriately

 

[Coyote]

This battle of who has the bigger flag is beginning to look like a grade school pissing contest and distracts from the discussion - anyone want to be the grown up here?

 

[Phoenall]

When you have supported the Palestinians in their attacks on the Jews, I don't see you having a go at team Palestine when they advocate the mass murder/eviction of Jews from every nation on earth. Just look at billo and penny for examples of this being posted on here every day.

I have never, at any point, seen any "team Palestine" posters here advocating "the mass murder/eviction of Jews from every nation on earth."

I would be very interested in seeing links to those!

Of course you haven't, you suffer from selective reading.

So you have not seen the many posts by billo demanding the Jews ( Zionists) be kicked out of Israel to make way fro the arab muslims. Or the many posts by penny that demands the Jews be kicked out of the US so that she can gloat over having been part of the " final solution "

You really are an ignorant prick aren't you, or is it selective ignorance on your part.

Post a link to what you claim Phoney...

Why would ANYONE just take your word for it?

Because you have seen the posts and have chosen to ignore them, so posting links would do no good as you would just ignore them all over again. Just as you ignore the links showing that Israel is not in breach of International laws, and still you claim they are.

No Phoney...

You just make this shit up all the time.... Why do you think everyone calls you Phoney!

Support your comments or shut the fuck up ...

Go on, just one will do...

One that states... "the mass murder/eviction of Jews from every nation on earth."

They don't it is just you and some other morons that jumped on the band wagon


I have done so and you have ignored it as usual, because you cant deny that this is the case. Just as in your own post when you wanted to know about Israel lifting the blockade, I posted evidence to show that they have and you have ignored the thread ever since. Your usual tactic when you are shown to be wrong is to run away and hide. Time to start running

 

[Phoenall]

Yes they could rely on Jordan to provide the services and security that is necessary for incubating a Pali state. That's why I've said for ages that a 2 state solution involves Israel working with Jordan and Egypt and other volunteer Arab states. It is the most direct path to eventual autonomy for Palestine.

Israel never got a chance to really negotiate with Jordan over the occupied West Bank, because by that time, the King was looking for ways to rid himself of the Palestinians. And as MOST of the posters have commented, the Palis burned that bridge when they ATTACKED their former host instead of negotiating for real autonomy with King Hussein...

It would be a monumentally BRAVE move for him to step forward now and take part in a reasonable solution..

That's a really interesting thought - I wasn't thinking along those lines but rather that Palestinians would become part of Jordan. That adds a whole new dimension to this and makes it seem like a better alternative than I thought. I wonder how possible it is?

It really is the only way to get a nation state for Palestine. These folks are in the same position they were during the British Mandate. It was noted then that the "palestinians" were not even CLOSE to being capable of self-rule. And some kind of "protectorate" would be required to transition them to statehood. Not a thing has changed. Except that the Palis blew the opportunity while Jordan was hosting them, and have blown away every attempt at electing representation leading to statehood.

The world just doesn't recognize unorganized indigenous populations for statehood.

Israel's error is letting this go on WAY too long. 50 year occupations are immoral and destructive. Israel's expectation always was that the Palis would get their act together and select responsible leadership. And barring that -- Israel doesn't want to be their MENTOR.. So --- some other nation(s) need to step up and volunteer. Preferably a neighbor or two. It's just obvious..

In parent language -- they need a strong talking to about insisting on getting Haifa back.. Or returning to Haifa as non-Israeli citizens. They cannot waste another 50 years. NOBODY has that much patience.

Agree with much of that.
I think though, that Israel also has a desire to keep some of the land and that has probably stalled the process as well.

50 years after the 67 war when Israel acquired that territory. Life goes on. See my post above.

And after the "Gaza experience" of dragging Israeli settlers kicking and screaming totally out of Gaza to do a clean handover to "palestinian government" ---- that mistake is not likely to get repeated..

IN FACT -- when Israel launched Gaza on a path to autonomy -- they were also preparing to launch a few northern sections of the West Bank into autonomy with FURTHER settler evictions.. But the Gaza deal died after only MONTHS when the PA was forced into elections and crashed and burned.

Gazans fleeing into Jordan after the '67 war are TODAY treated as garbage compared to the original Palestinian influx in '48. And if sitting on your ass being denied rights in a Jordanian camp isn't enough to make a "Zionist" nationalist out of you --- there's not a lot of hope for their cause. They just see no freaking USE for organization and government and forming a real nation..

The Gaza experience would not have happened if Israel hadn't built settlements on occupied territory. That's part of the problem that can't be ignored - they build settlements on Occupied Territory and impedes efforts towards peace.

Then the Palestinians should not have occupied Israeli land should they. They land was owned by the Jews until they were forcibly removed in 1949 and their land stolen by the Palestinians. In 1967 they were able to reclaim their lands and proceeded to build on it. In 1999 the Israelis made a treaty with the Palestinians that gave the Israelis the right to build even more settlements on certain areas of the west bank. Now the Palestinians have realised that the Jews have shown them up by building better and more profitably than they ever could so they are now bleating about " illegal " settlements and you take it all in.

The problem is the muslims are losing face all the time and cant stand being laughed at by the rest of the arab world so they LIE hoping that idiots will believe them and fight on their side. Just like you are doing now.

 

[Phoenall]

Boston1, et al,

Well, I think that it is time to relook at the entire concept of "International Law." Just over a decade ago, I was marveling at how some people could even rationally conceive of certain topics. The one symposium that caught my attention at the time was:

A Weapon to Destroy Israel:
Arab States' Struggle Against Solving the Palestinian Refugee Problem
(Downloadable at this link.)​

"If the Arabs return to Israel, Israel will cease to exist." (Gamal Abdel Nasser)

"Deputy head of the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm in Egypt says that Israel would cease to exist by the end of the decade."

Once I understood this, I understood the need to protect Israel.
(COMMENT)

It is about moral and ethical mind sets.

The Arab rulers treated the Arab refugees … as a weapon with which to strike at Israel. This concept has expanded to roles more violent than what was experienced in the past.

Most Respectfully,
R

Does that mean supporting the expulsion of millions of people?

Does this mean you are for the expulsion of Jews from Jewish Palestine to make way for arab muslim extremists and terrorists. Read the mandate of Palestine to see who the land was given to in 1923, and what the qarab muslims got at the same time

I'm for the expulsion of NOBODY unless they choose to go elsewhere voluntarily.

What are you for?

The removal of terrorists, fifth columnists and other violent groups from any land they are not prepared to live in peacefully. there should be an international task force set up for just this problem that will go to where there are uprisings like those of the Palestinians and to quell the violence by arresting the front runners and then firing non lethal rounds at the activists. If they face lethal fire then they will respond in kind and have orders to shoot first ask questions later. If we had this in place now gaza would be a bombed out city inhabited by ghosts, along with Syria, Iraq and many other Islamic third world nations

Sounds like expulsion. How would determine "fifth columnists" - all Pali's?

Those that have links to any terrorist organisation or have been found guilty of any act of aggression against Israel. Those that have no links or no arrest record would be allowed to stay and become full citizens. I believe that UN resolution 242 has this as one of its fundamental principles

 

[Boston1]

I'm not sure its on topic but since the land being discussed fell under the option for an Israeli National Homeland and since the Arab Muslims in the mandated area already have a state in Jordan why would the Israeli's offer even more land to the Arab Muslims in whatever form.

I realize there is a perceived demographic problem of Absorbing that many hostile Arab Muslims but that problem could be significant'y reduced through the judicious application of international law.

Israel can't cede the west bank and still maintain a defensible perimeter. The whole idea just doesn't work. But I'm not clear on why some people think the west bank is in any way ( so called ) palestinian in the first place. Or is it somehow intended to bolster this myth of a palestinian people.

As I recall the Arab Muslims rejected every effort to form another state in the mandated area and instead reiterated its goal of destroying Israel at every turn.

So how is any of the west bank, an area specifically designated as available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland, somehow belonging to anyone else but the Israeli's ?

 

[Phoenall]

I'd say it supports the repatriation of any number of enemy combatants from occupying a sovereign nation.

I hadn't brushed up on the Geneva conventions for quite a while but The UN charter gives member states the right of self defense. While the Geneva conventions dictates the treatment of prisoners of war as well as civilians. With the Arab leagues declaration of invasion/war. ( most declarations of war don't actually use the term war ) Israel is clearly and legally defending itself within the mandated area west of the Jordan river. All of the area west of the Jordan river as the area was never legally segregated into Judaic and Arab zones. So I think sovereignty reverts to its last legally agreed upon use.

In any case I'd say the law is clearly on the Israeli side in its response to any remaining hostile combatants against the state whether they be the original hostiles or the descendants of those original hostiles. The conventions require Israel to repatriate those hostiles at the cessation of hostilities

Which IMHO means the states that declared war against Israel. But it gets muddy. Its posible not all combatants to be expelled are from Egypt Jordan Syrian Iraq or Lebanon. Its also obvious that these signatories to the declaration of war might not allow their defeated armies to return.

Its really quite clear that Israel has not just a right but an obligation to repatriate prisoners of war. Really the only question that I don't have an answer to at the moment is where in the conventions a country is required to accept the return of its defeated armies.

Maybe Rocco has an answer to that one

But Israel under the conventions is allowed to detain combatants, anyone lending aid to combatants even anyone suspected of aiding or being a combatants and considering them prisoners of war.

The conventions also suggest after a period of one year after the end of hostilities prisoners of war should be returned. And it looks like there's no provision preventing the parol of prisoners during an ongoing conflict. So really Israel could unilaterally begin repatriation any time and simply hand the prisoners over to the red cross. Let them figure out who's going to take them.

In the end no more land should be offered by Israel to anyone and everything they presently have the international community should recognize as being annexed into Israel. I'd also fully support the repatriation of any hostile forces which remain in Israel either to their respective countries or to the red cross, without delay.

You can't expel 4.4 million people simply because you want to take their land.

You seem to think you can if they are Jews, and under INTERNATIONAL LAW of 1923 the land belongs to the Jews.

Let's try to stick to the truth here Phoenall - do you think you can manage that? Maybe even without a gratuitous "Jew Hater" non-sequiter?

First item - where have I said anything about expelling any Jews? A link would suffice.

Second - no, it does not. There was no force of law behind that from what I understand and I had to ask because I'm not going to pretend to be any sort of expert on that part of history. So let's consider the situation at hand today which is ultimately what to do to resolve the territorial conflict and, in this thread in particular - should Israel cede to Jordan?

Involuntary civilian expulsion of any kind is inhumane - can we agree on that?

When you have supported the Palestinians in their attacks on the Jews, I don't see you having a go at team Palestine when they advocate the mass murder/eviction of Jews from every nation on earth. Just look at billo and penny for examples of this being posted on here every day.

Where? A link to said support will suffice.

There is force of law as it was by International agreement that the sovereign owners would grant titke of the land to the Jews for their NATIONal home. The same international law also granted arab muslims land in the form of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Jordan and Egypt. So they must also be judged on the same merits by you.

NO why should they. Would Jordan cede land to Israel ?

Not when you support that action by muslims the world over, and this is shown by your support for muslims. You do know that since Israel came into existence that islam has managed to expel over 50 million people from their homes by violent means, and here you are complaining about illegal squatters being evicted from land that was never theirs in the first place.

What international agreement? My understanding, based on the discussion in the Mandate thread is that no promises were specifically made to either the Arabs or the Jews nor was it binding as a force of law. I'm defering to the expertise of others becuase it's very complicated.

Let's clarify - you DO support mass expulsion of civilians?

Given if you read above.

Depends on what it was for, if it was to provide lasting peace then they would. ( shown by the land swaps when they signed a peace treaty with Israel )

Read the mandate again as it was a legal document and clearly states that part of Palestine was to be for the Jewish NATIONal home. Just as the other mandates granted land to the arab muslims.


No I support the mass expulsion of terrorists, insurgents, illegal immigrants, hostile aliens, criminals and those who have no intention of living in peace. That is why 50,000 were expelled in 1949 by Israel with the full backing of the UN

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm not sure its on topic but since the land being discussed fell under the option for an Israeli National Homeland and since the Arab Muslims in the mandated area already have a state in Jordan why would the Israeli's offer even more land to the Arab Muslims in whatever form.

I realize there is a perceived demographic problem of Absorbing that many hostile Arab Muslims but that problem could be significant'y reduced through the judicious application of international law.

Israel can't cede the west bank and still maintain a defensible perimeter. The whole idea just doesn't work. But I'm not clear on why some people think the west bank is in any way ( so called ) palestinian in the first place. Or is it somehow intended to bolster this myth of a palestinian people.

As I recall the Arab Muslims rejected every effort to form another state in the mandated area and instead reiterated its goal of destroying Israel at every turn.

So how is any of the west bank, an area specifically designated as available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland, somehow belonging to anyone else but the Israeli's ?

West Bank was LARGELY in jewish EXCLUDED area.. That's why it came under Jordanian "protection" in the 1st place. As relates to the OP -- Jordan does need to step up and play a primary role in the disposition of Palestinian land now occupied by Israel. Historically -- THEY are the entity entrusted with "mentoring and developing" Palestinian self-rule..

 

[Phoenall]

Your premise is incorrect.

You are assuming it is "their land".

The area west of the Jordan has never been adjudicated as anyones land beyond the British mandate period. In which case it reverts to sovereign control. The Jordanians abandoned the area and IMHO illegally stripped its inhabitants of Jordanian citizenship. Israel controls the area which places it under the auspices of the Israeli courts by virtue of the Geneva conventions.

Under those conventions any combatants, including those who assist combatants or are suspected of assisting or participating in acts agains the state, forfeit their protected persons status. In which case Israel can detain them as prisoners of war.

Prisoners of war must be repatriated to their countries of origin. In which case Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq or Egypt are the responsible parties.

I think you are assuming the Arabs remaining within Israeli controlled areas are all civilians. The hard reality is anyone committing acts against the state in war time are combatants and forfeit their protected persons status.

They originated where they are. There is no country of "origin" to "repatriot" them to. That's just another name for ethnic cleansing.

WRONG as the evidence shows the arab muslims were in the minority during the Ottoman rule of the area. Then after the defeat of 1916 the arab muslims flooded into Palestine in an attempt at forcing the LoN to change its mind. They came from the surrounding area hoping to steal the land the Jews had made fertile and get some sex slaves. This state of affairs has been going on ever since, and only the terminally stupid would believe that arab girls gave birth to triplets and quads every nine months from the age of 12 till they were 60 years old with no mortalities. This would mean that they had a worlds first and a population of super humans to achieve the population explosion they did. Even the civilised west cant come close to these figures and we have better health and medical care than the third world arabs in Palestine. Want to show how the population increased exponentially every time the arab muslims were defeated, and more Syrian and Egyptian family names entered the register as refugee's.

Your "evidence" was debunked in another thread.

WAS IT or was it just ignored because it shows the arab muslims have no legal right to the land. Explain how with a pool of only 100,000 women of child bearing age the muslims managed to increase their population by over 30% every year, with no recorded infant deaths in a 15 year period ?

No. It was thoroughly debunked.

I never saw it and many have tried to debunk the genetic studies until their own links are shown to disagree with their claims or to be a pack of lies reported by hate sites. Like the khazar myth that no one can find any mention of in historical documents before the mid 20C.
What has been debunked is the studies that are full of maybe's and could haves, or the ones that claim modern Jews are descended from just 3 European women

 

[Boston1]

I'm not sure its on topic but since the land being discussed fell under the option for an Israeli National Homeland and since the Arab Muslims in the mandated area already have a state in Jordan why would the Israeli's offer even more land to the Arab Muslims in whatever form.

I realize there is a perceived demographic problem of Absorbing that many hostile Arab Muslims but that problem could be significant'y reduced through the judicious application of international law.

Israel can't cede the west bank and still maintain a defensible perimeter. The whole idea just doesn't work. But I'm not clear on why some people think the west bank is in any way ( so called ) palestinian in the first place. Or is it somehow intended to bolster this myth of a palestinian people.

As I recall the Arab Muslims rejected every effort to form another state in the mandated area and instead reiterated its goal of destroying Israel at every turn.

So how is any of the west bank, an area specifically designated as available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland, somehow belonging to anyone else but the Israeli's ?

West Bank was LARGELY in jewish EXCLUDED area.. That's why it came under Jordanian "protection" in the 1st place. As relates to the OP -- Jordan does need to step up and play a primary role in the disposition of Palestinian land now occupied by Israel. Historically -- THEY are the entity entrusted with "mentoring and developing" Palestinian self-rule..

I'm not seeing it anywhere, the Jordan memorandum says everything EAST of the Jordan is exempt from the the articles which allow for a national Jewish homeland. So by extension that means everything WEST is available for the creation of the Jewish state.

Which is part of Israel's argument against the term occupation. That and the land was unclaimed or unspecified in both its declaration of independence or the mandate

The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate

Looks like the area to be excluded was unspecified in the exact document.

Anyway I'm not finding anything that designates the disputed territories as NOT being available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland

 

[Boston1]

Once again I'm not so sure this is on topic but its an important aspect of any question of Israel ceding land, particularly if the land in question can't be shown to NOT be israels in the first place.

Hate double negatives. ;--)

Quote


Trans-Jordan Memorandum, 16 September 1922[edit]

Geneva,

September 23rd, 1922.

ARTICLE 25 OF THE PALESTINE MANDATE. Territory known as Trans-Jordan.

Note by the Secretary-General.

The Secretary-General has the honour to communicate for the information of the Members of the League, a memorandum relating to Article 25 of the Palestine Mandate presented by the British Government to the Council of the League on September 16th, 1922.

The memorandum was approved by the Council subject to the decision taken at its meeting in London on July 24th, 1922, with regard to the coming into force of the Palestine and Syrian mandates.

Memorandum by the British Representative.

1. Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine provides as follows :— " In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this Mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18."

2. In pursuance of the provisions of this Article, His Majesty's Government invite the Council to pass the following resolution : — "The following provisions of the Mandate for Palestine are not applicable to the territory known as Trans-Jordan, which comprises all territory lying to the east of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian Frontier."

Preamble. — Recitals 2 and 3.

Article 2. — The words "placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and".

Article 4.

Article 6.

Article 7. — The sentence " There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine."

Article 11. — The second sentence of the first paragraph and the second paragraph.

Article 13.

Article 14.

Article 22.

Article 23.

In the application of the Mandate to Trans-Jordan, the action which, in Palestine, is taken by the Administration of the latter country, will be taken by the Administration of Trans-Jordan under the general supervision of the Mandatory.

3. His Majesty's Government accept full responsibility as Mandatory for Trans-Jordan, and undertake that such provision as may be made for the administration of that territory in accordance with Article 25 of the Mandate shall be in no way inconsistent with those provisions of the Mandate which are not by this resolution declared inapplicable.

End Quote

The only exclusion made against the formation of a national Jewish homeland is from the center of the Jordan EAST.

There's no other restrictions

All the UN efforts were rejected by the Arabs themselves and would have been only suggestions anyway unless passed by the security council.

So where am I misreading this if there is any validity to the Arab Muslim claims to anything West of the Jordan ?

 

[Shusha]

The Gaza experience would not have happened if Israel hadn't built settlements on occupied territory. That's part of the problem that can't be ignored - they build settlements on Occupied Territory and impedes efforts towards peace.

Blaming Israel for Gaza now, Coyote? Again, "settlement" or, more properly, "places where Jews live" are not an impediment to peace.

When, exactly, should Jewish people not have been allowed to purchase land and build in Gaza? In antiquity? In 1930 when a Jewish man bought land there? In 1946? In 1970?

How is it not problematic for you to exclude people from living in a place because of their ethnicity?

 

[Shusha]

West Bank was LARGELY in jewish EXCLUDED area.. That's why it came under Jordanian "protection" in the 1st place.

What do you base this belief on?

THEY are the entity entrusted with "mentoring and developing" Palestinian self-rule..

I agree with this. They were.

 

[Humanity]

Blaming Israel for Gaza now, Coyote? Again, "settlement" or, more properly, "places where Jews live" are not an impediment to peace.

What sort of freaked out 'reality' do YOU live in?

"Illegal settlements" in territory that does NOT belong to Israel impedes the whole peace process...

"places where Jews live".... ??? Do you call Israel a "settlement"?

 

[flacaltenn]

West Bank was LARGELY in jewish EXCLUDED area.. That's why it came under Jordanian "protection" in the 1st place.

What do you base this belief on?

THEY are the entity entrusted with "mentoring and developing" Palestinian self-rule..

I agree with this. They were.

By the time a hot war broke out -- the Brits were off powdering their wigs and didn't care about the Mandate anymore. That would be the significant maps produced by the 1949 Armistice lines. Essentially it took a war to sort out that "jewish exclusion zone" --- And "transjordan" got a bit larger..

 

[Billo_Really]

So why can't they do that NOW?

Because Zionists are assholes.

Zionists think they're all that (and a bucket of chicken).

Here's what a Zionist said almost 100 years ago...

"They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination." - Ahad Ha'am​

And here we are, 100 years later and they're still doing the same thing. You can see it in the statements of the Israeli government; you can see it in the statements of average Israeli's; and you can see it in the posts of this very forum.

Ahad Ha'am could've of been talking about Roudy, Boston1, Phoney, Independent, Lipbush and many of Israel's kiss-ass minions that populate this board. That's how they talk! Ahad Ha'am called it and these people live it.

And the very few pro-Israeli supporters who don't talk that way, have to walk on eggshells for fear of the wrath of the crowd. If you're Jewish and neutral on the Pals, you're a target! Zionists will trash you like you were a Pal. Recently, they even killed a guy, because they thought he was a Pal.

I don't mind them, because I know, in the end, I'm a bigger asshole than they are.

 

[Billo_Really]

Because it does, and Palestinians are not Isreals indigenous population anymore than they are Americas.

But you forget that there are walls around other nations as well that are much more aggressive than those around Palestine. Just as you forget that the Palestinians have been violent since 1916 when the Ottomans and LoN made no provisions for them in the surrender terms agreed. They sided with the losers and so had no rights to any land or to be given any land in the allocation made by the lands new sovereign rulers.

Why should anyone believe you, you can't even spell Israel, you dumbass little faggot!

It won't matter whether they cede or not, they ain't keeping that land.

 

[Shusha]

West Bank was LARGELY in jewish EXCLUDED area.. That's why it came under Jordanian "protection" in the 1st place.

What do you base this belief on?

THEY are the entity entrusted with "mentoring and developing" Palestinian self-rule..

I agree with this. They were.

By the time a hot war broke out -- the Brits were off powdering their wigs and didn't care about the Mandate anymore. That would be the significant maps produced by the 1949 Armistice lines. Essentially it took a war to sort out that "jewish exclusion zone" --- And "transjordan" got a bit larger..

You are smart enough to know that the 1949 Armistice lines did not create borders or a "Jewish exclusion zone".