The UN recognised the country, they didn't give permission for genocide or ethnic cleansing.
Fuck Israel
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- 'This is like apartheid': ANC veterans visit West Bank
Obviously.FEOS wrote:
The bottomline being that each situation is different. You can't put a cookie-cutter answer to every problem just because aspects are similar.
They're still in the news, and pressure remains on Israel to back off. Meanwhile their strongest ally, the US, is looking at growing threats in China and Russia and an economic downturn.FEOS wrote:
You keep advocating for Hamas to keep up the violence...how well has that worked for them so far?
Seems like it's going just fine.
The UN declared that certain territory belonged to Israel. How is that not giving away territory?FEOS wrote:
There is a difference between recognizing a country and giving away territory. The UN did the former, not the latter...it was at least not as simplistic as that, anyway.ZombieVampire! wrote:
Only if the UN has legitimacy to give away the territory, which is debatable.FEOS wrote:
Was being the operative word. Once your precious UN recognized it and gave it membership, there was no going back.
Yet that is precisely what a good deal of the Middle East nations want to do.Dilbert_X wrote:
The UN recognised the country, they didn't give permission for genocide or ethnic cleansing.
Interesting.
Then they also "gave away" territory (a lot more of it, by the way) to the Arabs. The UN was left to administer what was, prior to the end of World War II, the British Mandate of Palestine. This territory covered present-day Israel and Jordan. Jordan was to remain in Arab hands (as it was under the Mandate) and Palestine (basically present-day Israel, which had been Jewish land under the Mandate) was to be further divided into more Arab land and about two-thirds still reserved for the Jewish folk.ZombieVampire! wrote:
The UN declared that certain territory belonged to Israel. How is that not giving away territory?
So they "gave away" territory to both sides, if we adopt your view. If one "giving" was illegitimate, then so was the other.
Let's have a big war to sort it out. Or, we could just let Israel be.
That's too simple an option for some people to realise.HollisHurlbut wrote:
Or, we could just let Israel be.
If Israel was created in YOUR neighborhood, you would have a different opinion.M.O.A.B wrote:
That's too simple an option for some people to realise.HollisHurlbut wrote:
Or, we could just let Israel be.
But when I found that launching a home made rocket into made no difference, I'd have the sense to stop before a guided TOW came through my window.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
If Israel was created in YOUR neighborhood, you would have a different opinion.M.O.A.B wrote:
That's too simple an option for some people to realise.HollisHurlbut wrote:
Or, we could just let Israel be.
But let's say that (like in the West Bank who is relatively peaceful) you would stop sending rockets and tried to live in peace with them, they would keep building illegal settlement right next to you house?M.O.A.B wrote:
But when I found that launching a home made rocket into made no difference, I'd have the sense to stop before a guided TOW came through my window.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
If Israel was created in YOUR neighborhood, you would have a different opinion.M.O.A.B wrote:
That's too simple an option for some people to realise.
Would you be able to accept that without a fight?
If it's their territory, it can't possibly be illegal.
Word to the wise: the UN has no authority to make something illegal within the borders of a sovereign nation.
Word to the wise: the UN has no authority to make something illegal within the borders of a sovereign nation.
Youre telling me that the West Bank belong to Israel?HollisHurlbut wrote:
If it's their territory, it can't possibly be illegal.
Word to the wise: the UN has no authority to make something illegal within the borders of a sovereign nation.
It does now, unless they decide to do like they did with the Sinai Peninsula and give it back.
It is illegal under the UN to annex territory won after a war and build settlements for colonisation.HollisHurlbut wrote:
It does now, unless they decide to do like they did with the Sinai Peninsula and give it back.
If it's so obvious, then why are you arguing for a similar answer?ZV wrote:
Obviously.FEOS wrote:
The bottomline being that each situation is different. You can't put a cookie-cutter answer to every problem just because aspects are similar.
If you consider intentionally targeting civilians, breaking cease fires, and still being in "Apartheid" conditions "just fine".ZV wrote:
They're still in the news, and pressure remains on Israel to back off. Meanwhile their strongest ally, the US, is looking at growing threats in China and Russia and an economic downturn.FEOS wrote:
You keep advocating for Hamas to keep up the violence...how well has that worked for them so far?
Seems like it's going just fine.
The part where it belonged to Britain and independence was declared immediately prior to the expiration of the mandate, with Britain wiping its hands of the mess...that's how. The UN did nothing but recognize a country that had declared its independence while under British sovereignty.ZV wrote:
The UN declared that certain territory belonged to Israel. How is that not giving away territory?FEOS wrote:
There is a difference between recognizing a country and giving away territory. The UN did the former, not the latter...it was at least not as simplistic as that, anyway.ZV wrote:
Only if the UN has legitimacy to give away the territory, which is debatable.
AutralianChainsaw wrote:
It is illegal under the UN to annex territory won after a war and build settlements for colonisation.
The UN has no jurisdiction inside a sovereign country.the UN has no authority to make something illegal within the borders of a sovereign nation.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Because the fact that the answer isn't exactly the same doesn't mean it can't be similar. In fact, if we couldn't apply similar answers to similar questions there'd be no point in education.FEOS wrote:
If it's so obvious, then why are you arguing for a similar answer?ZV wrote:
Obviously.FEOS wrote:
The bottomline being that each situation is different. You can't put a cookie-cutter answer to every problem just because aspects are similar.
Neither of which are relevant.FEOS wrote:
If you consider intentionally targeting civilians, breaking cease fires,ZV wrote:
They're still in the news, and pressure remains on Israel to back off. Meanwhile their strongest ally, the US, is looking at growing threats in China and Russia and an economic downturn.FEOS wrote:
You keep advocating for Hamas to keep up the violence...how well has that worked for them so far?
Seems like it's going just fine.
As an alternative to accepting oppression, it is.FEOS wrote:
and still being in "Apartheid" conditions "just fine".
But they did so without first requiring the government to demonstrate sovereignty, allowing member states to provide support to the Jewish side against the Arab side (that is, the Israeli side against the Palestinian side).FEOS wrote:
The part where it belonged to Britain and independence was declared immediately prior to the expiration of the mandate, with Britain wiping its hands of the mess...that's how. The UN did nothing but recognize a country that had declared its independence while under British sovereignty.ZV wrote:
The UN declared that certain territory belonged to Israel. How is that not giving away territory?FEOS wrote:
There is a difference between recognizing a country and giving away territory. The UN did the former, not the latter...it was at least not as simplistic as that, anyway.
Finally, someone else who understands!FEOS wrote:
The UN has no jurisdiction inside a sovereign country.
Regardless, much of what Israel is doing is officially within Palestine.
The fact that a possible answer isn't even remotely similar doesn't mean it should be discounted, either.ZombieVampire! wrote:
Because the fact that the answer isn't exactly the same doesn't mean it can't be similar. In fact, if we couldn't apply similar answers to similar questions there'd be no point in education.FEOS wrote:
If it's so obvious, then why are you arguing for a similar answer?ZV wrote:
Obviously.FEOS wrote:
The bottomline being that each situation is different. You can't put a cookie-cutter answer to every problem just because aspects are similar.
They most certainly are...they are core reasons "justifying" Israeli action.ZombieVampire! wrote:
Neither of which are relevant.FEOS wrote:
If you consider intentionally targeting civilians, breaking cease fires,ZV wrote:
They're still in the news, and pressure remains on Israel to back off. Meanwhile their strongest ally, the US, is looking at growing threats in China and Russia and an economic downturn.FEOS wrote:
You keep advocating for Hamas to keep up the violence...how well has that worked for them so far?
Seems like it's going just fine.
There's another alternative, but you're too focused on fighting back with violence rather than with strategy.ZombieVampire! wrote:
As an alternative to accepting oppression, it is.FEOS wrote:
and still being in "Apartheid" conditions "just fine".
As was pointed out by someone else earlier...the original declared State of Israel had much more Palestinian land than now...but it was still unacceptable to the neighborhood (and you, apparently).ZombieVampire! wrote:
But they did so without first requiring the government to demonstrate sovereignty, allowing member states to provide support to the Jewish side against the Arab side (that is, the Israeli side against the Palestinian side).FEOS wrote:
The part where it belonged to Britain and independence was declared immediately prior to the expiration of the mandate, with Britain wiping its hands of the mess...that's how. The UN did nothing but recognize a country that had declared its independence while under British sovereignty.ZV wrote:
The UN declared that certain territory belonged to Israel. How is that not giving away territory?
Palestine isn't a sovereign country. Yet. And Hamas is doing their damnedest to prevent that from ever occurring.ZombieVampire! wrote:
Finally, someone else who understands!FEOS wrote:
The UN has no jurisdiction inside a sovereign country.
Regardless, much of what Israel is doing is officially within Palestine.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Yes. You have to be off a certain religion to live there. And the people are classed and treated according to their religion. Its apartheid replacing skin colour for religion.rammunition wrote:
is Israel an apartheid regime????
Palestine never 'belonged to Britain' Britain had a mandate over Palestine as defined by the league of nations.The part where it belonged to Britain
'The first group or Class A mandates were areas formerly controlled by the Ottoman Empire deemed to "...have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."'
Palestine therefore had notional provisional recognition as an independent state in 1920.
Fuck Israel
Derp?ZombieVampire! wrote:
Finally, someone else who understands!
HollisHurlbut wrote:
the UN has no authority to make something illegal within the borders of a sovereign nation.
How can you "officially" be doing something in a place that doesn't exist?Regardless, much of what Israel is doing is officially within Palestine.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- 'This is like apartheid': ANC veterans visit West Bank