No, it does not. I don’t believe you are unable to read a legend.
There would be no need to protect Israeli civilians if they weren’t there in the first place. No nation in the history of the world has used women and children as an occupying force, they are roots used to make nations larger.
So ok, I’ll bite. WHY do you think those areas needed to be re-settled by Israeli’s in the first place?
If we were talking about military bases in WB and not suburbs you’d have a point. However that is not the case, so you do not.
So you’re saying the West Bank is in Israel?
Genocide is bad press, as the Jews are well aware. But for a long term strategy using natural growth to justify settlement expansion is a winner.
This started because I pointed out the absurdity of Netanyahu’s statements when compared with reality. The propaganda has come from you.
Well then, Israel better start constructing settlements there STAT.
Arguably, the most beneficial infrastructure in the WB has been built by Israel. Not saying it is right, but the Palestinians haven’t built much. And it is not for lack of funds. It is their leadership (Jordan, Arfat, and now Abbas). The infrastructure in Gaza that Palestinians enjoyed is thanks to Egypt. It’s kind of a shithole now.
I’m not sure what you think my point is?
I have NEVER said so. In fact, I have repeatedly pointed out that it is not in Israel when people make the claim that Israel does not take care of Palestinians…look at the the thread.
?
I don’t even know what you are talking about or what specifically you are referring to.
No, the propaganda has not come from me. Netanyahu’s comments are reflective of reality. I never thought I’d say this about the jerk, but more so than Obama’s.
He’s right. This stuff has to be taken in consideration. You can’t just draw a little line down a map and yell, PRESTO!
Playing dumb is not working, perhaps you should try a different tactic.
That also does not mean Israel had a right to build beyond that border.
Oh yeah, they conquered, built and assimilated foreign cultures. Which was precisely the goal and precisely my point.
Irrelevant.
Oh I know your point. The WB is currently for Israel what Germany and Japan are for the United States.
But you are wrong on every level.
Ok. When you wrote, “A border is something that Gaza and Israel have, or Egypt and Israel.” you notably left out the WB. I’m sure the Koreans agree Armistice Lines are the same as borders but you do not. So in your opinion then what is the status of WB?
Again, playing dumb is not working for you. I cannot make that sentence any clearer.
This stuff has to be taken into consideration when it’s Israeli’s, but can be ignored when it’s Palestinians?
Let’s see what happens if the PA pushes for recognition without Israel. War? And what happens to the 3,000 U.S.-trained Palestinians in the West Bank? :dubious: It’s not like the citizens of Ariel are just going to get up and leave.
This is another thing I see in Israel threads a lot, something is put forward that whilst not untrue, it’s made to appear much more relevant than it actually is.
It would be much more accuratet o say “A tiny amount of them existed before 1948”, because the actual number and size of those that did exist before 1948 makes them almost insignifcant to a discussion on Israel’s settlement policy. I would course point out that Arabs pushed out by Jewish miltias in 1948 have not been allowed to return to their homes and this includes Arab Israeli citizens displaced within what is now Israel (their properties where confiscated on the basis that they were ‘absentee landlords’, though, under the martial law which was used to govern Israel’s Arabs for the first years of the state, they could be shot for trying to return to their homes).
Easy. Jordan was shelling Jerusalem and parts of Tel Aviv (the West Bank was part of Jordan) even though Israel asked it to not get involved in the war. That’s what Netanyahu is partially talking about when he said* indefensible borders*. So when troops went to recapture the Old City (re: East Jerusalem) and somehow actually…won…they heard that Jordanian troops had withdrawn from the WB as well. They went for it.
From all military and government documents of the era, it has yet to be proved that Israel was intending on keeping it. No one wanted it. The purpose of Israel was a Jewish homeland.
Like I said.
*
It turned into something it wasn’t supposed to*.
The PLO wasn’t recognized. It was Jordan, Israel, and Egypt that entered talks. You know? The sovereign nations with functioning governments, infrastructure, economies, and military?
You’d have to really dramatically redefine the term invasion from the way it’s usually understood to claim that Israel took control of the West Bank via invasion.
While WWII ended with Soviet troops on German soil we generally don’t refer to the Soviets “invading” Germany in WWII.
Jordan attacked and invaded Israel and their attack was repulsed. Nations that launch aggressive wars lose territory with pretty dramatic regularity.
You’ll notice that the borders of Europe have changed dramatically on multiple occasions in the 20th Century and most of the countries who lost territory lost territory vastly larger than the West Bank. People should remember that the whole West Bank, including East Jerusalem is only about a third the size of Connecticut.
I know you’re trying to insult CP, but your merely made yourself look extremely ignorant and petty.
Perhaps I’m wrong though and you complain about why we don’t talk about the Soviet “invasion” of Germany during WWII. For your sake I hope you do because otherwise you’re a massive hypocrite.
You are both right but you are more illogically right. The smaller map is a summary of Israeli enforced restrictions on Palestinian movement. Sitnam’s point was clearly concerning the settlements which are specifically addressed by the larger map (it really grabs your attention first thing and that is why I say you are illogically right). The larger map clearly differentiates between types of Israeli settlements and military facilities. It supports his point.
The map says nothing about what an outpost (lavender) specifically is. The settlements sure look like they have divided up the West Bank and if they are all defensible (which they are via peaceful relations with the PA and awesome firepower and training) then the 67 armistice line (or border since they have the same function) is defensible.