Like that is a bad idea.
No, the real conflict to follow is internal as Israel’s practices grow ever more depraved and obviously so. You can have Israel, or you can have Judaism, but not both.
Why Palestine is Already a State: Shoddy Reporting Misrepresents Palestinian UN Bid
Much more at source.
Anyone that criticizes israel is an antis-semite (or even most people that criticize Israel is an anti-semite)? So you must think I am an anti-semite or I support anti-semites? Why would you even engage such a person in debate? BTW why would anyone who is not an anti-semite support anti-semites?
So the vast majority of the world is pretending all in an conpiratorial attempt to persecute jews? Jeebus, talk about a persecution complex.
Yep its pretty clear. You havea persecution complex.
We don’t support any country the way we do Israel.
Yeah I mentioned NATO didn’t I? We can abrogate that treaty but I don’t see any treaty where we agree to provide foreign aid and veto anything that Israel wants us to veto.
And yet expend significant treasure and diplomatic capital to protect israel’s position.
You don’t know? OMG, I think I see why you can take the positions you do. You don’t know!
Where do you see the actual application. I just see references to the state of palestine which means gaza the west bank and east jerusalem as far as i can tell.
Bullshit. You’ve proven nothing.
You claim that the requirments of statehood are:
(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
You claim that Palestine is deficient in the last requirement.
I show you taht Palestine has emabssies all over the world and you dismiss the possibility that Palestine might be a state.
Is the population not permanent?
Is the territory not defined?
Is there not a government?
You seem intent on coming up with reasons that Palestine is not a state.
How have you amply proven your conclusion or is your post your cite?
What evidence have you provided that Palestine is unable to enter into relations with other countries?
From the quote:
Emphasis added.
Yes, the Montevideo Convention, which merely codifies international law, governs. As I’ve said, and as this article claims.
The emphasised portion is so obviously bullshit, how can anyone who knows anything about the situation say it with a straight face?
Also, the person who wrote the article misdecribes the Montevideo Convention, which has 4, not 3, criteria. Article 1:
http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897
Lets look at the criteria:
- a permanent population
Yes, Palestine has a population.
- living on a defined territory
No. Palestine’s territory is the opposite of defined. Famously, Palestine claims Jerusalem as its capital - a city, mind you, that is already claimed as the capital of another country.
That doesn’t even get into the longstanding dispute over where, exactly, the border ought to be otherwise.
- a government
Which “government” would that happen to be? Hamas? The PLO? Both?
- capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
Again, which government? Palestine has two.
Now look at Article 3:
“Recognition” cannot create a state that lacks the four criteria in Article 1. A mere declaration by any party cannot create, by itself, the 4 criteria in Article 1.
Now, let’s examine the “Palestinian Declaration of Independance” made in 1988, which it is claimed created the state.
Where was the PLO when it was made? Did it constitute a “government” under the Montevideo convention?
Why, no. It was in exile in Algiers at the time.
Was the declaration for a territory with defined borders?
Why, no. Here’s the text of the declaration, in relevant part:
emphasis added
What, exactly, are the borders of this ‘state’? Whatever ground a Palestinian happens to walk on? That’s literally what it says.
No, I claim they are deficient in three of the four - see my post above.
Note that even Redfury’s cite supports the use of the Montevideo Convention, so you can drop the “you claim” nonsense. Those are the requirements for statehood.
See my answer to him. Yes, there is a population. No, there is no “defined territory” - unless you are willing to accept the 1988 Palestinian Declaration of Independance, which states that “The State of Palestine is the state of Palestinians wherever they may be” is “defined”, which sorta makes a mockery of the criterion. No, there is no government, obvious on its face by the fact that PLO members dare not even walk in Gaza, let alone “govern” there. Lacking a government, Palestine cannot enter into relations with other states in any meaningful manner.
The latter two points are easily demonstrated. You tell me - when Hamas fires rockets into south Israel, is the “Palestinian Government” morally and legally responsible? Yes, or No?
Are you saying that if the Palestinians agreed to monetary compensation instead of the right of return, that Syria would insist taht Palestinians go live in Israel?
OK I guess I should have said a deal that Israel can live with, not necessarily one YOU can live with because I suspect that there is no room for a deal between your position and the Palestinian position. You are simply trying to make the Palestinians so desparate taht they will agree to whatever you deign to offer.
Haven’t you heard of the arab spring? How are relations between Israel and Turkey these days? Was Iran an enemy in 1948 or 1967, it is today. Yeah things have been going just swimmingly for Israel.
Stop hyperventilating. They are offering more than genocide
Mahmoud abbas seem to support the arab peace initiative.
They have. See arab peace initiative.
I doubt it. Israel is not America, heck they aren’t even Russia.
I doubt it.
It depends on what you negotiate. And there are polls about what palestinians would do. Only about 10% of Palestinians would want to enter Israel and become israeli citizens. The vast majority would rather live in Palestine and get compensation. middleeastwindow.com
I think you and I have different definitions of existential crisis. You think that the inability to maintain a theocratic government is an existential crisis (hey, something you and the Ayatollahs have in common) and I think “being driven into the sea” is an existential crisis. By your analogy, the hispanic population in America represents an existential crisis for America because in 20 or 30 years the face of America will look very different than it does now.
Israel has already abandoned all claim to the occupied territories as part of Israel so while East Jerusalem is still in dispute its hard to say that there is not a defined territory unless you really really rally REALLY want to see it that way. Border disputes do not negate this, take teh example of Pakistan and Kashmir. Or are you saying that the occupied territories are not territory?
Doesn’t matter. This split is recent and unless youa re saying that Palestine lost statehood when hamas split off from the government, Palestine has a government as much as China had a government (and was a state) despite some dispute between Beijing and Taipei about the matter.
States exist indepently of transitions in government, invasion or revolution. When Palestine was governed solely by the PLO was it governed and able to enter into relations? Did they lose this ability and their statehood when Hamas broke off from the government? Did they not have a population and a territory?
Did they lose their state because of the Hamas elections? Because taht is what you seem to be implying.
Right so can I cite redfury too or are you the only one able to do that? But OK, having failed to find a better definition and seeing that there is some consensus on the matter, lets go with the montevideo convention.
Is there a government in Libya?
If Qaddafi fires a rocket at one of our ships in the mediteranean is the “Libyan government” morally and legally responsible? Yes or no?
It is a very rare lens that allows you to look at the world in such a way.
If the Palestinians have a ‘sovereign state’ per that above blog, then the Jews have had a ‘sovereign state’ for the last several thousand years. :rolleyes: Clearly that is not the case for either group.
The Palestinians have never had a state. You don’t ‘create states’ by laying claim to land that someone else already has control over. If they want a state, that is certainly within their rights to advocate for one, but claiming that Jerusalem is their ‘future’ capital is baloney childspeak. Jerusalem is in Israel. For as long as there is an Israel, there is a Jerusalem inside of it. The Palestinians have never controlled Jerusalem. It’s silly to call it disputed. (Jordanians have, Syrians have, other Arab nations have, etc., but ‘east’ Jerusalem has never been part of the yet-to-be-born state of ‘Palestine’.)
The WB is different, it’s “Judea and Samaria,” the heartland of the ancient Israel. That still means something to a lot of modern Israelis, apparently. More importantly, the WB (unlike Sinai and Gaza) shares a long border with the populous heartland of modern Israel; the perceived security problem is different.
No, Israel and the Palestinians have a vicious and ongoing dispute over where the border ought to be - the Israelis have built a wonking great wall where they want it to run. That’s what the stalled peace process was about in major part - where the border ought to run.
That’s even if you overlook/hand wave away the ‘minor detail’ of both sides claiming Jerusalem as their capital! 
There is no “defined territory”. Ergo, no state.
Sorry, but it does matter. Hamas currently has a greater potential to be the government of a “state” in Gaza than the PLO does over the whole of Palestine.
The PLO was in fact granted authority to govern under the Oslo Accords:
Please note the limitations over the authority so granted.
Since then, the PA (dominated by the PLO) has of couse lost all actual authority over the Gaza strip. It is now in less position to be a “government” than before - but it never was a “government” of a “sovereign state” in the first place.
As for capacity to enter into relations with foreign states:
'Nuff said.
Already existing states still exist if there is a change-over in government. Incohate, borderless entities lacking a government are not, however, sovereign states.
The PA did not lose its status as a government over a sovereign state with the Hamas split, because it never had any such status - it’s a creature of the Oslo accord. The Hamas split merely makes the situation worse from the POV of ‘statehood’.
The PLO has been “recognized” as the “as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people” at the UN, but this has nothing to do with “statehood” as this “recognition” was accorded when the PLO was in exile. Even you, I assume, are not going to argue that a group in exile is exercising sovereignty over a defined territory! Or maybe I should not assume.
You are a liar. Jimmy Carter is no pretender. And he’s about as antisemitic as Yitzhak Shamir.
And yet, under the Gaza–Jericho Agreement following the Oslo Accord, Israel was for some unknown reason willing to have the PLO assume control over much of this “heartland”. Odd, that, for an entity that will allegedly never yield “Judea and Samaria,” the heartland of the ancient Israel".
Lol, Jimmy Carter has been on the Arab payroll for years.
So you are saying that Palestine does not have a territory? Is Gaza and the West bank part of Israel or is it just no man’s land? Or are you basing the whole kit and kaboodle on the fact taht East jerusalem was held by Jordan (and populated by Palestinians) between 1948 and 1967?
Most people, yes.
Probably yes.
Why not?
To curry favor.
I doubt that there is a conspiracy at work. But yes, most people who attack Israel do so because of anti-Semitism. Why else would somebody in Norway or Georgia care only about that particular conflict?
Yes, we go further with other countries. For example, we have tens of thousands of troops actually stationed in South Korea. We have publicly committed to defend various other countries if they are attacked.
Sure, and the US could stop sending aid just like it could withdraw from NATO.
So Israel did not object to UN Security Council resolution 347? What about resolution number 270? What about number 106? What about 427? 450? 452?
How did all of these anti-Israel resolutions get through the Security Council?
I can name more if you want.
Lol, yes – I’m not a mind reader and I’m not going to guess at your position. What EXACTLY do you think Israel has done to the Palestinian Arabs which you object to?
The actual application is here:
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=423246
It references UN General Assembly Resolution 181, which provided for the following borders:
P.S. Please answer my question: Why do you think Arab textbooks erase Israel?
Umm, I was asking a simple question:
What Arab leaders have agreed to give up the “right of return”? It’s a simple question.
I’m not sure what your point is here. Why should Israel agree to a deal which would end it as a Jewish state?
I’m not (since I am not an Israeli). I’m simply pointing out that’s what needs to happen for there to be a bona fide peace.
That’s the normal procedure – the winner of a war gets to set the terms of the peace.
Militarily and economically, Israel is stronger than ever. Population growth is rising even as it drops all over the Arab and Muslim world. On the West Bank, the percentage of Jews continues to climb every year. Israel now has submarine-launched ballistic nuclear missiles, making it unlikely that countries outside of the immediate vicinity will try to invade. Most importantly, there is a consensus among Israeli Jews that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state.
I’m not sure what peace initiative you are talking about. Cite, please.
Also, please answer my questions:
Why do you think Israel has been erased from their textbooks? Why do you think that the “State of Palestine” will not offer citizenship to descendants of Arabs who fled in 1948? Why do you think Gaza refugees haven’t been returned to Gaza? Why do you think their patches and insignia include Israel as part of “Palestine”?
Cite please.
And the Arabs aren’t either. Anyway, Israel defeated Syria, Jordan, and Egypt simultaneously in 1967 and is much stronger now. Besides, Israel wouldn’t need aircraft carriers or other power projection facilities. It would just send in its air force, destroy all of the Arab defenses, and then let its tanks roll in.
Why? You think the extreme right in Israel would be more receptive to a Palestinian State?
UNESCO is anti-semitic organization now?
Could she be more dramatic?!
Just curious, is there anyone in US politics with dissenting opinion on this topic go on record? Just one!
I was always told that 100% unanimity is a hallmark of Soviet-style Communism. That, and of course, fake purge trials.