# Why Does the West Bank Need to be Ethnically Cleansed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2009, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421 "2009-02-04T15:48:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![antechinus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/fbc32d/32.png) [@antechinus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/antechinus)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/161 "2009-02-17T02:22:37Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > The problem is, who gets to decide what is illegal and what is legal? How about starting from the very top. The settlements are illegal according to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The settlements are illegal according to the United Nations. “The advisory opinion and a number of United Nations resolutions have all affirmed that Israel’s practice of constructing settlements — in effect, the transfer by an occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies —constitutes a breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention,” the Secretary General’s report says. “In addition to the construction of the settlements, other activities related to settlements are also illegal. [Source](http://www.pubrecord.org/nationworld/494-israel-committing-human-rights-abuses-un-reports-say-.html) “The Government of Israel should abide by its commitments as stated in the road map and reiterated in the Annapolis joint statement of November 2007, namely, to immediately dismantle settlement outposts erected since March 2001 and to freeze, consistent with the Mitchell report, all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements).” “Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank has taken place under every Government since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. In 2007, there were more than 450,000 settlers living in 149 settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. According to the Israeli Ministry of the Interior, the settler population in the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem, increased by 5.1 per cent, from an estimated 268,163 in January 2007 to 282,362 in January 2008.7 According to United Nations sources, almost 40 per cent of the West Bank is now taken up by Israeli infrastructure associated with the settlements, including roads, barriers, buffer zones and military bases.” [UN Report](http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/587/97/PDF/N0858797.pdf?OpenElement) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/162 "2009-02-17T02:23:33Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Exactly which law are they violating and who enacted that law? I can’t answer to the law. Do I really need to for you? If Mexico invaded Texas and settled several thousand armed Mexicans there, is that legal? If so, by what statute ? > [@](#): > > I don’t know . . . probably yes. Well there you go. That wasn’t so hard. > [@](#): > > Perhaps, but I don’t think failure to have gay marriage and national health care and the like falls in the same ballpark as stuff like persecuting religious and ethnic minorities. Whatever. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/163 "2009-02-17T04:15:17Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > I can’t answer to the law. Do I really need to for you? Yes you do. You made the (apparent) claim that the very existence of Jewish settlers in the West Bank was illegal. “Illegal” means some law is being violated. Which law? Whose law? > [@](#): > > If Mexico invaded Texas and settled several thousand armed Mexicans there, is that legal? I don’t know. And I would be even less certain if (1) the invasion had taken place 40 years ago (2) for defensive reasons (3) only after the United States had attacked Mexico in an effort to wipe it off the map; (4) the United States no longer claimed sovereignty over Texas (5) and the question was whether ethnic Mexicans who had since emmigrated to Texas were were there legally. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/164 "2009-02-17T04:56:29Z")
Wait. The UN is the very top? When did they start ruling all nations? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/165 "2009-02-17T06:01:31Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Yes you do. You made the (apparent) claim that the very existence of Jewish settlers in the West Bank was illegal. “Illegal” means some law is being violated. Which law? Whose law? The Fourth Geneva Convention. Did you miss the post by **antechinus**? If that convention doesn’t apply in your opinion, I have to ask what country you live in. Most countries signed on. Now I’m going to give you the fact that I’ve read The Fourth Geneva Convention and I’m hard pressed to see a definitive relevance to the statement by the UN Secretary General, but it is his interpretation. However, if you insist on questioning the illegality, I must ask you in return for evidence that these settlements were legally acquired. If they hold title issued by the Israeli government, an occupying power, defend the legality of wresting land and houses from the occupied people. If you won’t bother, and I haven’t suaded you then we really no more to talk about. > [@](#): > > I don’t know. And I would be even less certain if (1) the invasion had taken place 40 years ago (2) for defensive reasons (3) only after the United States had attacked Mexico in an effort to wipe it off the map; (4) the United States no longer claimed sovereignty over Texas (5) and the question was whether ethnic Mexicans who had since emmigrated to Texas were were there legally. You don’t know. Okay. Can I conclude you have no firm opinion on the right of settlers to remain on the West Bank? ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/166 "2009-02-17T06:53:56Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > See, that I have a problem with. The United States tolerates Jewish enclaves. Canada tolerates Jewish enclaves. The United Kingdom tolerates Jewish enclaves. Israel tolerates non-Jewish enclaves. Well, the Geneva Conventions have a problem with moving populations into an occupied territory. [Geneva IV, Section III, Article 49](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva07.asp) > [@](#): > > The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. > [@brazil84](#): > > If the Palestinian Arabs cannot abide by the standards of liberal, western nations, then why do they deserve any respect? (As a group, I mean.) Well gosh, I mean if Israeli Jews cannot abide by the standards liberal, western nations, then why do they deserve any respect? (As a group, I mean.):rolleyes: > [@](#): > > Or conversely, if it’s somehow desirable to eject Jews from the West Bank, then why would it be so terrible to push non-Jews out of Israel proper? Hmm, well because the settlements violate Geneva IV, Section III, Article 49, and guess what? Pushing non-Jews out of Israel proper is **also** a violation of the same article: > [@](#): > > Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/167 "2009-02-17T07:15:03Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > Well, the Geneva Conventions have a problem with moving populations into an occupied territory. [Geneva IV, Section III, Article 49](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva07.asp) Thanks. You obviously have a much better cite than I had looked into. That should settle the question for **brazil84**. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/168 "2009-02-17T07:36:34Z")
Transfer is an active verb. Allowing or even encouraging people to migrate of their own free will is certainly not even in the same ballpark as a government, with its legal monopolization of force, transferring people from one location to another. To put it another way, when the US made the Louisiana Purchase, it was not an instance of population transfer carried out by a government, but free migration into territory which came under the control of a government. It’s also worth pointing out that there hasn’t been a true binding UN resolution which classified the settlements as illegal, and the ICJ has already shown that when it comes to Israel, it’s perfectly willing to make statements even when it’s blatantly obvious that they’ve deliberately excluded all of the relevant exculpatory evidence. Let’s not be overly glib here. Bombast never serves the purposes of clarity. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/169 "2009-02-17T07:36:36Z")
“Looters will be shot on sight.” When did that become difficult to understand? [Article 33](http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm) > [@](#): > > Article 33 > > No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. > > **Pillage is prohibited.** > > Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited. _(emphasis added)_ > [@](#): > > pillage > … > Function: > noun > Etymology: > Middle English pilage, from Anglo-French, from piler to rob, plunder > Date: > 14th century > > \*\*1 : the act of looting or plundering especially in war \*\* > 2 : something taken as booty _(emphasis added)_ ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/170 "2009-02-17T08:01:06Z")
Lest we forget, a large portion of the Palestinian population, itself, is made up of illegal immigrants and their descendants. In other words, “looters” who illegally live on land that they and their ancestors never had a right to. Or why stop there. Currently illegal Palestinian construction in Jerusalem is in full swing. Of course, since your position isn’t a rationalization of Hamas’/Islamic Jihad’s/etc… bigotry and murderous, genocidal ambitions against the Israelis, I’m sure you’ll quickly come out in support of the mirror position to yours. Namely, that it is only right and proper for Israel to deliberately kill any and all Palestinian ‘looters’. And I take it that, since you argument is intellectually honest, you’ll clearly proclaim that the Israeli government not only can, but should round up and shoot any and all Palestinians who are engaged in the theft of land via the process of illegal construction in Jerusalem. I mean, since you’re not just rationalizing a way to support murder. Right? We’ll see this intellectually honest mirror argument made by you any time now. Any time now. Any time. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/171 "2009-02-17T08:19:46Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > It’s also worth pointing out that there hasn’t been a true binding UN resolution which classified the settlements as illegal What, in your opinion, would make a resolution to that effect “true” and “binding”? Are you arguing that the settlements **are** legal? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 8:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/172 "2009-02-17T08:31:39Z")
[UN Charter: Chapter Six](http://www.un-documents.net/ch-06.htm). [UN Character: Chapter Seven.](http://www.un-documents.net/ch-07.htm) It’s not “opinion”. An accurate and intellectually honest reading (quite rare where Israel is concerned) shows clearly that the UN only has the power to compel nations under Chapter Seven, Chapter Six only allows suggestions. Hence, non-binding. In point of fact, [none of the UNSC resolutions dealing with Israeli settlements were binding.](http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/unitednations/Israel%20and%20Iraq%20-%20UN%20Double%20Standards.pdf) None. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 9:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/173 "2009-02-17T09:20:59Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Transfer is an active verb. Allowing or even encouraging people to migrate of their own free will is certainly not even in the same ballpark as a government, with its legal monopolization of force, transferring people from one location to another. You are reaching here. The wording in the Geneva Convention specifies “transfer or deport” . Your second 'ballpark" sounds like deportation to me. Transfer has a much broader meaning which would definitely include a a policy of occupying power incentives to move Jews into Palestinian territory. Israeli settlement policy was an “active” policy. The government actually established settlements for Jews. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/174 "2009-02-17T09:44:31Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > “Looters will be shot on sight.” > > When did that become difficult to understand? So you can substantiate that hmm - I guess maybe you mean to imply Israeli settlers are looting? Care to provide a cite for this? Or well, I’m still waiting with baited breath for you to cite that the IDF considers Settlers to be subhuman. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/175 "2009-02-17T10:17:25Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > You are reaching here. The wording in the Geneva Convention specifies “transfer or deport” . Your second 'ballpark" sounds like deportation to me. Transfer has a much broader meaning which would definitely include a a policy of occupying power incentives to move Jews into Palestinian territory. Israeli settlement policy was an “active” policy. The government actually established settlements for Jews. He’s always reaching, it’s almost but not quite as bad as **Sevastopol**.:rolleyes: So hey, when [Gauleiter Greiser.html](http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/othercamps/greiser.html) was importing good Aryan stock to take over the homes of deported and murdered Poles and Jews, if he was simply allowing them to move in and encouraging it, but god forbid using the active verb of transferring them, was it was ok? Even though well, they were transferring them in the end? Do we really need to get into internet dick fights and start throwing dictionary definitions of transfer at each other? Or will you accept that the Israeli government allowed the transfers of settlers into the occupied territories and thus transferred its own civilian population into occupied territories? Or is this the new escape clause; the Hutus and Tutsis and the Serbians, Croats, you name it are immune from this because they just encouraged it and provided free transportation and free land including someone’s home to move into? I mean they didn’t actually transfer them there per your definition. You may as well make the same argument about every population transfer in this century. I mean ya know, the USSR didn’t _transfer_ people into the Baltic states so much as _encourage_ them to. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > To put it another way, when the US made the Louisiana Purchase, it was not an instance of population transfer carried out by a government, but free migration into territory which came under the control of a government. Could you possibly provide a less useful comparison? Sooo - that whole 6 Day War in 1967 was really the Israelis buying the land from Napoleon so he’d have funds to continue his continental war. And the Settlers freely migrated to territory that was \*\*bought and legally the possession of Israel \*\* exactly like the lands of the Louisiana Purchase were to the US? Hint: the Louisiana Perchance and the Occupied Territories in the Mid-East didn’t come under the control of their respective governments in anything like the same fashion. > [@](#): > > Let’s not be overly glib here. Bombast never serves the purposes of clarity. I agree completely. It’d be nice if you’d take the step to stop doing it yourself. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/176 "2009-02-17T10:25:09Z")
Dutchman: Your argument has become somewhat Jabberwockian as you’re evidently arguing that in some instances, like Hebron, Jerusalem and Gush Etzion, allowing Jews to return to places from which they or their close ancestors were forced out via direct violence are guilty of being “transferred” _back to their homes._ It should also be pointed out that as recently as the Oslo Accords, the PA agreed that the settlements’ presence would [be settled via negotiation](http://www.mideastweb.org/meoslodop.htm). In the presence of a legal agreement between Israel and the PA which does not state that they are illegal but, instead, that their specific status will be settled by negotiation… And that’s to say nothing of the fact that a large part of the disputed territories were never under Palestinian sovereignty, were never private property and cannot accurately be said to be “Palestinian territory”. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/177 "2009-02-17T10:51:24Z")
Sorry Dissonance, even your use of ad hominem and invective hasn’t given your argument logical consistency. Fancy that. Case in point, you’ve just been hoisted by your own petard. You consider lands which were won by wars of aggression and then sold to a foreign power by another foreign power, totally ignoring the native inhabitants, to be legal possessions of those foreign powers. \*And by that logic, your bombast about “transfer” fails. \* The League of Nations and UK, after all, allowed for close settlements of Jews in the entire Mandate territory. Thus making Jewish settlements in any and all of it just as legal as the Louisiana Purchase, if not more so. I suppose I could also belabor the point and analyze your double standard whereby comparing the LP and other voluntary population transfers is wrong wrong wrong because they had different causes, but comparing deliberate genocide and ethnic cleansing in order to provide Lebensraum with a defensive war whose territorial gains were immediately offered back in exchange for peace is just fine. Or, perhaps, I could re-hash the absurdity of arguing that France could conquer someone else in a war of aggression and then sell off that land which would then become a “legal possession” that could be settled freely, but if the UK conquered the Ottoman Empire and then created a Mandate for its new territory with the authorization of the League of Nations, following through on that is “illegal” “transfer”. But, really, what’s the point? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/178 "2009-02-17T12:33:50Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > The Fourth Geneva Convention. As far as I can tell, the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to individual Jewish settlers, only to signatory nations. So even assuming that it is illegal for Israel to open the West Bank to Jewish settlement, it does not necessarily follow that the Jewish settlers themselves are breaking any law. Here’s an extreme hypothetical question: Suppose that in 1967, Israel had forcibly resettled 1,000,000 Palestinian Arabs from the West Bank into the Golan Heights. That would be a clear violation of the convention you cite, right? And therefore, by your reasoning, the population is there illegally, right? So it follows, by your reasoning, that it’s acceptable for anyone (including Israel, Syria, or whomever) to evict them, right? What about Israel itself? I think people are relying on a strained reading of the word “transfer” in order to condemn Israel. Do you agree with the following statement: “The United States has transferred hundreds of thousands of Puerto Ricans to New York City.” But anyway, that’s beside the point since the claim you are making is that the Jewish settlers themselves are violating some law. > [@](#): > > You don’t know. Okay. Can I conclude you have no firm opinion on the right of settlers to remain on the West Bank? Yes, but I’m leaning in favor of the pro-settler position. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/179 "2009-02-17T14:46:19Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > As far as I can tell, the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to individual Jewish settlers, only to signatory nations. So even assuming that it is illegal for Israel to open the West Bank to Jewish settlement,… Was it legal or not for Israel to open the West Bank to Jewish settlement ? > [@](#): > > it does not necessarily follow that the Jewish settlers themselves are breaking any law. They are occupying property that they did not legitimately acquire. > [@](#): > > Here’s an extreme hypothetical question: Suppose that in 1967, Israel had forcibly resettled 1,000,000 Palestinian Arabs from the West Bank into the Golan Heights. That would be a clear violation of the convention you cite, right? And therefore, by your reasoning, the population is there illegally, right? So it follows, by your reasoning, that it’s acceptable for anyone (including Israel, Syria, or whomever) to evict them, right? I’m not going to argue hypotheticals. > [@](#): > > Do you agree with the following statement: > > “The United States has transferred hundreds of thousands of Puerto Ricans to New York City.” Were they encouraged by the government? > [@](#): > > But anyway, that’s beside the point since the claim you are making is that the Jewish settlers themselves are violating some law. Simply enough, they did not acquire their real estate legally. > [@](#): > > Yes, but I’m leaning in favor of the pro-settler position. Stay the course then. I’m moving on. I’ll have to leave you behind. I have no doubts at all based on what I’ve heard so far. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2009, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421/180 "2009-02-17T15:02:32Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Dutchman: Your argument has become somewhat Jabberwockian as you’re evidently arguing that in some instances, like Hebron, Jerusalem and Gush Etzion, allowing Jews to return to places from which they or their close ancestors were forced out via direct violence are guilty of being “transferred” _back to their homes._ We are talking about the settlers only. Play with your strawman if you must to justify your position. > [@](#): > > It should also be pointed out that as recently as the Oslo Accords, the PA agreed that the settlements’ presence would [be settled via negotiation](http://www.mideastweb.org/meoslodop.htm). In the presence of a legal agreement between Israel and the PA which does not state that they are illegal but, instead, that their specific status will be settled by negotiation… How you get a legal standing from an agreement to negotiate is beyond me. > [@](#): > > And that’s to say nothing of the fact that a large part of the disputed territories were never under Palestinian sovereignty, were never private property and cannot accurately be said to be “Palestinian territory”. So what. They certainly weren’t under Israeli sovereignty. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-west-bank-need-to-be-ethnically-cleansed/484421.md?page=10)