The West Bank and E Jerusalem aren't a part of Israel either so why are Israeli citizens living in those territories when Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits it?
Not our fault that it was'nt, Jordan occupied Jerusalem did it not ? Yes, but it would be true toward Jews as well should the Arabs have won, Tel Aviv would have been Gaza strip. Sorry ? what ? Gaza and WB including Jerusalem were not under Egypt and Jordan control ? Jerusalem and Gaza were not the terror hubs where attacks been orgenized against Israelis ? in the cease fire agreements didnt Egypt and Jordan leave the Palestinians at Israeli hands to deal with them alone ? Well its up for the sides to decide if its fair or not, personaly as much as a favourite American president can be to Israel - I still be worried because the Palestinians will not be content, on the other hand you think you can dictate Israel what to do and threat it with war but you likewise miss the Israeli audience and its support so your pro Palestinian approach is doomed as well, 2 states solution will be - like it or not - be more influenced by the stronger side, and so it wont be real peace but just another Oslo. Its one of the aspects of the 2 states solution that makes the option unrealistic to me.
Jerusalem was united by law a long time ago and it is an official part of Israel, Israel occupied it from an occupier and it offers citizenship to all its dwellers, Im sure the Israeli law leans on some international law as well, you wont find the significance of Jerusalem to Israel in the UN records but its greater than just land gain so it would be wise not to address it as such, The Gov did not send Israelis to live in the WB, in fact it struggled with them for a very long time, once upon a time when the Left was dominant in Israel, but some Israelis kept on moving there and live there, I can say that from moral point of view to settle a land not belonging to any state and at the time not willing nor able to be indipendant - does'nt shock me that much, I mean why not make the best pf it as long as peace is not an option as it wasnt till Madrid talks. since then and since Oslo building there is a problem since there is an agreement the land will be divided.
No nation recognizes the Israeli annexation of Jerusalem (or the Golan Heights) as a part of Israel - Not even the United States. Israel, at it's whim, has disregarded International Law and it's treaty obligations since it was founded. The Israeli government, as a military force of occupation, had an obligation to prevent any Israeli citizens from moving into occupied territories under Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions. Why haven't all of the Israeli citizens currently occupying the West Bank and E Jerusalem been arrested and prosecuted for illegally entering the Palestinian territories? You act like the Israeli government couldn't have prevented it but this is absolute nonsense.
I know, but it still happened. Why are you asking a person that does support a Palestinian state all these questions? I remember reading some other posters here, they said it wasnt illegal because the land was disputed, not part of any state, only illegal if the state itself send them, something like that.
Once again it's time to remove our heads from the rectal cavity of the past and address the facts since 1967. As was the case with the prior administrative control of the "Palestinian" territory under the UK, Jordan, and Egypt when Israel, through an act of military force, took control of the "Palestinian" territory it was under a treaty obligation to fulfill the provisions of Article 73 of the UN Charter which states, in part: http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/index.html Israel, based upon the UN Charter, has a "sacred trust" in the establishment of self-government in the Palestinian territories and in doing so keeping the best interests of the Palestinians of the utmost importance. We can also note that Jordan and Egypt did not abandon the Palestinians to Israeli control but instead turned the responsibility back over to the UN Security Council which addressed the future of Israel and the Palestinians in UNSC 242. As you accurately note if the resolution is based upon the superior military might of one side as opposed to the resolution being based upon what is just for both sides there will never be peace. How does the prevention of any act of aggression by either side make the 2 state solution unrealistic?
Because I dont trust an International force and I dont think any side will approve losing control over some part to an international force,
I found a couple things that might help: http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950319000987 And: http://alternativenewsalert.com/guess-how-israeli-justice-system-works.html
The only holy book that actively names a feud with two previous major religions is the Qu'ran. Neither the Torah nor Bible declare they will have an end war to destroy the enemies of God. Those books assert a defensive struggle under horrible oppression and that God will fight his own damn war to defend them when all hope is gone. If the premise of the Qu'ran is to eradicate a race (Hebrews) and two religions, why is it so championed as a book of peace among the secular authorities who rationalize everything except opposition to that particular zealous hatred? You can't even begin to criticize Islam. But there is no end of blatant attacks both verbally and physically on Christianity or Judaism. I think it has to do with pandering to oil producing nations so profits from the petrodollar flow without religion getting in the way of business. Nothing is more American than that, come to think of it. I may have answered my own question here, but I hold out hope that America at least will soon quit trying to pander to the whinny baby that is Islamic insatiability. No, it's not a religion of peace, as borne out by the prophets' own words, you're just arguing for the faith as commanded, and permitted to lie to do so to defend the faith, or a fellow Muslim. Those other two demand an attempt at truthfulness as a course in life, and forbid denial in the truth they know, not even if a lie will save their lives or advance the cause. They ask all men to strive to be better and to do good to other men, even strangers with other belief's. But all the liberal globalist world wants to side with is the religion that teaches intolerance and many reasons to kill. I read your book Muslim's of the world. I urge you to read the Bible. Your book isn't the third and final revelation. It omits much of the Torah (Old Testament) and leaves out the New Testament. Many places it slanders the Jew's and makes fun of their hardships. I understand why you are commanded in the Qu'ran to leave it at home when you go abroad, and to not read any other holy book. You might very easily and very rightly come to the realization that your book is sadly lacking in substance or wisdom. I say it as an outsider viewing it from without, but I ask you to examine the older scriptures for yourselves. Then run for the airport and leave the murderous population who will kill you for apostasy. Anyway, I don't get the western love affair with the ideology that is apposed to our democratic and feminist society. Maybe tomorrow is the day we all finally name the enemy who has no problem naming us.
