Quote:
Originally Posted by klipkap";p="
"...
So why the emphasis on excluding "the". Caradon makes it clear that it is NOT SO AS TO ALLOW ISRAEL TO ACQUIRE TERRITORY BY ILLEGAL MEANS. Instead, he did not want the "1967 line" to be seen as permanent. As he later explains it, it might well have been that in future negotiations, some of this territory occupied by Israel might in fact become part of the Zionist State, in exchange for Israeli ground that would make more sense as part of a Palestinian state. The resolution should not preclude this acquisition by Israel...
|
What a strange and Biased reading. (not surprising)
Caradon and others didn't want territories won by war.
They preferred, actually insisted, the Arabs just take a Territorial adjustment by negotiation or ascent, clearly in Israel's favor, rather than letting Israel have all the "War" conquered territory.
But
never meant Israel to return to the smaller/original "UNsecure" pre-1967 borders.
Israel, in giving back the sinai, and more recently Gaza, (and offering app 95% of the WB) has probably given back 98% of the land area won already.
Well within the parameters of a small adjustment.
A small adjustment I already spelled out Twice with a link ("Golan and the 'mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria")
Again as to his and Many Others intent.... specifically rejected Israel going back to the 67 borders. This just one of MANY Unequivocal ones I presented on the last page.
Quote:
"....- Ingeniously drafted resolutions calling for withdrawal from 'all' the territory were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly one after another.
Speaker after speaker made it explicit that Israel was NOT to be forced back to the 'fragile and vulnerable' [1949/1967] Armistice Demarcation Lines..." (UNSC Resolution 242, 1993, p. 17).
The USSR and the Arabs supported a draft demanding a withdrawal to the 1967 Lines.
The US, Canada and most of West Europe and Latin America supported the draft, which was eventually approved by the UN Security Council...
|
There is no "Exchange" mentioned or necessary.
This is a klitklap Fabrication, pulled out of a hat.
Welcome to the Beeny Morris Historical society.
At least you are coming around and partially responding to what WAS posted instead of fawning ignorance and Dishonestly just reading the Resolution without any background of how the language was indeed arrived at. It just took some beating into your not dense, but heavily biased Noggin.
.