Biden will ‘make Abbas great again,’ says Israeli pundit

Move the embassy: Why not. There's no added value to have it in one city or the other.
Cancel the peace agreement: How? The agreement is between israel and its neighbor, all are sovereign states. They don't need the US permission to make peace.
Restore financial aid to Palestinians: I'm all about fairness. If it's ok to foot the bill for israel armed forces then I'm ok with giving the palestinians the same amount. How about we gave both $0.00

 

Oh boy...

 

Yes the illegal settlements should be recognised as such again and the illegal occupation of Golan heights.

 

Embassy back to Tel Aviv ... for sure, because the step of Trump was not only totally illegal, but also totally superfluous!
Peace agreement is an issue of Israel and the involved Arab States and not an issue of the USA. I get even always a laugh attack when I read that it is one of Trumps successes ...

The financial aid for the Palestinians is more a question of how far the USA takes on its responsibility for BS that they have caused.
And yes ... of course the hint with the terrorists from you ... but I suggest that the FBI then proceeds in the same way as Israel with regard to terrorists in the USA. If another right-wing, racist, left-wing or religiously motivated terrorist (not only Muslims, but also Christian ones who are also in the USA) makes one of the disgusting attacks within the USA, then the FBI takes a bulldozer and does it all Flatten the house and property of the assassin's family. The same then for the mass murderers, who often run amok in schools in the USA. Also destroy the family home of the perpetrator directly with a bulldozer as a punishment. Are you OK with that?

Anyway ...
The illegal settlements should definitely be on your list ... and the demand to demolish all of them immediately and to throw these settlers scum from the occupied territories, if not prosecute them and imprison them.

 

WTF? President Trump has upheld the LAW!
But since you're not American, I forgive you for not knowing that

 

Then why bring it up - if this is not the case. The Palestinian/Israeli Conflict meets all the requisite characteristics for a Blood Feud.

You claimed "Its not a Blood Feud" and supported this claim with "Israel does not have a "Blood Feud Culture - followed by a definition stating that such custom needs to be codified in law"

So you did claim what you now say you did not claim - but regardless .. this was just one of your trips down a rabbit hole anyway - having no bearing on the fact that the conflict in question can be correctly characterized as a "Blood Feud".

but for argument's sake .. let us assume you wish to term it differently since you don't like my term - that is fine .. but then what is the term you would like to use for this conflict - define this term and show how this conflict fits your definition.



.

 

Here's what we can expect from the sleepy Joe administration:

Biden’s Palestinian-American Staffer Justified Suicide Bombings in Past

New White House staffer justified suicide bombings during the Second Intifada when Palestinian terrorists blew up hundreds of Israelis.
Biden appointed Reema Dodin, whose parents are Palestinian-Americans, was appointed as a deputy director of the White House Office of Legislative Affairs.

 

Closing those illegal settlements would be a good start. The resulting self-immolation of the fundamentalist settler fools would mean an improvement in the gene pool....

 

Wrong. I recognize the disputed nature of Israel's creation, in 1947 (after the UN voted to partition Palestine), and the need for a just settlement of the opposing claims of both parties.

You are only interested in the triumph of one side.

 

What happened to the Arab state
partitioned in 1947?
Minimally Gaza & West Bank.

It was not under Israeli control until 1967.

Please explain.

Gracias


Moi

​

PS The U.N. Partition required a 2/3rds vote
of the U.N. General Assembly
No Blue helmets ever defended Israel's right to exist.

 

A bit of history, if I may?

After the Arabs refused all offers of land for peace in the wake of the 1967 war, the Israelis were necessarily responsible for the West Bank and Gaza. Israel’s government under Levi Eshkol initially barred settlements on the grounds that under a peace agreement the land would one day be relinquished to the capacious and underpopulated existing Palestinian state named Jordan. When the Jordanians joined the rest of the Arab states in adamantly refusing any negotiations, Israel inherited the land. Refuting every claim of Arab “displacement” by Jews, the Israelis spurred development and welcomed Arabs thronging in to participate in it.

Between the 1967 war and the first intifada in 1987, Arab settlers, moving in from Jordan and other Arab countries to the West Bank and Gaza, came to outnumber Israeli settlers eight to one.

 

The British mandate, which was the subject of the majority UN partition vote in 1947, was not an "Arab state".

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia (google it, my link isn't working )

"The Mandate for Palestine was a League of Nations mandate for British administration of the territories of Palestine and Transjordan, both of which had been conceded by the Ottoman Empire following the end of World War I in 1918.

<<<Passage of the resolution required a two-thirds majority of the valid votes, not counting abstaining and absent members, of the UN's then 56 member states. On 26 November, after filibustering by the Zionist delegation, the vote was postponed by three days. According to multiple sources, had the vote been held on the original set date, it would have received a majority, but less than the required two-thirds. Various compromise proposals and variations on a single state, including federations and cantonal systems were…

Wikipedia · Text under CC-BY-SA license>>>

(Wow...so the UN might have created the sensible solution of a single state shared by Jews and Palestinians, if the vote had been held on the originally planned date? The plot thickens...).

Anyway, the Arabs rejected the partition plan, while Jews simply declared Israel's existence within the borders drawn up by the UN; and both sides immediately went to war. Arabs sided with the Palestinians but they lost the war, and the UN accepted Israel's de facto existence.

The unstable situation since 1948 was further destabilized in the 1967 war, in which Israel captured, inter alia, the WB and east Jerusalem The UN of course - following its charter which includes "the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible" - proposed UN res 242, was adopted by the UNSC, but never implemented.

Why not?

Israel and the real failing of resolution 242 | Israel | The Guardian

(again, from google)

<<<Andrea Teti (Letters, 23 May) makes light of the absence of the definite article in the English version of UN resolution 242 of 1967 that called for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces "from territories occupied in the recent conflict". Yet the principal author of resolution 242, Lord Caradon, told me in 1973 that the ambiguity of that phrase was deliberate to avoid either a US or Soviet veto on behalf of their respective allies.>>>

......Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive. *Walter Scott).

​

 

...but you need to go back to 1918 and the League of Nations creation of the British Palestine mandate after the fall of the Ottoman empire, for a complete understanding of the creation of the state of modern Israel....see post #212 immediately above.

 

@a better world

The partition was a 2 state solution. Jewish & Arab states.
The Arab state was denied by Egypt & Jordan who
took over Arab Palestine.
Egypt took Gaza.
Jordan took the West Bank.

I did a term paper on this many years ago.

 

Actually, none of that conflicts with the Wikipedia quotes I supplied in post #212.

Note: you asked (in #210); "what happened to the Arab state partitioned in 1947?"

I pointed out there was no "Arab state" in the land called Palestine before partition, only the British Palestine mandate created by the L of N following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918.

 

There was no Arab state in Palestine during the Ottoman rule
nor the mandate.

There was to be an Arab state and a Jewish state
following the partition.

The Jewish state became Israel.
What happened to the Arab state the U.N. partition intended?


Hope that clarifies the question.
"I take the responsibility, but not the blame", NIXON

Moi the dyslexic
Just answer the question in bold font. Or not.

​

Y'think the Biden rejection of Israel and Russia
will drive them to become closer allies?

​

 

Which according to Alfred Lilienthal in What Price Israel was only achieved after an Emergency halt had been demanded and a lot of bribery and blackmail went on resulting in several countries which prior had given strong arguments why this should not happen to change their votes. This vote only achieved through blackmail and bribery was never ratified. It was no reason for Israel tro start massacres and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians resulting in Israel herself declaring her state and the Arab countries on the incessant demand of their citizens going in to protect the Palestinians from rape, murder and ethnic cleansing.

 

It was taken over by various Arab states during the various wars with Israel, as you said, eventually to be occupied by Israel after the war in 1967.
And as I pointed out in #212, the UNSC passed UN res 242 , as part of the process of adjudication of a peace settlement by interntional law, but 242 was never established on the ground, for reasons examined in my post (SC members US siding with Israel, and Russia siding with the Arabs; plus the omission of the word "the" in .."withdrawal from (the) territories occupied in the recent conflict" in the english version, meaning all sides could argue over the extent of the territory to be withdrawn from, by the Israelis.....

I will be interested to ascertain Biden's views on the 2-state solution, Jerusalem and illegal WB settlements; I can't answer your final question at present.

 

Please quote the international law relevant to your "illegal settlements" statement.

 

I said "Jews don't have a blood feud culture". Israeli Arabs do.

I already told you that this conflict is rooted in Arab nationalism. It's a struggle for arabization of Bilad al Sham (the Levant).

 

Looks like Israel is working hard to get as much land as she can while Trump is still President and also to make it nigh impossible for Biden to be as Israeli friendly as he would like to be.

16th November

UN envoy decries Israel’s move to expand illegal settlement | Middle East | Al Jazeera

On illegal settlements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law_and_Israeli_settlements

 

You spouted a lot of zionist propaganda non of it true. Jewish Nationalism and Christian Restorationism are at the root of the conflict, amazes me how otherwise intelligent people use the same sort of historical revisionism as holocaust deniers when the subject of Palestine is mentioned.

 

Fourth Geneva Convention. And I never said under international law, more sophistry.

 

There are many roots to this conflict - one that is aptly described as a "blood feud" - a fight over turf - Most Palestinians just want a normal place to live at this point - so oppressed they are by the evil overlords

 

Two peoples want the same land, wrongs have been committed by both sides but the only real solution will be one state with the two peoples living together, it will not happen in my life time sad to say.