So now you cherry pick my posts in a disingenuous attempt to try and avoid the fact that I demonstrated how Israel was an occupier. What you have desperately been avoiding is the fact that Israel has been in violation of the terms/agreement by which it was allowed to occupy the land it currently occupies. In the land it occupies it has set up a Gov't which rules over people in that land in a way that was not part of the agreement. This makes them an occupier. In places such as Gaza - Israel is not really occupying the space however they exert control over the space via blockade (economic, trade, movement)
You cannot demonstrate this, as they are not. This has been proven to you. You cannot "occupy" territory that belongs to you. . And thus, not an occupier.
No, the best thing to happen to a people is for them to be allowed to run their own business, to vote, to have economic freedom. As humans they have claim to the rights we so rightly and proudly claim as our own - rights for which we held a many years war of revolution.
False. There absolutely is a blockade, enforced by Israel. There is NO questions about that. The last point is totally preposterous - the fishing restriction has nothing to do with "checking their boats". Fishermen are simply flat out refused access to their own waters. Israel shoots at any boats approaching the three mile limit of the blockade - denying access to Gaza's waters beyond. Gaza's Territorial Waters extend 12 miles (the USA claims 24). The Exclusive Economic Zone extends 200 miles, covering natural resources including fish and energy resources. Limiting Gaza to 3 miles is clear evidence of a blockade, and in the case of Gaza there is the additional fact of Gaza being in desperate humanitarian circumstance and there being few fish within the 3 miles imposed by the blockade. Blockading Gaza IS an act of war - as are all blockades.
Why is Gaza blockaded? By MAURICE OSTROFF Jerusalem Post The demand by Hamas that the blockade be lifted before even negotiating a ceasefire leads straight to the IMPORTANT question about its purpose. Was the blockade imposed because of the rockets or did rocket fire start because of the blockade? The answer will surprise many, including the BBC, France 24 and other influential mainstream media as well as politicians and journalists with short memories. When Israel evacuated the Gaza strip there was no thought of a blockade. Rather, as will be shown in this article, the intention was to improve the lives and economy of all Palestinians including Gazans by cooperation with Israel. The blockade wasn''t considered until two years later when Hamas gained control of Gaza in a cruel fratricidal battle against Fatah and Israel''s friendly hand was reciprocated with increased terror and rockets. It is highly relevant to remind opinion makers that although they have consistently referred to the blockade of Gaza as an Israeli blockade, it has been maintained jointly with Egypt during the rule of Mubarak as well as of Morsi and Sisi. It is interesting too, to recall that though Egypt has been a party to the blockade, rockets have been fired on Israel alone. Not one on Egypt. And although facts seem to have lost their importance in the media as well as in politics, intellectual honesty and journalistic ethics should tweak our interest in checking on the roots of the blockade that generates so much righteous indignation among some pseudo human rights NGO''s. For a start we are reminded that when Israel vacated the Gaza strip in 2005, then PM Ariel Sharon emphasized in his disengagement plan published on May 28, 2004, that Israel was committed to the peace process and the purpose of the plan was to lead to a better security, political, economic and demographic situation. A blockade was furthest from his mind. In March 2007, Hamas and Fatah formed a Palestinian authority national unity government headed by Ismail Haniya, but in June Hamas took control of Gaza in the the cruel battle referred to above. According to a Human Rights Watch report of June 13, 2007, armed Palestinian groups committed grave crimes, executing captives, attacking a hospital and violating the most fundamental humanitarian principles, in some cases amounting to war crimes. "Both Fatah and Hamas military forces summarily executed captives, killed people not involved in hostilities and engaged in gun battles with one another inside and near Palestinian hospitals. Armed Palestinians from Islamic Jihad and the Fatah-affiliated Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade used a vehicle with TV insignia to attack an Israeli military position on the border with Gaza". "Hamas captured Muhammad Swairki, a cook for President Mahmoud Abbass presidential guard, and executed him by throwing him to his death, with his hands and legs tied, from a 15-story apartment building in Gaza City. Later that night, Fatah military forces shot and captured Muhammad al-Rafati, a Hamas supporter and mosque preacher, and threw him from a Gaza City high-rise apartment building. On Monday, Hamas military forces attacked the home in Beit Lahiya of Jamal Abu al-Jadiyan, a senior Fatah official, captured him, and executed him on the street with multiple gunshots. On Tuesday, there were reports of additional killings of individuals not involved in hostilities". According to the Guardian of June 15, 2007 "In scenes reminiscent of Baghdad after the fall of Saddam Hussein, hundreds of people swarmed through the unoccupied house of Fatah strongman Mohammed Dahlan, after his neighborhood fell to Hamas, stripping everything, including windows, doors and flowerpots". The following extracts from Sharon''s aforementioned disengagement plan paints a picture of good intentions with sadly negative unintended consequences. Referring to the evacuation of an area in Northern Samaria (Ganim, Kadim, Sa-Nur and Homesh), which few remember, he said this would enable territorial contiguity for Palestinians in Northern Samaria and that Israel would assist the international community in improving the transportation infrastructure in the West Bank to facilitate contiguity of Palestinian transportation, normal life and Palestinian economic and commercial activity in the West Bank. In Gaza, he said, Israel would transfer industrial, commercial and agricultural facilities to a third, international party for the benefit of the Palestinian population that is not involved in terror. Regarding International Passage he said that to improve the situation, the hours of operation would be extended. Infrastructure relating to water, electricity, sewage and telecommunications were left in place. And most importantly, the Erez industrial zone was to be transferred to the responsibility of a Palestinian or international party and Israel would explore with Egypt, the possibility of establishing a joint industrial zone on the border of the Gaza Strip, Egypt and Israel. Because too few opinion makers know about the Erez and other beneficial joint industrial enterprises that then existed and that were offered to Gaza but were wantonly destroyed, it is worth describing them. Unfortunately very little is known, even by experts on Palestine, about the many cooperative efforts established by Israel that were thwarted by the Palestinian uprising, quite apart from those in the pipeline which were not given the chance to be realized. Before the second intifada, Israel and the Palestinian Authority cooperated in creating employment opportunities along the seam-line" between Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. A successful industrial zone was created at Erez which grew to employ about 5,000 workers in some 200 businesses half of which were Palestinian-owned. They produced everything from plastics to car parts and continued to do so even as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict raged. This was part of a larger Gaza Industrial Estate (GIE), slated to provide up to 50,000 jobs. In addition, a joint industrial zone was planned south of Tulkarm intended to provide jobs for more than 5,000 Palestinians. Additional areas were planned for Jenin and the Kerem Shalom area near Rafah in Gaza. But all these positive efforts were unfortunately thwarted. The GIE zone became the target of deadly Palestinian attacks leading to closure of the enterprise. Hamas and the Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed joint responsibility. The tragedy was encapsulated by one of the Palestinian factory owners, 40-year-old Ashur Salha,. "It''s simply stupid," he told Haaretz, "Whoever ordered the bombing must have known that 30,000 mouths depend on our employment here. After all, this hurts us [the Palestinians] much more than it does the Israelis." Sadly, the golden opportunity for a new prosperous Gaza created by Israel''s disengagement from the strip was rejected. As soon as Israel left Gaza, Gazan gunmen wantonly destroyed thousands of greenhouses and other projects left behind by the Jewish settlers; projects that could have provided income for over 4,500 families. Before the Palestinian uprising, up to 100,000 Palestinians worked in Israel, providing an economic lifeline. Palestinian trucks moved freely on Israels roads facilitating the export of thousands of tons of agricultural products from Gaza to Jordan and beyond. Even during times of violence about 5,000 Palestinians continued to work in Israel, and in the settlements that have since been evacuated. Similarly Palestinian businessmen traveled freely and conducted their affairs in Israel. If peace is to be achieved by negotiation, the question must be asked how this can be done while the Hamas charter declares there is absolutely no room for peaceful negotiation. Article 13 of the Hamas Charter unambiguously declares: Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The cost of acquiring more that 10,000 sophisticated missiles many of which are capable of reaching Jerusalem and Tel Aviv as well as constructing hundreds of elaborate steel and cement lined tunnels and the recently revealed drones must be enormous. This raises the question as to how the funds, so generously donated by the EU and the USA for humanitarian purposes are supervised? If these funds had been used for creating businesses, building hospitals and improving infrastructure including sewage treatment and water and electricity supplies, Gaza would be a much happier place. Taking the above circumstances into account, one must ask who in good conscience can advocate lifting of the blockade before solid long-term security arrangements are made to prevent Hamas from continuing its proven history of accumulating sophisticated armaments instead of applying its financial and human resources to constructive purposes?
Well. I feel for Gaza. NOT. Haven't Israel been made war on seven times, all on behalf of Palestinians? Why, yes. In my mind, Israel is justified to take any and all measures they deem appropriate to guaranty the survival and prosperity of Israel (not Gaza), world opinion be damned. Simple, really.
well the US won its war. The arabs fought two wars to root out the israelis and lost. i have news for you if the US lost the revolutionary war then it would still have been part of the empire.
The Palestinians are the party that always rejects peace. Israel is the party that has offered peace over and over and over again. Kind of ironic that a false accusation that "Israel are the ones refusing peace" is followed so quickly by a Palestinian rejection of the two-state solution. Anyway, Palestinian rejection of the two-state solution gives Israel the right to craft their own solution and impose it by force. Incorrect. The proposal allows for a future negotiated two state solution where Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the Palestinian state. I very much like the plan's idea of finishing the Security Fence, including in the spots where Israel is currently being pressured not to finish it, and then declaring the Security Fence as Israel's official border. I very much like the plan for Israel to retain full military control over Areas B and C east of the Security Fence in the absence of a negotiated two-state solution. As the Palestinians will always refuse a two-state solution, that means over the coming centuries Israel will retain de-facto possession over all of Areas B and C. I have mixed feelings about halting settlement construction east of the Security Fence. While land east of the Security Fence in theory would be transferred to a future Palestinian state if there were ever a negotiated solution, in reality the Palestinians are going to refuse to ever make peace and thus Israel will get to keep this land. I'd kind of like to see Israel make good use of it. I have mixed feelings about limiting settlement construction west of the Security Fence to the construction of new high-rise apartment buildings in existing settlements. Same reasons as above. I don't much like the idea of having American troops being deployed to patrol the Jordan River. But since that would be contingent on a negotiated two-state solution, I guess we won't have to worry about that ever happening. The Palestinians will always refuse peace. Hardly betrayed. But no, the plan proposes unilateral acts for Israel to take. Palestinian input isn't required for that. It's not like Israel is going to break any promises. - - - Updated - - - Such aggression justifies Israel keeping all the land and legitimizes the settlements. - - - Updated - - - The reason for the blockade is because the Gazans keep firing artillery at Israeli civilians. - - - Updated - - - Theoretically true I guess. But let's be clear that Israel is not engaging in terrorism. The weapons aid is essential for Israel to defend themselves, and by extension essential to regional stability. It is a good thing. The Palestinians are only supposed to get their state when they agree to make peace. Our blocking their rights in the absence of peace is also a good thing. There isn't much we can do to make the Palestinians start negotiating honestly. This one is hardly our fault. Was there something to negotiate? It is good that we shield Israel from "pressure" deriving from anti-Semitic false accusations of imaginary atrocities. We do make a difference. - - - Updated - - - This endless aggression against Israel makes it OK for Israel to keep all the land, and it legitimizes the settlements. And here is the justification for the blockade. - - - Updated - - - Yes, and an entirely lawful act of war at that. There isn't much to negotiate. The blockade will not end until the Palestinians stop trying to smuggle in weapons to murder innocent Israelis with. - - - Updated - - - I hardly think the two-state solution would amount to them living on their knees. - - - Updated - - - The Palestinians will refuse to comply with their obligation to make peace with Israel. NATO forces would just look the other way while Palestinians murdered innocent Israelis. Rejection of the two-state solution gives Israel the right to craft their own solution and impose it by force. - - - Updated - - - That's OK. Israel isn't ethnic cleansing anything, so that's a non-issue. - - - Updated - - - If they didn't want a lawful blockade imposed on them, they shouldn't have been firing rockets at Israeli civilians. - - - Updated - - - It is pretty straightforward history that the Muslims invaded the Roman empire without justification sometime around the seventh or eighth century and stole land that didn't belong to them, including Israel. And also that they intentionally steal other people's holy sites, with Jerusalem being one of the most noteworthy examples of such theft. - - - Updated - - - Actually the Palestinian refusal to make peace with Israel does allow Israel to keep that land. So no. Israel is not stealing anything. - - - Updated - - - Occupation requires the direct presence of troops in control over unfriendly territory. "No Israeli troops governing Palestinians" means "no occupation". The silly semantics game is being played by the people who are falsely accusing Israel of an imaginary occupation.
The two-state solution isn't new, but there is a new proposal for Israel to take some unilateral actions that will increase their security and, in theory, make it easier to reach that two-state solution. Part 1: http://www.twostatesecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Security-First-CIS.pdf Part 2: http://www.twostatesecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/CNAS-Report.pdf
There has been continuous war for the past 10 years or so, when the blockade was put in place. The catch here is that Palestinians are people. Our own revolutionary history and that of any number of other nations informs us that it will be a cold day in hell that humans will give up on their own and their family's life and liberty.
I absolutely disagree. The people here were far from ready to toss in the towel over more defeats of Washington. And, guessing that we were in some way far better than everyone else in this world is just plain stupid. So, tell me about the Brit "empire" and how those conquered accepted domination.
Nope. The fishing limit for Gaza fishermen is 6 nautical miles, and is extended to 9 nautical miles (over 10 miles) during peak fishing season.
This is false and I'll address that in a moment after addressing the following: A peace solution must be equitable for both sides but this is not. First of all it doesn't return E Jerusalem to the Palestinians. Secondly it requires the Palestinians to be demilitarized when a primary responsibility of any government is to provide for the defense of the nation with a military force. If Israel wants to impose a demilitarization requirement then it must apply to both nations. Additionally the requirement for a military force to ensure against acts of aggression must ensure against acts of aggression by either side and a "Israeli and American military" would only prevent the Palestinians from invading Israel but would not prevent an Israeli invasion of Palestine. There must be equal protection for both nations but that's not included in this proposal. The claim that the Palestinians haven't made a peace proposal is false. About two years ago the Palestinian Authority offered the following proposal to Israel. Based upon the agreed withdrawal of all Israeli military forces from the occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank and East Jerusalem the Palestinians proposed the mutual agreement from both sides to the: Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of (Israel and Palestine) and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force In addition the Palestinians proposed that an independent military force, preferably NATO, would occupy a military buffer zone, predominately in the Palestinian territory, providing for the mutual protection of both Palestine and Israel from any military action by the other party to the treaty. It is presumed that this independent military force would remain in place so long as any potential threat existed in either Israel or Palestine that would violate the peace by initiation any hostile action. One demand from Israel, that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish nation, was justifiably rejected because no nation should define the national character or identity of another nation which is solely under the sovereign authority and control of the people of the nation. All of these provisions are laid out in UN Security Council Resolution 242 as the only conditions necessary for a lasting peace. Israel rejected this proposal for a mutually fair and lasting peace by the Palestinians.
lol you disagree the us won the revolutionary war? The other peoples who won their wars are also free. The entire arab world fought the israelis twice and lost maybe they should have tried winning instead.
It has been limited to 3nm, and Gaza has a legal right to 12m- as well as a legal right to 200 for natural resources. But, at least you appear to recognize that there is an Israeli imposed blockade - more than many seem yo know about. - - - Updated - - - Please reread my post. Maybe you'll do better next time.
The limit has been 3 nautical miles for a limited period of time, due to rocket launching from Gaza during Obama's visit in Israel in 2013. read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/...t-for-fishing-off-gaza-coast.premium-1.525134 http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/205993 Of course there's a naval blockade of Gaza, enforced by both Israel and Egypt. Cargo bound to Gaza must pass through one of the two countries. Gaza in not completely shut off though, there's economic trade with Arab countries, Europe, Israel and the West Bank, there are NGOs operating in Gaza and foreign aid flowing in, there's UNRWA, there's the pilgrimage to Mecca, there are sick Gazans treated in Israeli hospitals, there are travel agencies. There's a lot people don't know about Gaza, Israel, and the conflict.
The two state solution has always included letting the Palestinians have East Jerusalem as the capital of their state. For a two state solution to work, Israel has to be secure from continued attack. The only way to do this is to prevent people from being able to attack them while allowing Israel the ability to defend themselves. Unfortunately the Palestinians worked to undermine the negotiations at the same time that they were pretending to participate. There was a huge coordinated effort to spread the most vile anti-Semitism imaginable across the messageboards of the world. It really poisoned the positive atmosphere for peace. I was not on this site at the time so I can't say what it was like here, but it was pretty bad on the boards that I was on. Peace requires that the Arabs and Palestinians accept Israel's existence. If they continue to attack Israel because they refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish state, that violates Israel's right to live in peace. By my recollection, the hopeful atmosphere for peace was undermined by a huge campaign of anti-Semitism across the world's messageboards, and then the peace talks broke down and collapsed.
Seriously??? Are you suggesting that the concern was for boat launched missiles that have no directional capacity? That is very hard for me to believe. First of all, there isn't some advantage in shooting undirectable missiles with limited range from FARTHER out to sea. More importantly, Gaza has every right to 12 miles. You continue to try to involve Egypt in the blockade. But, that just plain does not fly. Egypt is not blockading Gaza boat traffic. Egypt isn't denying Gaza's fishing rights. Egypt isn't threatening air traffic destined for or originating in Gaza. Think about this: If Israel were to do what Egypt is doing, there would be no legitimate claim to the existence of a blockade.
The IDF considers President Abbas to be their primary partner in security. Abbas has gotten the leadership of Gaza to agree to rejecting violent means in obtaining a negotiated settlement for the permanence of Israel and Palestine. Yet, your suggestion at least sounds like you think peace is impossible.
I am one that believes peace is not possible as it would require a sea change in attitudes on both sides, trust between the parties, and a recasting of orthodox religious views on both sides. There are too many Israelis that want Israel from river to sea and there are too many Palestinians (not to mention their fellow arabs and muslims) that wants the liberation of historic palestine - two entirely mutually exclusive end games. The nutbars on both sides have too much power.
The elected leadership of Palestine (both West Bank and Gaza) state that their objective is a negotiated settlement leaving them with security and self determination within permanent borders, along side the permanent and secure state of Israel. I agree there is a minority that does not share that objective, but allowing the majority view to fail due to a minority willing to use criminal methods does not hit me as a satisfactory outcome. And, I don't see it as justifiable in terms of security, either, as the ability to work for security will be improved, not degraded, by recognition of a permanent border as opposed to today, where ethnic cleansing and apartheid are the ruling principles of West Bank and permanent blockade and extreme poverty is the ruling principle for Gaza. These negatives are well recognized as primary ingredients for terrorism. Failing to reduce those ingredients must be viewed as unacceptable.
No disagreement but the proposal posted did not include Israel withdrawing from E Jerusalem and both sides must be able to have a military to defend themselves from attack. In the proposal posted the Palestinians were to be "demilitarized" and that's unacceptable. What individuals post cannot be allowed to jeopardize the peace process. There will always be malcontents but they are a small voice that often must be ignored. The Palestinians can only speak for the Palestinians and not for all Arabs. As stipulated in the provisions of UNSC 242 it requires both the Palestinians and the Israelis to accept each other's right to exist and to exist in peace without any threats or acts of force against each other. The Palestinians don't have to accept a "Jewish State" but they are required to accept the "State of Israel" and it's right to exist within it's internationally recognized borders and to live in peace. The Palestinians have a justification for attacking Israel because Israel has a hostile military force occupying Palestinian territory. All people have a right to defend themselves from a foreign hostile military force occupying their territory, As for others that are attacking Israel (e.g. Hezbollah) they have their own reasons unrelated to the Palestinians. Once again the last thing a diplomat should letting influence them are message boards were often the worst scum of the earth show up to post. If Israel is using that as an excuse they Israel has no excuse at all.
