Israel could lose its only ally over settlements

I believe the high source in the Israeli government that a warning was given but not an "ultimatum".

 

As I interpreted the American backpedaling in Post # 15, this will be taken as the green light to the Israelis to continue building settlements in the West Bank. The following day the Israel Defense Minister, Moshe Ya'alon, declared, “We built in the past. We’re building in the present. We will build in the future.” The Israel Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu added, “We built a lot, including recently.”
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-settlement-expansion-ongoing-but-best-to-keep-it-under-wraps/
Calling the American President's bluff in his Middle East policy, is not a very hard thing to do these days.

 

According to the US State Department, the US hasnt made an ultimatum to Israel nor about the US vetoes, hence, you cant say that you believe to the US State Department while saying that you believe that there was a warning when the US State Department rejects it.

 

There are degrees of truth, you know.

 

You said that you believe to the US State Department regarding this subject, which means that you believe that the US did put an ultmatum to Israel nor made any warning.

 

I believe we got two versions of the event and I believe them both. The State Department says no ultimatum was given so it was a warning. The top Israeli government source took this to mean an ultimatum but the State Department seems to be anxious to downplay the matter. Instead of an ultimatum or a warning perhaps a caution might be acceptable. What Obama was not counting on was the leaking by an Israeli government source of his private telephone conversation with Netanyahu. Netanyahu called his bluff.

 

As I already wrote and showed you in post #11:
According to the US State Department spokesman Mark Toner, there was no such warning from the White House.

As he said:

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Co...uilding-421136

The "warning" the you are talking about, was brought up by the settlers as a fear. But as you can see, according to the US State Department, there was no such warning from the White House. Hence if you believe the US State Department, then you believe that there was no ultimatum that was given to the Israel, nor a warning.

 

You do not know the difference between "ultimatum" and "warning". Really, I do not blame you; there is no difference.

 

So if there is no difference between "ultimatum" and "warning", then if you believe that an ultimatum wasnt given to Israel, then you cant believe that a warning was given, since "ultimatum" and "warning" is the same.

 

I agree, these spokesmen make a living out of doublespeak.

 

You agreed with the US State Department when he stated that an ultimatum wasnt issued by the US, and since you agreed with that, then you cant now say that warning been made, since "ultmatum" and "warning" are the same, as you wrote in post #33.

 

I am sorry, stuntman, perhaps you should take the matter up with The Times of Israel and the US State Department. I cannot answer for either. But, there is no smoke without fire.

 

You clearly stated that you are agreeing with the US State Department which said that the US hasnt issued any warning/ultimatum to Israel, so it means that you cant now say that the US did issued one. I dont understand why you are avoiding your own comments.

 

Forgive me but I cannot put it any simpler for you. Neither you nor I are privy to the telephone call President Obama made to Prime Minister Netanyahu. Two conflicting accounts of the phone call have been reported; one from the Israelis and one from the Americans. I have no reason to doubt either. I told you what I think. What more do you want me to say?

 

I want you to not avoid your own comments. In post #12 you clearly stated that you agree with the statement that came out from the US State Department, and according to that you cant say that you believe that a warning was issued, when you before that said that you believe they did not issued one.

 

I believe there was a warning or caution issued by President Obama to Prime Minister Netanyahu but that it was couched in terms that woulld allow the State Department to deny it should the Israelis spill the beans. This is what diplomats do all the time.

 

You said that you believe to the US State Department regarding this subject in post #12, which means that you believe that the US didnt put an ultmatum to Israel. Hence, you cant now say that the US did issued a warning.

 

USA has already voted for or allowed many UNSC resolutions declaring the settlements and the annexation of East Jerusalem to be illegal.

 

Not in the powerful Security Council.

 

You are 100% wrong

 

Prove it.

 

It does not contradict that the US didnt put a warning to Israel regarding the US vetoes.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_252

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_267

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_298

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_446

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_452

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_465

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_471

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_476

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_605



is that enough for you?

 

This does not mention the Settlements, specifically. The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This does not mention Settlements, specifically. The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This does not mention Settlements, specifically.

The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This is the sole instance of the United States voting the settlements to be illegal but this action was done accidentally. (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MFADocuments/Yearbook4/Pages/69%20Security%20Council%20Resolution%20465%20-1980-%20on%20the%20s.aspx) This was an embarrassment for the Americans and, strictly speaking, you are correct about this single vote.

The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This does not mention the Settlements, specifically. The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This does not mention the Settlements, specifically. The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

This does not mention the Settlements, specifically. The United States abstained and did not use its veto.

Yes, it is proof that the occupation of Palestinian Territories, including East Jerusalem, and administrative actions of Israel, including the building of Settlements, is illegal. You cited ten Security Council Resolutions and although the United States voted for only 2 (one "in error"), by not using its veto in the other 8 a votes, could be made for the correctness of your statement that the "USA has already voted for or allowed many UNSC resolutions declaring the settlements and the annexation of East Jerusalem to be illegal." I grant you that 10 are many.

 

choosing to not use its Veto power but instead abstaining from the vote, allows the opposing side to win the vote and get the resolution passed.

when you know that everyone else is voting YES, and you don't vote, you are as good as voting YES.