- 31,668
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
Jerusalem: Israeli police hit in Palestinian car attack
Both sides are guilty in this conflict.
Israel - Palestine discussion thread
- Thread starter Beeblebrox237
- 3,544 comments
- 178,165 views
Jerusalem: Israeli police hit in Palestinian car attack
Both sides are guilty in this conflict.
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
"The Palestinian’s legal right to resist occupation—to fight for their ability to promote, sustain, and nurture human life, to fight for their right to grow, to flourish—comes from two documents: the 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the Fourth Geneva Convention and its subsequent protocols."
http://972mag.com/on-the-palestinians-legal-right-to-fight-the-occupation/30855/
That is the point... End Israel's occupation and you will save lives on both sides.
- 87,229
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Hmm. It might be the land from within their borders that Israel took back from the countries that invaded them at the moment they became Israel, but probably not the land that was within their borders that they took back and then returned at the end of the conflict - though how they're occupying either of those escapes me.
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
- 40,820
So let's go back to 1967 borders. That's sure to solve the whole problem.
Incidentally, it's things like this which is why people keep asking you questions when you keep copy-pasting things you've found around the internet with no input of your own.
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
"They" in your comment, we have to mention it is.... The United Nations.... The draft (first paragraph) "Reaffirms its (Security Counsel's) resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), 1544 (2004), 1850 (2008), 1860 (2009) and the Madrid Principals." You can find any of these resolutions on line.
The BBC link from the top of the page is referring to an incident that took place "on the seam of East and West Jerusalem, on the same junction as a previous attack last year."
East Jerusalem is an occupied territory...
Again, this is UN saying Israel needs to give those lands back, in other words, the vast majority of the international community, based on the international law.
Any jokes are defying all the deaths in the region, so out of respect, I'll invite everybody here to try to avoid them.
Of course nobody can bring back the dead, but the sooner they end the occupation, the more lives will be saved, because the locals are entitled to fight back, and, as the last 50 years show, they will continue fighting.
- 40,820
To who?
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
read the resolutions please, if you are interested
Incidentally, it's things like this which is why people keep asking you questions when you keep copy-pasting things you've found around the internet with no input of your own.
It is lack of knowledge... on international politics and U.N. previous decisions... Lack of knowledge on the issue...
Last edited:
- 31,668
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
Quite a bold statement coming from someone who on the one hand doesn't answers questions, and when an answer is provided it barely makes any sense.
- 20,933
- NJ/USA
- Blitzbay
- Blitzbay
For a conversation there needs to be a give and take. You seem to not want anyone to let us hear what YOU are trying to telling us unless you truly don't have a position.
So is this your way of telling the people posting here that you know better than everyone? Seems to defeat the purpose of a conversation.
- 3,308
- Kentucky
- Chrunch_Houston
I will probably regret this but...
You keep referring to that resolution, but it failed to get the required votes. So basically it means nothing.
You keep referring to that resolution, but it failed to get the required votes. So basically it means nothing.
- 40,820
The non-binding, failed UN resolution doesn't answer my question about who you think the land is being returned to, so unless we are to take from your blitzkrieg on the three Israel topics that your keyboard looks like this:
Who did the West Bank belong to before 1967?
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
hahahahahaha....
It failed and it's a draft, because US and Australia voted against, but, as NYTimes mentions (your link) "American officials were eager for the vote to occur this month instead of being deferred until January when the composition of the Security Council will change."
After Bibi went rampant against US president, and after Bibi made it clear he doesn't want a Palestinian state, Americans are reevaluating their support at UN, so a next Jordanian attempt might end up differently.
The draft contains all the previous Resolutions, which give a comprehensive list of UN Security Counsel decisions up to date.
If US changes its position, will be the end for Israeli occupation, because nobody will stand against it (vote for ratification of the resolution).
UN Security Council vote on Palestinian draft resolution
YES: Jordan, China, France, Russia, Luxembourg, Chad, Chile, Argentina.
NO: United States, Australia.
ABSTAINED: United Kingdom, Lithuania, Nigeria, South Korea, Rwanda.
As long as you check the sources, read the stories and use common logic, you wont regret it!
For all the other community members and their humor... hmmm... I'll repeat myself, my opinion doesn't matter. All that is important is if what is being published here is right or wrong, true or false. I am really sorry you constantly refuse to read the links, but it is not my problem.
Let me tell you what made me look closely into this long and bloody conflict.... Years ago I didn't believe in a peaceful conclusion, considering Israel a total victim and Arabs at fault. The fact that Palestinians, Jordanians or Lebanese citizens do not have a voice in western media made me think like a total ignorant. But, at some point I stopped asking myself: "What in the world can make a mother of two, go blow herself up as a suicide bomber, jeopardize her kids lives?" And that woman was not the only one to take such a radical decision. There are still many other to go embrace death over life. So... what can be so harsh, or what ideology can produce such a decision? And I understood that, for women of Islam (like any other in the world) it is only one reason - desperation. I can accept radicalism in a men's world, but not in a women's world. Ladies are different. They will always avoid conflict or harsh decisions, they will try to protect and they will not attack unless their children are under immediate threat.
edit - 2015 - http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/03/2...iticized-by-un-for-women’s-rights-violations/
and
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/CN.6/2015/5
Long story short... I start reading about both sides positions, history and rights, understood Zionism and it's anomalies. Today, thousands of people on both sides are dead and their families are also the victims of the same insanity.
Making jokes on this thread is childish. I give you a better idea...You can send those "funny" gifs, pictures, drawings or sarcastic comments in private. I don't mind guys. But please respect dead arab and israeli civilians, arab combatants, israeli soldiers and their families. They deserve respect and commitment to stop the crazy fighting.
I mentioned it before. Probably, if peace will be achieved, there will be victims still, but a lot fewer than yesterday or today. That can be a first step to a normality where Jews, Palestinians, Iraqi and all the other people in the region can sit and have tea together again, without crazy Zionism/Expansionism.
I hope Northern Ireland to be a good example of how to find peace in an almost imposible situation.
Last edited:
- 20,933
- NJ/USA
- Blitzbay
- Blitzbay
At this point you are just posting spam.
For what seems like the 70th time. The occupation of what and who are they giving the lands back to? As opposed to giving the lands to people who never had ownership of the land and every time they were asked to agree on something, they reneged because Israel wasn't giving up enough, such as their ridiculous right of return for refugees who are grandchildren of the actual refugees that the neighboring countries have no issue keeping in deprived refugee camps.
So do you have an answer, or are you going to once again, copy and paste another article as opposed to giving your opinion or your own view?
For what seems like the 70th time. The occupation of what and who are they giving the lands back to? As opposed to giving the lands to people who never had ownership of the land and every time they were asked to agree on something, they reneged because Israel wasn't giving up enough, such as their ridiculous right of return for refugees who are grandchildren of the actual refugees that the neighboring countries have no issue keeping in deprived refugee camps.
So do you have an answer, or are you going to once again, copy and paste another article as opposed to giving your opinion or your own view?
- 31,668
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
That was because of the elections, because as soon as he was re-elected he flippity-flopped like a true politician and said that he was now evaluating the options for the Palestinian question.
- 3,308
- Kentucky
- Chrunch_Houston
Thanks for the advise.
So Bibi calls Berry a poo poo head and the United States is going to change it whole diplomatic position on Israel? Keep dreaming.
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
Thanks for the advise.
So Bibi calls Berry a poo poo head and the United States is going to change it whole diplomatic position on Israel? Keep dreaming.
I'm not...
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4639609,00.html
[edit http://news.antiwar.com/2015/03/20/obama-raises-stakes-in-netanyahu-feud/
"Israeli officials referred to the 30-minute phone call as “difficult,” and said Obama gave the Israeli premier the impression that he could no longer count on the US to veto Palestinian statehood at the UN.'']
and this.... great political language..
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tension...tinue-after-netanyahus-re-election-1426690031
"The Obama administration isn't reconsidering its opposition to the Palestinians joining the ICC, a senior administration official said. However, officials demurred when asked whether they would defend Israel against a U.N. action by using U.S. veto power, an authority Washington has wielded dozens of times in recent decades on behalf of its Mideast ally.
“We’re currently evaluating our approach,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. “We’re not going to prejudge what we would do if there was a U.N. action.”
@Dannish - That was because of the elections, because as soon as he was re-elected he flippity-flopped like a true politician and said that he was now evaluating the options for the Palestinian question.
That is very unfortunate in the diplomatic world, when US is closely watching your moves. What he said was how he lied in past about willing to have implemented a 2 state solution. It is cheating, and US administrations are sensitive to this when is about Middle East peace process.
Last edited:
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Please don't insult our intelligence. You continuously post broad-brush semi-propaganda works by other people - that's either an entirely random-act-of-internet or you feel that they genuinely support a position that you'd like us to be aware of. So what is your position?
Let's presume that even without opinions you still have some factual knowledge (which I doubt). Whose land are Israel occupying?
- 31,668
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
And you continue to be unable to demonstrate that you actually know what you're talking about, the clue for us all is that you don't.
Whose lands are Israel occupying?*
*If the question is unclear in meaning then ask a teacher/adult to help in explaining it
F1jocker12
(Banned)
- 490
- Minneapolis
- GTSC_F1jocker12
You answer is to the wrong article...
Read UN Security Council Resolution 242 (Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting) and UN Security Council Resolution 338 (Adopted at the 1747th meeting by 14 votes to none.One member (China) did not participate in the voting).
.
Essentially, this is the situation with the occupied land:
Any questions you ask from here means you are questioning United Nations Resolutions... Are you sure that is what you wanna do?.. Because is pointless.
Last edited:
