You clearly have no idea what international law is. Nor do you have any idea about the relative competencies of the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. When declarations and facts collide, facts win.
Golly gee, not according to the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab League as they didn't think there was one going on otherwise they would not have bothered to take the time and effort to declare one themselves.
"US of AIPAC" doesn't exist on any map or wet dream. If it did there wouldn't be much of a problem in the ME as Israel would occupy the entire lands from the Atlantic to Pakistan. Try returning to reality.
Not quite as long as the Arabs had been murdering them. Nobody said they were stupid Moon. Say, book your ticket to US Of AIPAC or did you defer to a sale on one to La La Land?
"Partition was unreasonable" Strange, Abbas gives mixed messages then as he wishes to have the '67 borders yet the official policy of his peoples is to destroy Israel. Hardly a partner for peace and then again, if it is unreasonable then how can he genuinely be able to negotiate for the '67 borders and how can there ever be peace?
Uh if you actually read the Arab league declaration youll see they did think there was a war going on and sought to protect the arabs from it.
Yes but since you werent actually there youve obviously read it somewhere so Id like to know where. The Palestinians from 48 mostly tried to farm their lands and feed their families rather than make war. And the Palestinians did not reject the peace deal at Camp David, that's just pure lying Israeli propaganda without any reference to the events. In fact they accepted it with less reservations.
Perhaps you'd care for a ' question and answers ' face-off ? I'll begin. Is international law consent-based or is it imposed by States with the strongest militaries ? ' Competencies ' ? Perhaps you mean ' authority ' ?
Its really quite simple , partition was unreasonable, yet the PLO has officially given up its claim to 78% of original Palestine in the late 80s. Therefore he can negotiate for the 67 borders and therefore peace is within easy reach. Moreover wishes the 67 borders, and the charter's offending parts were abrogated in the last negotiations. Abbas is more a partner for peace than any Israeli leader has ever been. Debate over, there is no possible intelligent rebuttal to these points. - - - Updated - - - LOL, thats pathetic, but go on redeem yourself ; Tell us what International law is and how this backs up your position....
International law is very limited and deals with issues that have been settled in treaties and conventions. It has nothing to do with UN declarations. And even less with what is your personal opinion of right and wrong. - - - Updated - - - No, I mean competencies. Probably too difficult a word for you.
"Security and order in Palestine have become disrupted." Why? Not war but; "The Arabs clashed with the Jews, and the two [parties] proceeded to fight each other and shed each other's blood. Whereupon the United Nations began to realise the danger of recommending the partition [of Palestine] and is still looking for a way out of this state of affairs." Their intent was to intervene by force and establish an Arab State. "Therefore, as security in Palestine is a sacred trust in the hands of the Arab States, and in order to put an end to this state of affairs and to prevent it from becoming aggravated or from turning into [a state of] chaos, the extent of which no one can foretell; in order to stop the spreading of disturbances and disorder in Palestine to the neighbouring Arab countries; in order to fill the gap brought about in the governmental machinery in Palestine as a result of the termination of the mandate and the non-establishment of a lawful successor authority, the Governments of the Arab States have found themselves compelled to intervene in Palestine solely in order to help its inhabitants restore peace and security and the rule of justice and law to their country, and in order to prevent bloodshed." Sure looks like a declaration of war to me. Did Israel ok this? Did the UN?
You said; "Partition was unreasonable" Yet the Palestinians are now trying to achieve this while at the same time vowing to destroy Israel as per their official positions. How can there be peace when one side has yet to take the destruction of the other off their official position and considers partition as "unreasonable?" Debate has yet to begin as you still have no starting point.
Peace talks and solution is possible only if both parties respect each other as humans. Israeli do not accept Palestinians as humans and Arabs hate Jews, because relationships were poisoned from start. They cannot keep world hostage of this conflict forever. To survive, Israel need friends, USA will change course, eventually. What will happen to Israel then? Another diaspora or, second coming?
Nobody is keeping the world hostage. And Israel accepts Iasraeli Arabs as citizens. Your posting just shows that you too are still having delusional dreams about Israel being wiped off the map.
' Hafrada'- the neo-Zionist equivalent of apartheid, is rife in Israel. The State does not respect the moral efforts of its own judiciary and neither does the Israeli jewish population at large. Israeli government extremists frequently express their hopes of ' transferring ' arab-Israelis out of Israel in order to create a ' jewish State '. That's a fascist concept and it hasn't yet been attempted because the world is watching. Israel's moral decline is already well-advanced but its political decline will begin in earnest just as soon as it is summoned to the international courts to answer Palestinian charges. Palestine, as a newly-recognised State, is entitled to bring its cases internationally.
Theyre not trying to achieve partition, theyre to achieve something much less ambitious. There can be peace easily as the offending bits of the charter were abrogated in the prior negotiations, and the PA has proven its willingness and ability to cooperate with the Israelis for over 10 years.... Thats how.
BALONEY... A country is recognized by its History and Archeology... Israel has been <RECONSTITUTED> on the Land of its Forefathers... The Arabs are mixture of people from the surrounding Arab States and Muslim Europe. So the wetbacks of Israel want to be independent from Israel and live on the donations from Europe and others since they do not produce anything to sustain their lives. There are 20 Million <wetbacks> in America vs <One and half million Arabs under Abbas> is this a viable proposition for an independent State? Let us for a second dream like Moon and Creation and say the 20 Million in America would like to secede, be independent from the US would this ever happen?
Which facts? Please dont act like a typical conservative and run away when someone wants to discuss matters in detail with you. Just tell me what you know and how you know it.
The historical facts. But you are too blinded by your anti-Israel agenda to have any interest in those.
LOL, it says right there in the declaration that there was a war going on already; And their intent? Pity you seek to tell us over and over again about the declaration yet dont even have the courage to tell us exactly what it says in it. And why would the Israelis ok it? It would mean theyd have to give back the houses theyd stolen already while the UN had interfered in a region and patently failed to do anything but upset millions of lives. The arab states decided to do exactly as any other regional states would do and have done, such as Europe regarding conflicts at its own borders. - - - Updated - - - Yes what historical facts and where exactly do you derive these from? Im asking a straightforward question, can you not give such an answer? If you cannot say then what is your purpose here but to trouble and troll those who wish to take prt in discussion? - - - Updated - - - Nonsense, a country is no recognised by history and archeology. Complete unfounded balderdash.
No, it has not. Israel is a synthetic State which was created by unilateral declaration - on land not belonging to it- in 1948.
Of course, it is extremely difficult for the US to support the Palestinian State because it already made the chronic error of recognising Israel on somebody else's territory in the first place. It's the Curse of Truman.
???? Most all States are created by unilateral declaration and the UK had abandoned their mandate. And the Ottoman empire before them had surrendered their sovereignty over Israel
The UK did not ' abandon ' its Mandate. It allowed the newly-formed United Nations to adopt responsibility for Palestine, a responsibility which the UN maintains to this day. The UN attempted a fair solution to the problem of the influx of so many European Zionists by offering Resolution 181, the Partition Resolution, to the General Assembly. It was adopted by majority- all arab States opposing it- but it was never implemented. The Zionists helped themselves to huge areas of the territory designated Palestinian. Israel's unilateral declaration of Statehood included territory not ascribed to it and many States have never recognised Israel as a consequence. They have a thoroughly valid legal point.
