Australia recognises West Jerusalem as Israel's capital - PM Morrison

[bristolboy]

On 12/17/2018 at 9:06 PM, Morch said:

 

If you were indeed referring to West Jerusalem, then de facto, most of the world actually accepts the premise. Not formally, of course, but almost all the discussed two-state formulations rely on this acceptance.

 

Going by legalities here is somewhat tangled, as the original partition plan did not grant overall sovereignty of the city to either side. The East-West division is itself a de facto product of historical events. Nowadays, it is, at most, relevant only as far as ideas governing the holy sites under a future peace agreements. I don't think that there were much serious attempts at applying it to the city as a whole.

Slip of the keyboard. Meant East Jerusalem.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I put myself in the position of the Palestinians that owned the land that the UN arbitrarily confiscated for the Zionists, and if I were one of them I'd have certainly not agreed with the existence of Israel. However, the thread is about Jerusalem, not the existence of Israel per se. I doubt that anyone can say that Israel legally "owns" Jerusalem, except through conquest.

Deflect away though. 

BTW, how can you claim that I have "hatred" in my heart. The only time I even give Israel a thought is when I see threads about it on TVF.

 

The Palestinians did not "own the land", though - other than if one applies some serious amount of historical revisionism. They weren't even labeling or defining themselves as Palestinians for quite some time. But as you concur, this topic isn't about that brand of nonsense commentary.

 

As for "deflecting", that would be yourself hijacking the topic to discuss an off-topic pet issue.

 

It's kinda funny that you go on about the "legalities", while denouncing the authority of relevant international bodies when it suits. Addressed earlier, and on numerous past topics, but let's have another go - with reference to the original partition plan, neither side's claims to the city (or even parts of it) are well founded. But be that as it may, and taking into account the daftness of the original conceptualization, there's a situation brought about by actual events.

 

There is no plausible way to make the original proposal a working reality, and so, the best way forward would be to accept claims by both sides to respective parts of the city, while trying to broker some sort of an agreement regarding control of the holy sites. 

 

I have no idea what you do or think about outside of TVF, my comments are in response to the attitude and views you routinely present on relevant topics.