U.S.A. should stop being the world police, close All overseas bases, bring ALL soldiers home from conflicts, seal its borders, cut off aid to ALL countries, repair itself from the inside out, and let everyone else fend for themselves.

Then no one can complain about the U.S.A......

U.S.A. should stop being the world police, close All overseas bases, bring ALL soldiers home from conflicts, seal its borders, cut off aid to ALL countries, repair itself from the inside out, and let everyone else fend for themselves.

Then no one can complain about the U.S.A......

Send a memo to Hillary Clinton ...

Why just this place? The US is broke. Pull support from everywhere and the troops too.

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what? Israel wasn’t a country until 1948 and even then amid very murky circumstances of bribery and threats to UN members by USA....some things never change eh.

Where’s your 2000 year old title deed?

Here’s the Zionist fantasy about a typical day in the life of a 19^th century Palestinian

“Keep those suitcases packed and strapped to the camels, guys. I just had a telepathic call from God and he tells me the descendants of his chosen people who abandoned the lease 2,000 years ago are on their way back here any century now. Whoa there son, don’t plant any corn, olive trees or orchards in this here cradle of civilization. We will only get it wrong anyway. The Zionists from Belarus and Moldova will show us how to make the desert bloom.

And maybe if we are nice to them, they will allow us to stay.”

Yes, a spot of gentle satire but in essence this is what the Zionist argument is..totally ludicrous.

Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

How is the PA the USA's enemy?

As you said above, the PA is Fatah and Fatah still has many ties to terrorism, including cheering on the kidnapping of 3 Israeli teenagers that resulted in their deaths and was probably one of the main causes of the recent Gaza war. Fatah are not as nutty as Hamas, but they are hardly our friends, although we do cooperate with them, because they are the lesser of two evils.

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what?

So, the UN tried to solve the problem by creating two countries. The Jews said yes. The Arabs said no, declared war on Israel and LOST and they have been losing ever since. That is why they have no land, no country and no economy to support their own people. All they have is more violence, which has always backfired on them and gotten them nothing other than violence in return - which they then whine about.

" Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support. Membership itself doesn't automatically incur U.S. punishment. "

Enshrined in law??? I'm flabbergasted that a country that boasts that it is the land of the free and home of the brave, the world's great democracy, the global policeman, can put into law that should another state seek to prosecute criminal activities, that the plaintiff be punished!

It essentially sends the message that the US condones Israeli crimes.

Where else in the world is a plaintiff persecuted for seeking redress for a crime? I can think of only the world's most corrupt places.

What was the rationale behind legislating that piece of law? What was the national interest that forces the US to support crimes in Israel? And we're not talking about petty crimes, either.

And it seems this persecution is because some Israeli criminals may not be able to have a holiday in Europe.

Israel; "Lets steal their drinking water so we can fill the swimming pool and water the lawn, and lets get the US to cut off direly needed aid, so we can go skiing in Switzerland (and escape punishment for heinous crimes)."

Disgusting and highly immoral.

Shame, shame shame on you United States of America.

Why the faux indignation?

Is the USA obligated to unconditionally transfer aid to the Palestinians? (or to anyone, for that matter).

As far as I am aware, every USA foreign aid bill comes with similar clauses and conditions which if triggered could result in suspension or termination of funding (thing something of the sort was mentioned on the latest Nigeria topic). In some cases these clauses are used as the administration sees fit, under current political conditions in the USA, options for the Obama administration might be somewhat limited.

The USA itself, for various reason, is not a member of the ICC. Why would it be expected to regard it as an alternative arbiter or as a legal authority regarding these matters?

The Palestinians are not "persecuted for seeking justice". They may be denied a grant based on future actions. It is not the Palestinian's "right" to receive this funding, rather it is given at the USA's discretion. There's this thing said about gift horses...

It does not seem that this condition was very offensive for the Palestinians, at least can't recall them having half the tantrums seen on some of the posts here. If it was such a matter of principal they could have just said "No, thanks".

The rationale behind this condition was to discourage sides from taking their differences to court, instead of trying to come to terms and understanding through negotiations (something which was relevant, at the time). The bill does not force the USA to support war crimes by Israel (and no need to bother with the ICC, as you passed a conviction already) - if the USA does not recognize the ICC's authority, why would it wish to sponsor appeals to the court? The USA's interest would be have been to keep tabs over negotiations, simple as that.

Again with the water thing, which is not mentioned in the OP, and not related to the topic. Again with fantasies about vacations in Europe, when the obvious implications would be for Israeli officials on state related trips.

The Palestinians were well aware of this condition when they made the ICC move - any thoughts on that?

the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 was amended by the Symington Amendment (Section 669 of the FAA) in 1976. It banned U.S. economic, and military assistance, and export credits to countries that deliver or receive, acquire or transfer nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with IAEA regulations and inspections. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 101 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what? Israel wasn’t a country until 1948 and even then amid very murky circumstances of bribery and threats to UN members by USA....some things never change eh.

Where’s your 2000 year old title deed?

Here’s the Zionist fantasy about a typical day in the life of a 19^th century Palestinian

“Keep those suitcases packed and strapped to the camels, guys. I just had a telepathic call from God and he tells me the descendants of his chosen people who abandoned the lease 2,000 years ago are on their way back here any century now. Whoa there son, don’t plant any corn, olive trees or orchards in this here cradle of civilization. We will only get it wrong anyway. The Zionists from Belarus and Moldova will show us how to make the desert bloom.

And maybe if we are nice to them, they will allow us to stay.”

Yes, a spot of gentle satire but in essence this is what the Zionist argument is..totally ludicrous.

Wrong. The Muslims stole the land of Israel from the Jews. After the Christ, who was Jewish and was born and died in Israel, Israel became increasingly Christian. But it was still Israel belonging to the Israelites.

"Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the Land of Israel was predominantly Jewish until the 3rd century.The area became increasingly Christian after the 3rd century and then largely Muslim from the 7th century conquest until the middle of the 20th century. It was a focal point of conflict between Christianity and Islam between 1096 and 1291, and from the end of the Crusades until the British conquest in 1917 was part of the Syrian province of first the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and then (from 1517) the Ottoman Empire."

Wikipedia

The "Title Deed?" The land of Israel was given back to the Jews by international decree after WWII, after it was stolen by the Muslims much earlier.

Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

"our enemies" ? You are Israeli? Ooops no. More like a Yank Israeli terrorist apologist. And of course the USA would never join the ICC, it would never be out of court itself.

Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

"our enemies" ? You are Israeli? Ooops no. More like a Yank Israeli terrorist apologist. And of course the USA would never join the ICC, it would never be out of court itself.

I would like to see the ICC try to LAY ONE FINGER on the USA or one of its citizens.

Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

"our enemies" ?

Fatah has been threatening MY country - the USA.

Fatah central committee member Abbas Zaki threatened the US following the Palestinian Authority's (PA) failed UN bid demanding recognition and Israeli withdrawals.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/189435

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qetMxvLmlYk#t=16

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what?

So, the UN tried to solve the problem by creating two countries. The Jews said yes. The Arabs said no, declared war on Israel and LOST and they have been losing ever since. That is why they have no land, no country and no economy to support their own people. All they have is more violence, which has always backfired on them and gotten them nothing other than violence in return - which they then whine about.

Of course they rejected it . Why should they agree to give 61% of the land to 31% of the population, most of whom were illegal Jewish migrants over the previous 4 decades?

In hindsight...what a wonderful counsel that is..they would have been better off accepting it.

The Palestinians thought they could do better..just like the Zionists who rejected the Peel Commission plan of 1937 partitioning Palestine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission

...but their decision resulted in the deaths of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust who might have been alive and citizens of Israel. The Zionists get it wrong sometimes too according to Ben Gurion.

Of course they rejected it .

Then they can only blame themselves and they already had Jordan - which was part of the Palestine Mandate - so your figures are - as usual - ridiculous.

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what? Israel wasn’t a country until 1948 and even then amid very murky circumstances of bribery and threats to UN members by USA....some things never change eh.

Where’s your 2000 year old title deed?

Here’s the Zionist fantasy about a typical day in the life of a 19^th century Palestinian

“Keep those suitcases packed and strapped to the camels, guys. I just had a telepathic call from God and he tells me the descendants of his chosen people who abandoned the lease 2,000 years ago are on their way back here any century now. Whoa there son, don’t plant any corn, olive trees or orchards in this here cradle of civilization. We will only get it wrong anyway. The Zionists from Belarus and Moldova will show us how to make the desert bloom.

And maybe if we are nice to them, they will allow us to stay.”

Yes, a spot of gentle satire but in essence this is what the Zionist argument is..totally ludicrous.

Wrong. The Muslims stole the land of Israel from the Jews. After the Christ, who was Jewish and was born and died in Israel, Israel became increasingly Christian. But it was still Israel belonging to the Israelites.

"Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the Land of Israel was predominantly Jewish until the 3rd century.The area became increasingly Christian after the 3rd century and then largely Muslim from the 7th century conquest until the middle of the 20th century. It was a focal point of conflict between Christianity and Islam between 1096 and 1291, and from the end of the Crusades until the British conquest in 1917 was part of the Syrian province of first the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and then (from 1517) the Ottoman Empire."

Wikipedia

The "Title Deed?" The land of Israel was given back to the Jews by international decree after WWII, after it was stolen by the Muslims much earlier.

Well, there you have it folks..and you thought I was exaggerating. This is the Zionist mentality..

God: Now hear this! I want all races and religions to return to where your ancestors were 2,000 years ago...ships and planes will be provided. Good luck.

The Palestinians thought they could do better..just like the Zionists who rejected the Peel Commission plan of 1937 partitioning Palestine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission

You have been informed that this is a LIE many times, but you continue to post it. The Jews did not reject it outright, they wanted further negotiations on the exact terms. It was - as usual - THE ARABS that rejected it completely. Don't you get tired of having your fabrications exposed?

From YOUR link:

Jewish opinion remained divided. The Twentieth Zionist Congress in Zurich (316 August 1937) announced "that the partition plan proposed by the Peel Commission is not to be accepted, [but wished] to carry on negotiations in order to clarify the exact substance of the British government's proposal for the foundation of a Jewish state in Palestine".

After all of these posts:

1. No one has attempted to show that there ever were any "Palestinians" before the 1980's with Yasser Arafat.

2. No one has attempted to show that there is now or ever has been a nation called Palestine.

3. No one has attempted to show why the USA owes the so-called "Palestinians" any money at any time, for any reason, whatsoever.

1. Because it's a given and needs no explanation. The Philistines, the Falestini....same thing, just an anglicised version of the name. 100 years ago, there was no place called Thailand, and no people called Sri Lankans. Your point makes no point except to highlight that the vast majority of current Israelis can trace their roots to Israel by no more than 3 generations or 70 odd years, while the vast majority of Palestinians have ancestral ties to the land for countless generations and many many centuries.

They have a right to be there, and they are called Palestinians.

2. Moot. They live in the area called Palestine and always have done, and they are trying to have self-determination. The state of Palestine exists.

3. They don't. What's your point? The US chooses to give aid to a beleaguered state, partially no doubt because they, the US, may feel some guilt that the Palestinian's miserable state of affairs is due largely to US sponsored crimes and aggression of Israel.

there was no falestini? 100 years ago. Again you show you don't know anything.

Morch wrote..(sorry thread full)

And really, Dexterm...after all those times you assured posters that you were in fact a friend to Israel - turns out you wish for its ultimate defeat? The heart breaks at such betrayal (if it wasn't too amusing, that is).

I am indeed a friend of Israel, more so than many of the red necks on this forum who ironically will ultimately hasten Israel’s demise as any sort of Jewish state.

I want young Israelis to spend the best years of their lives sanuking rather than being brutalized for 3 years in the army risking having their heads blown off. I want Israel to be the financial, technological, tourist and cultural hub of the entire Middle East, rather than development forever stymied by being in a constant state of war, possible European boycotts and sanctions, and surrounded by people who wont trade with them.

IMO there are 2 ways of achieving this..

2 state solution

A lasting peace for Israel within secure, recognized borders would require a just agreement acceptable to the majority of Palestinians... the main elements being 100% return to 67 borders in principle (could include land swaps), East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, compensation for refugees (incl Jewish refugees) and a token return of a few elderly ones if they wish.

Israeli security issues addressed sensibly and no shenanigans over population transfers eg Israeli Arabs

One state solution.

Israel annexes the whole of the West Bank and grants equal citizenship to the Palestinians it inherits. It is in effect that already. Israel controls every aspect of Palestinian lives including their taxes! All that's missing is citizenship.

A nuclear armed Israel can never be defeated militarily. The 2 state solution is the only way Israel can temporarily preserve anything of a state with a Jewish character...and time and land is rapidly running out for that.

Either way through the natural transmigration of people over the next 100 years Israel will cease to be a Jewish state.(That's the defeat I am talking about). No bad thing IMO. I much prefer living in a society where I don’t give a hoot about my neighbors’ color, race, or religion..just that they are decent human beings and good neighbors.

Yet yesterday you said you were mobilizing for their ultimate defeat.

with friend like you who needs enemies? by the way any luck yet with joining ISIS? They need friends like you more than Israel does.

Wrong. The Muslims stole the land of Israel from the Jews. After the Christ, who was Jewish and was born and died in Israel, Israel became increasingly Christian. But it was still Israel belonging to the Israelites.

"Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the Land of Israel was predominantly Jewish until the 3rd century.The area became increasingly Christian after the 3rd century and then largely Muslim from the 7th century conquest until the middle of the 20th century. It was a focal point of conflict between Christianity and Islam between 1096 and 1291, and from the end of the Crusades until the British conquest in 1917 was part of the Syrian province of first the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and then (from 1517) the Ottoman Empire."

Wikipedia

The "Title Deed?" The land of Israel was given back to the Jews by international decree after WWII, after it was stolen by the Muslims much earlier.

Well, there you have it folks..and you thought I was exaggerating. This is the Zionist mentality..

God: Now hear this! I want all races and religions to return to where your ancestors were 2,000 years ago...ships and planes will be provided. Good luck.

This is no such thing. The land was ruled to belong to Israel by international decree after WWII. Go talk to The League of Nations if you have a problem with the people of Israel returning to their homeland after having it stolen by Muslims in the 7th century.

The Palestinians thought they could do better..just like the Zionists who rejected the Peel Commission plan of 1937 partitioning Palestine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission

You have been informed that this is a LIE many times, but you continue to post it. The Jews did not reject it outright, they wanted further negotiations on the exact terms. It was - as usual - THE ARABS that rejected it completely. Don't you get tired of having your fabrications exposed?

From YOUR link:

Jewish opinion remained divided. The Twentieth Zionist Congress in Zurich (316 August 1937) announced "that the partition plan proposed by the Peel Commission is not to be accepted, [but wished] to carry on negotiations in order to clarify the exact substance of the British government's proposal for the foundation of a Jewish state in Palestine".

Yes his lies are exposed over and over but that doesn't stop him from repeating them. It's like talking to a brick wall.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what? Israel wasn’t a country until 1948 and even then amid very murky circumstances of bribery and threats to UN members by USA....some things never change eh.

Where’s your 2000 year old title deed?

Here’s the Zionist fantasy about a typical day in the life of a 19^th century Palestinian

“Keep those suitcases packed and strapped to the camels, guys. I just had a telepathic call from God and he tells me the descendants of his chosen people who abandoned the lease 2,000 years ago are on their way back here any century now. Whoa there son, don’t plant any corn, olive trees or orchards in this here cradle of civilization. We will only get it wrong anyway. The Zionists from Belarus and Moldova will show us how to make the desert bloom.

And maybe if we are nice to them, they will allow us to stay.”

Yes, a spot of gentle satire but in essence this is what the Zionist argument is..totally ludicrous.

Wrong. The Muslims stole the land of Israel from the Jews. After the Christ, who was Jewish and was born and died in Israel, Israel became increasingly Christian. But it was still Israel belonging to the Israelites.

"Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the Land of Israel was predominantly Jewish until the 3rd century.The area became increasingly Christian after the 3rd century and then largely Muslim from the 7th century conquest until the middle of the 20th century. It was a focal point of conflict between Christianity and Islam between 1096 and 1291, and from the end of the Crusades until the British conquest in 1917 was part of the Syrian province of first the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and then (from 1517) the Ottoman Empire."

Wikipedia

The "Title Deed?" The land of Israel was given back to the Jews by international decree after WWII, after it was stolen by the Muslims much earlier.

Well, there you have it folks..and you thought I was exaggerating. This is the Zionist mentality..

God: Now hear this! I want all races and religions to return to where your ancestors were 2,000 years ago...ships and planes will be provided. Good luck.

You are exaggerating, everything you say is unfounded lies. Believe me when I say The folks here can see who the fool is, and it isn't the Zionist's mentality.

Nobody is claiming that there existed a nation call Palestine.

If you really believe that, you have not been paying attention. The only reason that most of the usual Israel-bashers dropped this claim is that it has been proven that there was never an independent Arab country called Palestine over and over again on this forum.

However, ignorant posters - new ones - often chime in and claim that the Jews came along and stole a nation called Palestine from the "Palestinians" that already had a country there and nothing could be further from the truth. Jews, Christians and Muslims had been living in the area for many centuries. There was no central government, until the British took over the geographical area and started their own. The Jews were usually called "Palestinians" and the Arabs were called "Arabs", which is exactly what they were and they never claimed otherwise. There was no such thing as Arab "Palestinians" until they started calling themselves that long after modern Israel was born.

So what?

So, the UN tried to solve the problem by creating two countries. The Jews said yes. The Arabs said no, declared war on Israel and LOST and they have been losing ever since. That is why they have no land, no country and no economy to support their own people. All they have is more violence, which has always backfired on them and gotten them nothing other than violence in return - which they then whine about.

Of course they rejected it . Why should they agree to give 61% of the land to 31% of the population, most of whom were illegal Jewish migrants over the previous 4 decades?

In hindsight...what a wonderful counsel that is..they would have been better off accepting it.

The Palestinians thought they could do better..just like the Zionists who rejected the Peel Commission plan of 1937 partitioning Palestine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission

...but their decision resulted in the deaths of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust who might have been alive and citizens of Israel. The Zionists get it wrong sometimes too according to Ben Gurion.

You have this lie on infinite loop. The Arabs rejected the Peel Commission, Golda Meir sought further clarification of the plan, but this was already moot in line with the Arab rejection. Immigration to Palestine pre war was severely limited because of Arab pressure to do so, which contributed to the deaths of 6 million Jews, aside of course to the half million killed by the Muslim Balkan SS set up by the Mufti of Jerusalem.

After all of these posts:

1. No one has attempted to show that there ever were any "Palestinians" before the 1980's with Yasser Arafat.

2. No one has attempted to show that there is now or ever has been a nation called Palestine.

3. No one has attempted to show why the USA owes the so-called "Palestinians" any money at any time, for any reason, whatsoever.

There is no imperative to show anything.

If a large enough mass of people decide that they are a "people" then that's it. Helps if they share certain things in common, but the extant of this is not something which is set in stone.

Objectively, most of the world accepts the Palestinians as "people, "nation" "state" or whatever. Countries and organizations could have differing levels of acknowledging the Palestinians, but overall - it is a reality. There is no absolute blueprint for this sort of thing, but rather it is a process. It would be worthy to note that both the USA and Israel do recognize the Palestinians - even if this recognition may not be officially full blown. De-facto, they do, or the OP would not even be possible.

The USA did not owe the Palestinians anything. The USA did take up a certain conditional obligation to the Palestinians. With the situation looking as if the condition is about to be breached, the USA issues a warning. One may argue the issue of specific condition being immoral or showing bias, but in terms of the USA's obligations things are rather clear.

On a general note, the usual tedious, pseudo-historical debate is pretty embarrassing in terms of knowledge and arguments presented, and moreover, bears very little relevance to the actual realities of the conflict, or to viable ways which could lead toward a solution. Its most common use, by both sides, is to deflect attention and discussion from relevant on-hand issues.

It appears that the Palestinian leadership believed they could make a chess move, without someone else moving a chess piece in response.

Hardly.

Anyone who imagines that the Palestinians representatives involved in these moves are not aware of every hidden clause is mistaken. Furthermore, both sides know each other well enough to predict probable reaction, counter-reactions of each other, not to mention the same for viewers.

Most of the public indignation expressed is totally faux, but apparently necessary for domestic consumption, public opinion support and because it is the sort of thing expected under such circumstances. There are conventions to be observed and etiquette to be followed even when dealing with crisis management.

The unattainable notion of action without consequences is something which leadership sometimes tries to inspire with the support. It is simply another tool in the struggle for public opinion.

Morch wrote..(sorry thread full)

And really, Dexterm...after all those times you assured posters that you were in fact a friend to Israel - turns out you wish for its ultimate defeat? The heart breaks at such betrayal (if it wasn't too amusing, that is).

I am indeed a friend of Israel, more so than many of the red necks on this forum who ironically will ultimately hasten Israel’s demise as any sort of Jewish state.

I want young Israelis to spend the best years of their lives sanuking rather than being brutalized for 3 years in the army risking having their heads blown off. I want Israel to be the financial, technological, tourist and cultural hub of the entire Middle East, rather than development forever stymied by being in a constant state of war, possible European boycotts and sanctions, and surrounded by people who wont trade with them.

IMO there are 2 ways of achieving this..

2 state solution

A lasting peace for Israel within secure, recognized borders would require a just agreement acceptable to the majority of Palestinians... the main elements being 100% return to 67 borders in principle (could include land swaps), East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, compensation for refugees (incl Jewish refugees) and a token return of a few elderly ones if they wish.

Israeli security issues addressed sensibly and no shenanigans over population transfers eg Israeli Arabs

One state solution.

Israel annexes the whole of the West Bank and grants equal citizenship to the Palestinians it inherits. It is in effect that already. Israel controls every aspect of Palestinian lives including their taxes! All that's missing is citizenship.

A nuclear armed Israel can never be defeated militarily. The 2 state solution is the only way Israel can temporarily preserve anything of a state with a Jewish character...and time and land is rapidly running out for that.

Either way through the natural transmigration of people over the next 100 years Israel will cease to be a Jewish state.(That's the defeat I am talking about). No bad thing IMO. I much prefer living in a society where I don’t give a hoot about my neighbors’ color, race, or religion..just that they are decent human beings and good neighbors.

I see, so you are a friend of Israel, but also profess that your "motivation to activate for their ultimate defeat". Can almost see how this works, but not quite. Ultimate defeat does not sound like compromise or peace, though.

One reads your possible solutions and got to wonder about some of the hidden pearls found there.

For example, talking about a two state solution, it is deemed necessary that an agreement will be is deemed to be "acceptable to the majority of Palestinians" but no mention is made of how acceptable it needs to be for Israelis. The faux 100% 1967 territory return is not even a condition which the Palestinians really insist upon, Compensation for Jewish refugees is not something which was ever agreed upon or even discussed at detail - relevant countries are less than thrilled with the notion. Sensible security arrangements are an easy way to gloss over certain core issues, on which sides repeatedly find it hard to reach a middle ground.

There is no one in a position of relevance suggesting Israel will annexe the whole of the West Bank (certainly not the Gaza Strip) and grant Israeli citizenship to all of the Palestinians.

Not too bothered about things a 100 years down the line, really. Won't be around anyway, and if the rest of history is any indication, attempting predictions that far in the future is an exercise in futility.

Basically, then, you are a friend of Israel, who wishes it cease being Israel. My guess is that most Israelis would be hard pressed to appreciate this notion of friendship. Obviously, this may not be correct for Muslims, as your main beef seems to be with Israel ceasing to be predominantly Jewish, with less reservations expressed toward the direction it would take with a Palestinians majority. If the defeat envisaged is through demographic changes, and if these are indeed inevitable, why all the drama, anguish and violence? Just ban Durex.

On a general note, the usual tedious, pseudo-historical debate is pretty embarrassing in terms of knowledge and arguments presented, and moreover, bears very little relevance to the actual realities of the conflict, or to viable ways which could lead toward a solution. Its most common use, by both sides, is to deflect attention and discussion from relevant on-hand issues.

Agreed & it is as you basically said....There are Today two large groups

with problems to resolve.

Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

How is the PA the USA's enemy?

As you said above, the PA is Fatah and Fatah still has many ties to terrorism, including cheering on the kidnapping of 3 Israeli teenagers that resulted in their deaths and was probably one of the main causes of the recent Gaza war. Fatah are not as nutty as Hamas, but they are hardly our friends, although we do cooperate with them, because they are the lesser of two evils.

What current ties do Fatah have to recent terrorist actions against Israel or the USA?

That many Palestinians, including Fatah members expressed support for the kidnapping, for example, does not actively make them neither terrorists or enemies, certainly not enemies of the USA. Doesn't make them saints and buddies, as well.

Abbas, by the way, what pretty straightforward in condemning the kidnapping, and the PA cooperated with Israel on this matter.

Claiming lesser of two evils, regardless if this is how things are actually seen by the USA, is not the same as declaring that the PA is an enemy.

" Under American law, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support. Membership itself doesn't automatically incur U.S. punishment. "

Enshrined in law??? I'm flabbergasted that a country that boasts that it is the land of the free and home of the brave, the world's great democracy, the global policeman, can put into law that should another state seek to prosecute criminal activities, that the plaintiff be punished!

It essentially sends the message that the US condones Israeli crimes.

Where else in the world is a plaintiff persecuted for seeking redress for a crime? I can think of only the world's most corrupt places.

What was the rationale behind legislating that piece of law? What was the national interest that forces the US to support crimes in Israel? And we're not talking about petty crimes, either.

And it seems this persecution is because some Israeli criminals may not be able to have a holiday in Europe.

Israel; "Lets steal their drinking water so we can fill the swimming pool and water the lawn, and lets get the US to cut off direly needed aid, so we can go skiing in Switzerland (and escape punishment for heinous crimes)."

Disgusting and highly immoral.

Shame, shame shame on you United States of America.

Why the faux indignation?

Is the USA obligated to unconditionally transfer aid to the Palestinians? (or to anyone, for that matter).

As far as I am aware, every USA foreign aid bill comes with similar clauses and conditions which if triggered could result in suspension or termination of funding (thing something of the sort was mentioned on the latest Nigeria topic). In some cases these clauses are used as the administration sees fit, under current political conditions in the USA, options for the Obama administration might be somewhat limited.

The USA itself, for various reason, is not a member of the ICC. Why would it be expected to regard it as an alternative arbiter or as a legal authority regarding these matters?

The Palestinians are not "persecuted for seeking justice". They may be denied a grant based on future actions. It is not the Palestinian's "right" to receive this funding, rather it is given at the USA's discretion. There's this thing said about gift horses...

It does not seem that this condition was very offensive for the Palestinians, at least can't recall them having half the tantrums seen on some of the posts here. If it was such a matter of principal they could have just said "No, thanks".

The rationale behind this condition was to discourage sides from taking their differences to court, instead of trying to come to terms and understanding through negotiations (something which was relevant, at the time). The bill does not force the USA to support war crimes by Israel (and no need to bother with the ICC, as you passed a conviction already) - if the USA does not recognize the ICC's authority, why would it wish to sponsor appeals to the court? The USA's interest would be have been to keep tabs over negotiations, simple as that.

Again with the water thing, which is not mentioned in the OP, and not related to the topic. Again with fantasies about vacations in Europe, when the obvious implications would be for Israeli officials on state related trips.

The Palestinians were well aware of this condition when they made the ICC move - any thoughts on that?

the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 was amended by the Symington Amendment (Section 669 of the FAA) in 1976. It banned U.S. economic, and military assistance, and export credits to countries that deliver or receive, acquire or transfer nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with IAEA regulations and inspections. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 101 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

Unless mistaken, there is a provision included for the President to override this, citing interests of national security etc.

The USA provides Israel, India and Pakistan with military and economic assistance, and this been going on....for a while now.

Not quite sure what was the point here - that the USA does not always act in a fair, even-handed and moral way? That some countries can get away with things because of better lobbying or strategic importance? That life is not fair? I concur with all of these.

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

How is the PA the USA's enemy?

As you said above, the PA is Fatah and Fatah still has many ties to terrorism, including cheering on the kidnapping of 3 Israeli teenagers that resulted in their deaths and was probably one of the main causes of the recent Gaza war. Fatah are not as nutty as Hamas, but they are hardly our friends, although we do cooperate with them, because they are the lesser of two evils.

What current ties do Fatah have to recent terrorist actions against Israel or the USA?

That many Palestinians, including Fatah members expressed support for the kidnapping, for example, does not actively make them neither terrorists or enemies, certainly not enemies of the USA. Doesn't make them saints and buddies, as well.

Abbas, by the way, what pretty straightforward in condemning the kidnapping, and the PA cooperated with Israel on this matter.

Claiming lesser of two evils, regardless if this is how things are actually seen by the USA, is not the same as declaring that the PA is an enemy.

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Fatah-members-killed-in-Gaza-during-war-Abbas-reveals-374661

Mahmoud Abbas announced that “only 50 martyrs belonging to Hamas” were killed during Operation Protective Edge.

Abbas revealed that 861 Fatah members were killed during the operation.

Armed groups belonging to Fatah claimed during the war that they, too, had been involved in the fighting against the IDF and the firing of rockets at Israel.

Hope the above answers your question!

Very good news. They are our enemies. Why have we been giving them money in the first place?

"our enemies" ?

Fatah has been threatening MY country - the USA.

Fatah central committee member Abbas Zaki threatened the US following the Palestinian Authority's (PA) failed UN bid demanding recognition and Israeli withdrawals.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/189435

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qetMxvLmlYk#t=16

Does a nation...sorry, people...wait...this gets confusing....how can "they" be an enemy without being...nevermind.

A politician says something and that makes the Palestinians an enemy of the USA? But no issues with Israeli politicians speaking out their mind on USA administration when it doesn't act as they like? Yeah, things said were not on the same level, but compensating for what Israel gets from the USA it was pretty bad.

I was lectured, on another topic, that words are not the same as deeds. Possibly so:

Israeli settlers stone two cars belonging to US consulate staff

Israeli settlers have stoned two cars belonging to the staff of the US consulate in Jerusalem during an angry stand-off in which US security guards – according to conflicting accounts – reportedly unholstered their weapons.

The confrontation – unusual in seeing US diplomatic staff targeted – occurred between a US consular party and far-right settlers from the illegal Adei Ad outpost on the occupied West Bank on Friday.

While the initial details are sketchy it appears the US diplomats – accompanied by a security team – had been in the area after being invited by Palestinian farmers from the village of Turmus Aya, north-east of Ramallah, to examine olive saplings that had been uprooted overnight on Thursday by settlers.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/02/israeli-settlers-stone-two-cars-us-consulate-staff

Does it mean Israel is an enemy of the USA now? Nope.

As for Zaki. The best illustration I can give is think Jatuporn.