A Palestinian village braces for Israeli demolition

[Ulysses G.]

You should not rely on amateurish blogs for historical information or post stupid smileys when you don't know what you are talking about. How could "responsibility for Palestine be handed back to the UN", when they had never had responsibility for Palestine in the first place?

On 14th May 1948 the British flag was lowered and the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel was proclaimed. ggold is correct. Palestine was never handed over to the UN.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Lissos]

I really want to join some of the discussions here but I'm sick of spending ages on responses (and on a tablet, a long and tedious job) to see entire discussions erased.

Carry on....

[Scott]

I really want to join some of the discussions here but I'm sick of spending ages on responses (and on a tablet, a long and tedious job) to see entire discussions erased.

Carry on....

Be very careful if you quote someone and make sure your post is on topic and not inflammatory and it will remain. If you quote a post and it is removed, then your post will be removed as well.

Again, numerous off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

[Ulysses G.]

The Balfour Declaration was incorporated into the Mandate for Palestine.approved by the League of Nations.

On 14th May 1948 the British flag was lowered and the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel was proclaimed. Palestine was never handed over to the UN.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[losworld]

Cutting funding to our closest ally in the Middle East would be a lot more ridiculous.

Most of the money that the USA gives Israel has been used to purchase goods and services from America, so that American aid money is recycled back into the American economy. Nearly 90% of US aid to Israel is military, and Israel spends about 75% of that purchasing U.S. goods. This aid is really an American subsidy to U.S. arms manufacturers.

Israel is a strong military ally. The security cooperation between Israel and the United States is huge, and Israel has consistently been a major security asset to the United States, an asset upon which America can rely, far more than other recipients of American funds.

Israel is the world's leading expert in collecting intelligence on terrorist groups and in counter-terrorism. It provides military intelligence and know-how to the U.S. worth far more than what we give them in Aid.

On top of intelligence, if there were no Israel, the US would have to deploy aircraft carriers to the area, along with tens of thousands of US soldiers, which would cost tens of billions of dollars annually. Gen. Alexander Haig called Israel "the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require even one US soldier, cannot be sunk, is the most cost-effective and battle-tested, located in a region which is critical to vital US interests."

There is absolutely no current strategic benefit to the U.S. allying so closely with Israel in the middle east. In fact it creates more problems then solutions. Pull out of the region altogether would make more sense. Plenty of oil to go around. You talk about terrorism but don't you think if Islamic based terrorism exists it may have a lot to do with the U.S. so closely supporting Israel? But on the other hand don't you find it a bit odd ISIS is more interested in attacking the U.S. then its supposed sworn enemy Israel? If you do a bit of research you will find that Saudi Arabia and Israel have been involved in aiding and abetting ISIS. Quite the strategy.... create the problem so you can offer a solution that works in your favor? As Rahm Emmanuel said "never waste a crisis".

Alexander Haig also said about Vietnam "if I had my way I would pave the place". Why reference such an ignorant and evil person?

Edited July 28, 2015 by losworld

[Ulysses G.]

You seem to be quite big on nutty conspiracy theories. Please provide CREDIBLE evidence that that Saudi Arabia and Israel are allied with ISIS.

[Seastallion]

You seem to be quite big on nutty conspiracy theories. Please provide CREDIBLE evidence that that Saudi Arabia and Israel are allied with ISIS.

Twisting words again. He said aiding and abetting. Big difference.

[up-country_sinclair]

There is absolutely no current strategic benefit to the U.S. allying so closely with Israel in the middle east. In fact it creates more problems then solutions.

Without a doubt. With "friends" like Israel, who needs enemies?

The needlessly provocative act of aggression described in the original post is just the most recent example of how America's relationship with Israel is detrimental to its objectives in the region and the world. Israel's despicable acts against these poor people is designed to do only one thing: steal more land from the inevitable resultant conflict

Israel is a pariah state whose repeated human rights violations undermine America's efforts to reach out to the more than 1.5 billion moderate Muslims. The US needs to stop allowing the Israeli tail to wag the dog, and rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

Edited July 28, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Ulysses G.]

Cutting funding to our closest ally in the Middle East would be a lot more ridiculous.

Most of the money that the USA gives Israel has been used to purchase goods and services from America, so that American aid money is recycled back into the American economy. Nearly 90% of US aid to Israel is military, and Israel spends about 75% of that purchasing U.S. goods. This aid is really an American subsidy to U.S. arms manufacturers.

Israel is a strong military ally. The security cooperation between Israel and the United States is huge, and Israel has consistently been a major security asset to the United States, an asset upon which America can rely, far more than other recipients of American funds.

Israel is the world's leading expert in collecting intelligence on terrorist groups and in counter-terrorism. It provides military intelligence and know-how to the U.S. worth far more than what we give them in Aid.

On top of intelligence, if there were no Israel, the US would have to deploy aircraft carriers to the area, along with tens of thousands of US soldiers, which would cost tens of billions of dollars annually. Gen. Alexander Haig called Israel "the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require even one US soldier, cannot be sunk, is the most cost-effective and battle-tested, located in a region which is critical to vital US interests."

There is absolutely no current strategic benefit to the U.S. allying so closely with Israel in the middle east.

Of course there are strategic benefits. I have listed a number of them above.

In addition, until cars and trucks can be powered by solar, wind, or nuclear energy, the entire world depends on the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf region. That requires American security guarantees, which require our presence. America will likely not become self-sufficient in energy for decades and until that happens, we need Israel as much as they need us.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Lissos]

rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

Hmmmmm

(at the risk of showing up on - "Why all the Hmmms?" guy's radar,)

[Johpa]

Israel is a pariah state whose repeated human rights violations undermine America's efforts to reach out to the more than 1.5 billion moderate Muslims. The US needs to stop allowing the Israeli tail to wag the dog, and rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

You can demonize the State of Israel all you want but that doesn't change the fact that you are arguing for the elimination of millions of people who have founded a nation-state no differently than countless other peoples whose nation-state building dispossessed others. Again your argument boils down to the tides of history need not apply to the Jews. Other parallel situations around the globe (e.g., Tibet, Kurdistan, Sri Lanka, South Asia) don't arouse any such hostilities nor do we hear the call from the anti-Israel choir for the reversal of history in those cases.

Now don't get me wrong. Given today's sensibilities, I would not support the various treaties signed in the first half of the 20th century that eventually led to the creation of the state of Israel. And I am very critical of some Israeli policies, especially as it relates to new settlements. And I am critical of the toleration of some of those policies by the US just as I am critical of the decades of US toleration of Thai government corruption at the highest levels. But the idea that somehow Israel dictates US policy, the "tail that wags the dog", is just another reiteration of the anti-Semitic Elders of Zion nonsense, as is your choice of words "rid itself of this parasite once and for all". And if you think your closeted anti-Semitism is bad, you have clearly never looked into the mainstream Muslim owned press.

By the way, Islam creates a conservative political base, not a moderate base. You would be hard pressed to count one million moderate Muslims worldwide. And those conservative Muslims conserve the essence of Islam, which is to create a global Ummah run under Shariah law. In the long term, Israel is just a sideshow in the historical tide that those 1.4 billion conservative Muslims have on their agenda sheet.

[Harveyg]

Israel is a pariah state whose repeated human rights violations undermine America's efforts to reach out to the more than 1.5 billion moderate Muslims. The US needs to stop allowing the Israeli tail to wag the dog, and rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

You can demonize the State of Israel all you want but that doesn't change the fact that you are arguing for the elimination of millions of people who have founded a nation-state no differently than countless other peoples whose nation-state building dispossessed others. Again your argument boils down to the tides of history need not apply to the Jews. Other parallel situations around the globe (e.g., Tibet, Kurdistan, Sri Lanka, South Asia) don't arouse any such hostilities nor do we hear the call from the anti-Israel choir for the reversal of history in those cases.

Now don't get me wrong. Given today's sensibilities, I would not support the various treaties signed in the first half of the 20th century that eventually led to the creation of the state of Israel. And I am very critical of some Israeli policies, especially as it relates to new settlements. And I am critical of the toleration of some of those policies by the US just as I am critical of the decades of US toleration of Thai government corruption at the highest levels. But the idea that somehow Israel dictates US policy, the "tail that wags the dog", is just another reiteration of the anti-Semitic Elders of Zion nonsense, as is your choice of words "rid itself of this parasite once and for all". And if you think your closeted anti-Semitism is bad, you have clearly never looked into the mainstream Muslim owned press.

By the way, Islam creates a conservative political base, not a moderate base. You would be hard pressed to count one million moderate Muslims worldwide. And those conservative Muslims conserve the essence of Islam, which is to create a global Ummah run under Shariah law. In the long term, Israel is just a sideshow in the historical tide that those 1.4 billion conservative Muslims have on their agenda sheet.

Have to agree with much of the above. Additionally, although I don't know the Israel criticizers here(putting it gently) I want to reiterate that words like parasite and such directed at Israel suggests the character of "upper Sinclair" and perhaps some others as outlined by Jopah above. IMHO it renders your words as emanating from source that me and my family are quite familiar with.

On the one hand there seems to be some somewhat well researched info on both sides of the Israeli Arab issue but the dearth of criticism of Arab actions is deafening.

But on another note - a query to all...

I've wondered how much the Palestinians are victims of Hamas and in turn by Itan. How many strings are being pulled at the expense of these people from the Arab side. I have no idea. Does the Arab side gain from ongoing tension and no peace. Is no peace better for Iran in its goal of Middle East domination??

Thoughts welcome....

[up-country_sinclair]

Israel is a pariah state whose repeated human rights violations undermine America's efforts to reach out to the more than 1.5 billion moderate Muslims. The US needs to stop allowing the Israeli tail to wag the dog, and rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

You can demonize the State of Israel all you want but that doesn't change the fact that you are arguing for the elimination of millions of people

I've argued for nothing of the kind.

If some other nation were committing these same atrocities and human rights violations (for example, like that in the original post) against citizens of Israel, I would be expressing the exact same level of outrage.

I am a committed agnostic and don't have any interest in the religious beliefs of others.

[up-country_sinclair]

rid itself of this parasite once and for all.

Hmmmmm

(at the risk of showing up on - "Why all the Hmmms?" guy's radar,)

How exactly does the US benefit from its unquestioning support of Israel? It doesn't.

Israel is a weight that has been pulling the US down for decades. A geopolitical "cost/benefit" analysis makes that abundantly clear.

Take for example the Israeli actions detailed in original post. How does that benefit the strategic interests of the US in the region and the rest of the world? And events like this tragically happen all the time. And every time it happens, the US suffers.

And when Israeli government officials try publicly embarrass a sitting US president and secretary of state, then it is even more obvious that the host needs to take a stand and say "good riddance ".

[Lissos]

so there is hope that a campaign will start and be successful in forcing Israel back to the legal 1948 border.

That campaign has been operating in a myriad of forms and from different angles for decades already. And to quote the Father of an Omani friend of mine when I was at their house in Muscat - "Once Israel shrinks to her 48 borders, she cannot survive much longer". Two things to note - he said it with blatant conspiratorial malice, and his tone of "she" came across as patriarchal intent to whip a disobedient little 'Bint' into the dust.

Despite this, I got on well with his father in other ways (even though his son was embarrassed by his fiery views) but from that moment on I knew I could never ever trust that the sweet talk of Arabs for seeking of concessions was anything but part of a long term strategy of weakening Israel's armour so that a day will come where they can go for the jugular and slaughter it for good. I of course didn't bite at the time, because I'm not stupid enough to argue Israel's case while a guest in an Arab home.

At the time I feigned total ignorance of the conflict, to gather an insight.

[dexterm]

Sorry, thread full..

ggold wrote,

If the Arabs don't want peace who do you suggest the land is given too? As they say here in Thailand "up to" the Arabs if they want peace they will have their land. If they don't want peace then Israel has every right to develop and use the land as they wish.

The Arabs do indeed want peace. The Arab Peace Initiative has been on the table for discussion since 2002. And we have been tantalizingly close to it twice already.

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

The actions of the current right wing Israeli government in further displacing resident Palestinians in the OP while allowing illegal Jewish colonists to steal more land is a serious obstacle.

Clearly it is the Israelis who do not want peace. If they sincerely do, the first step would be to end the occupation or give equal rights to the Palestinians they are occupying.

[dexterm]

so there is hope that a campaign will start and be successful in forcing Israel back to the legal 1948 border.

That campaign has been operating in a myriad of forms and from different angles for decades already. And to quote the Father of an Omani friend of mine when I was at their house in Muscat - "Once Israel shrinks to her 48 borders, she cannot survive much longer". Two things to note - he said it with blatant conspiratorial malice, and his tone of "she" came across as patriarchal intent to whip a disobedient little 'Bint' into the dust.

Despite this, I got on well with his father in other ways (even though his son was embarrassed by his fiery views) but from that moment on I knew I could never ever trust that the sweet talk of Arabs for seeking of concessions was anything but part of a long term strategy of weakening Israel's armour so that a day will come where they can go for the jugular and slaughter it for good. I of course didn't bite at the time, because I'm not stupid enough to argue Israel's case while a guest in an Arab home.

At the time I feigned total ignorance of the conflict, to gather an insight.

Israel's 48 cease fire lines already gives them more than was agreed on in the Mandate. They should be well satisfied with their existing land theft. If they want even more than that by annexing the West Bank too, then they should grant equal citizenship to the Palestinians they are occupying. Israel can't have its cake and eat it too.

Edited July 29, 2015 by dexterm

[Lissos]

Israel can't have its cake and eat it too.

In case you hadn't noticed, it can and does.

[Ulysses G.]

so there is hope that a campaign will start and be successful in forcing Israel back to the legal 1948 border.

That campaign has been operating in a myriad of forms and from different angles for decades already. And to quote the Father of an Omani friend of mine when I was at their house in Muscat - "Once Israel shrinks to her 48 borders, she cannot survive much longer". Two things to note - he said it with blatant conspiratorial malice, and his tone of "she" came across as patriarchal intent to whip a disobedient little 'Bint' into the dust.

Despite this, I got on well with his father in other ways (even though his son was embarrassed by his fiery views) but from that moment on I knew I could never ever trust that the sweet talk of Arabs for seeking of concessions was anything but part of a long term strategy of weakening Israel's armour so that a day will come where they can go for the jugular and slaughter it for good. I of course didn't bite at the time, because I'm not stupid enough to argue Israel's case while a guest in an Arab home.

At the time I feigned total ignorance of the conflict, to gather an insight.

Israel's 48 cease fire lines already gives them more than was agreed on in the Mandate. They should be well satisfied with their existing land theft.

The Arabs turned down that deal, declared war several times and have been fighting ever since. They blew their chance. There was no "theft".

[dexterm]

Israel can't have its cake and eat it too.

In case you hadn't noticed, it can and does.

..and that is precisely the root of the whole problem....Israeli greed and its perception courtesy of the US umbrella that it's business as usual with impunity.

20-30 years ago Israel would have gotten away with the land grab in the OP, but now they are facing fierce criticism from the EU and even USA. This time through the social and international media the whole world is watching. The times they are a changin.

As more people become aware of Israel behaving badly, pressure for change will mount. The endgame is near.

Edited July 29, 2015 by dexterm

[Steely Dan]

The Arabs do indeed want peace. The Arab Peace Initiative has been on the table for discussion since 2002. And we have been tantalizingly close to it twice already.

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

The actions of the current right wing Israeli government in further displacing resident Palestinians in the OP while allowing illegal Jewish colonists to steal more land is a serious obstacle.

Clearly it is the Israelis who do not want peace. If they sincerely do, the first step would be to end the occupation or give equal rights to the Palestinians they are occupying.

You are scarcely even worth replying to, but just this once. Palestinian leadership launches investigation into alleged talks between Palestinians and Israel. It is the official Palestinian position to have no dialogue with Israel. Now who is it who does not want peace?

http://m.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/PLO-to-investigate-reports-of-secret-talks-between-Palestinian-and-Israeli-officials-410436

Edited July 29, 2015 by Steely Dan

[dexterm]

so there is hope that a campaign will start and be successful in forcing Israel back to the legal 1948 border.

That campaign has been operating in a myriad of forms and from different angles for decades already. And to quote the Father of an Omani friend of mine when I was at their house in Muscat - "Once Israel shrinks to her 48 borders, she cannot survive much longer". Two things to note - he said it with blatant conspiratorial malice, and his tone of "she" came across as patriarchal intent to whip a disobedient little 'Bint' into the dust.

Despite this, I got on well with his father in other ways (even though his son was embarrassed by his fiery views) but from that moment on I knew I could never ever trust that the sweet talk of Arabs for seeking of concessions was anything but part of a long term strategy of weakening Israel's armour so that a day will come where they can go for the jugular and slaughter it for good. I of course didn't bite at the time, because I'm not stupid enough to argue Israel's case while a guest in an Arab home.

At the time I feigned total ignorance of the conflict, to gather an insight.

Israel's 48 cease fire lines already gives them more than was agreed on in the Mandate. They should be well satisfied with their existing land theft.

The Arabs turned down that deal, declared war several times and have been fighting ever since. They blew their chance. There was no "theft".

Just because the bully wins does not make it right.

Maybe you would like the world to accept Israel behaving like Genghis Khan, but in the 21st century the global community won't allow it.

Israel is a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention. If it doesn't like the law it should never have signed up for it.

https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreatiesByCountrySelected.xsp?xp_countrySelected=IL

Under international law a state cannot capture territory, annex it as its own, displace the existing population and transfer its own people there.

Occupied territories

Articles 47-78 impose substantial obligations on occupying powers. As well as numerous provisions for the general welfare of the inhabitants of an occupied territory, an occupier may not forcibly deport protected persons, or deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory (Art.49).

Art. 49. Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Section_III._Occupied_territories

[dexterm]

The Arabs do indeed want peace. The Arab Peace Initiative has been on the table for discussion since 2002. And we have been tantalizingly close to it twice already.

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

The actions of the current right wing Israeli government in further displacing resident Palestinians in the OP while allowing illegal Jewish colonists to steal more land is a serious obstacle.

Clearly it is the Israelis who do not want peace. If they sincerely do, the first step would be to end the occupation or give equal rights to the Palestinians they are occupying.

You are scarcely even worth replying to, but just this once. Palestinian leadership launches investigation into alleged talks between Palestinians and Israel. It is the official Palestinian position to have no dialogue with Israel. Now who is it who does not want peace?

http://m.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/PLO-to-investigate-reports-of-secret-talks-between-Palestinian-and-Israeli-officials-410436

Your report (if true?) refers to secret talks....thankfully they are always taking place...no doubt between Israel and Hamas too.

Israel scuppered formal talks via Kerry last year. If it wants to show goodwill and genuine desire for peace it should stop building settlements as in the OP on stolen land destined for a future Palestinian state.

[Ulysses G.]

Just because the bully wins does not make it right.

The bully was the Arabs who started attacking Jews when they greatly outnumbered them.

The bully was the one who attacked tiny Israel with 5 Arab armies and LOST.

The Arabs turned down the deal for their own country, declared war on Israel numerous times and have been fighting ever since. They blew their chance for the 48 borders.

[Lissos]

Regarding earlier mention of a - "Global Community" which will not allow Genghis Khan-esque actions. 'What' Global "Community" is that, exactly?

[dexterm]

Just because the bully wins does not make it right.

The bully was the Arabs who started attacking Jews when they greatly outnumbered them.

The bully was the one who attacked tiny Israel with 5 Arab armies and LOST.

The Arabs turned down the deal for their own country, declared war on Israel numerous times and have been fighting ever since. They blew their chance for the 48 borders.

No time for your phony re writing of 1947 history today; we have been there many times before. I fear we are drifting off topic... get with the present ...an illegal (in the eyes of the EU and USA) Israeli land grab in 2015...and look towards a future solution to the conflict.

Edited July 29, 2015 by dexterm

[dexterm]

Regarding earlier mention of a - "Global Community" which will not allow Genghis Khan-esque actions. 'What' Global "Community" is that, exactly?

70% of the world's sovereign states with more to follow, who have already recognized Palestinians' right to self determination.

"As of 30 October 2014, 135 (69.9%) of the 193 member states of the United Nations and two non-member states have recognised the State of Palestine. Many of the countries that do not recognise the State of Palestine nevertheless recognise the PLO as the "representative of the Palestinian people". On 29 November 2012, the UN General Assembly passed a motion changing Palestine's "entity" status to "non-member observer state" by a vote of 138 to 9, with 41 abstentions"

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

[Lissos]

Furthermore, regarding the comment :

"Just because the bully wins does not make it right"

If 48 is the discussion, the 'actual' bully lost that war.

Essentially the Muslim world pulled a 'Thai face loss' stunt, akin to one fella gathering 20 mates because Falang asserted himself. 20 mates then fully intend to f% Falang over with pool cues and machetes. In 48 the Thai gang was shocked to be largely defeated. One of them, Jordan, nabbed territory for 19 years though, not once considered making it a 'Palestinian' state. Nobody appears to have given a toss about the time Jordan had it, and had the Jews lost 48 and been massacred, not a word would be whinged today. It would be dismissed as - "Well, they asked for it, and winners are winners" so let's not pretend that we find winning unpalatable / not right.

edit : fixing broken italics bracket. ha!

Edited July 29, 2015 by Lissos

[Lissos]

70% of the world's sovereign states with more to follow, who have already recognized Palestinians' right to self determination

I see what amounts to an agreement on paper about a 'concept', rather like the Balfour declaration and we all know the Balfour declaration didn't magically hand or create a homeland for Jews. So, good luck bringing an agreement on paper to fruition. Israel knows from bitter experience that there is far more to nation building than a bunch of clueless suits far from the theatre itself, nodding their heads like donkeys to great applause.

edit : why break the habit of a lifetime? Fixing broken quote brackets

Edited July 29, 2015 by Lissos

[dexterm]

70% of the world's sovereign states with more to follow, who have already recognized Palestinians' right to self determination

I see what amounts to an agreement on paper about a 'concept', rather like the Balfour declaration and we all know the Balfour declaration didn't magically hand or create a homeland for Jews. So, good luck bringing an agreement on paper to fruition. Israel knows from bitter experience that there is far more to nation building than a bunch of clueless suits far from the theatre itself, nodding their heads like donkeys to great applause.

edit : why break the habit of a lifetime? Fixing broken quote brackets

No time to debate dusty antediluvian illegal and irrelevant letters from an immoral British government today. Get on topic and look towards the future.

Edited July 29, 2015 by dexterm