israel criticizes aregentina and brazil for recognizing palestinian st

[dre]

My point is that it is a joke and doesn't work...and at this rate...never will. Brought to you by the same idiots that gave us Durban and anti-blasphemy laws and over 200 resolutions against Israel while saying/doing sfa about dozens of other conflict areas. Not enough juice, apparently.

My point is that it is a joke and doesn't work.

You cant judge whether it works or not because you dont even have an elementary understanding of what it is. You think "international law" is the UN General assembly judging by your posts. Its not. Its a system of international treaties that become part of each countries domestic legal system.

Without this patchwork of international agreement that mostly came after WW2, we would be on about WW7 by now.

[Wild Bill]

You cant judge whether it works or not because you dont even have an elementary understanding of what it is. You think "international law" is the UN General assembly judging by your posts. Its not. Its a system of international treaties that become part of each countries domestic legal system.

Without this patchwork of international agreement that mostly came after WW2, we would be on about WW7 by now.

Ok! Some folks were a little confused between International Law and the UN.

Now that you straightened that out, what are we left with? THE UN IS A JOKE!

I think you picked apart their model and not their point.

[Argus]

Because keeping them in a perpetual state of statelessness is one of the main reasons for terrorism there.

Really? Most terrorism in the world is Muslim, and virtually none of it is related to Palestine. What makes you think that giving Palestinians their tiny, shithole country - with no money or resources, and no history or culture or desire for democratic institutions - would actually improve anything there?

What you would get, as of now, would be a yemen-like country run by Islamists. And that's going to be useful to the world, how exactly?

[Argus]

You make it sound like Israel is under seige and they really arent.

So if the Israelis tear down all their walls and barbed wire border defenses and do away with all the protection for their buildings and aircraft and airports and such, as well as drastically reducing the size of the IDF - that will be the start of a life of peace for them?

[DogOnPorch]

Ok! Some folks were a little confused between International Law and the UN.

Jus inter gentes/jus gentium...the only one confused around here is dre.

Now that you straightened that out, what are we left with? THE UN IS A JOKE!

I think you picked apart their model and not their point.

When dealing with flamers like dre, you have to recall two things: He's always right and you're always wrong.

[DogOnPorch]

What you would get, as of now, would be a yemen-like country run by Islamists. And that's going to be useful to the world, how exactly?

Useful as an excellent source of Mein Kampf translated into Arabic, I suppose. Perhaps as a source of pre-teen brides, as well.

[myata]

Clinton: "negotiated" two states is inevitable (Clinton on Middle East

Some highlights:

And she said the establishment of a Palestinian state through negotiations is "inevitable."

I wonder what kind of "negotiations" Ms Clinton had in her mind when its clear as daylight that at least one side - Israeli to be clear, have no intent of genuine, in good faith negotiations that obviously presume cessation of all aggressive activities?

Clinton made clear that she believes the Israelis and Palestinians are ultimately responsible for settling their long conflict.

"Unfortunately, as we have learned, the parties in this conflict have often not been ready to take the necessary steps," she said. "They must take responsibility and make the difficult decisions that peace requires."

Yeah right. It'll remain our little Polichinelle secret, which one particular side of the conflict has been receiving massive assistance including military one, no matter what they do (and don't). That part of the puzzle will of course keep avoiding Ms Clinton's otherwise comprehensive analysis of situation. So no, dont expect this part of responsibility being addressed (or even recognized) anytime soon.

And so it must be clear by now that US pseudo-mediation is failing as utterly as is flawed its very premise (that one can be a strong unconditional ally; and a genuine mediator of the conflict ally is involved in, all at the same time). It high time to discard it to the pile of other well spoken but never intended to go anywhere near practice political babble. The world should go on with recognizing Palestine as a state occupied by foreign power at take it from there.

Edited December 11, 2010 by myata

[bush_cheney2004]

.....And so it must be clear by now that US pseudo-mediation is failing as utterly as is flawed its very premise (that one can be a strong unconditional ally; and a genuine mediator of the conflict ally is involved in, all at the same time). It high time to discard it to the pile of other well spoken but never intended to go anywhere near practice political babble. The world should go on with recognizing Palestine as a state occupied by foreign power at take it from there.

That's what they said in 1979 too....Egypt and Jordan disagreed. The "world" was a great help then too [/sarcasm].

[myata]

Sorry, could resist commenting this one, from the same source, but by Nobel prize winning pres himself (highlight myata):

"A sophisticated and thoughtful American approach to Middle East issues is essential, but not enough," he said. "America has to demonstrate its determination to stand up to the enemies of peace, of Israel and of our moderate neighbors."

And what if (speaking hypothetically of course) one of the parties quoted.... say, the first one quoted itself would merit a place among those, you know... "of peace"?! Not in the least by their persistent, never abating or compromising act?

How would we address (or even comprehend) that logical conundrum?!

[dre]

So if the Israelis tear down all their walls and barbed wire border defenses and do away with all the protection for their buildings and aircraft and airports and such, as well as drastically reducing the size of the IDF - that will be the start of a life of peace for them?

I never said they should tear down any border walls... except the one that they build deep in palestinian territoriy for the purpose of a land grab. It should be rebuilt on the actual border.

But beyond that... I think walls are a great idea. I would build two hundred foot high walls a mile apart along the border... and put about 10 million land mines between them. That MIGHT help stop those two gangs of abject morons from constantly trying to fuck each other over. I wouldnt count on it though.

[dre]

Really? Most terrorism in the world is Muslim, and virtually none of it is related to Palestine. What makes you think that giving Palestinians their tiny, shithole country - with no money or resources, and no history or culture or desire for democratic institutions - would actually improve anything there?

What you would get, as of now, would be a yemen-like country run by Islamists. And that's going to be useful to the world, how exactly?

It would be more useful than having CONFLICT: DIRTFARM go on for another 60 years, and having the jews and palestinians remain global beggars and welfare recipients.

Dozens of conflict have come and gone, and many have been resolved. But CONFLICT:DIRTFARM is like a bad TV series that runs for 60 years. Those people are an embarrassment to the human race.

[Bonam]

But beyond that... I think walls are a great idea. I would build two hundred foot high walls a mile apart along the border... and put about 10 million land mines between them.

I support this idea. Also, you'd need to add multiple layers of anti-missile and anti-mortar defenses along the wall to shoot down random terrorist rockets and shells.

[Bonam]

It would be more useful than having CONFLICT: DIRTFARM go on for another 60 years, and having the jews and palestinians remain global beggars and welfare recipients.

The Palestinians may be beggars and "welfare recipients" but the same can hardly be said of Israel. While Israel does receive military aid from the US, its economic output and trade with the US and other countries far far exceeds that. Not only that, but many important advancements in electronics technology, medical technology, solar energy technology, and desalination technology originate in Israel, and the entire world benefits from these.

[KeyStone]

And until the palestinians unequivically recognise Israel, dismantle the terrorist networks and conclude a peace treaty, why would they? Why would anyone want to give that terrorist incubator any legitiomacy at all?

That's the biggest myth of all.

There is no group in Palestine that can completely shut down the attacks on Israel, and Israel knows this very well.

So, all their agreements revolve around ending the attacks, so that when an attack invariably occurs, Israel can opt out of the accords, and claim that it was the Palestinians that failed to live up their end of the bargain.

If Israel wants to negotiate in good faith, they need to factor in occasional rocket attacks etc, and put in place a mechanism for dealing with them, that discourages Palestine from doing them, but does not completely dismantle all progress towards a solution.

The simple truth is that if you have five children killed by drone missiles, you are never going to want peace with Israel. Likewise, if you had your three children killed on a bus blown up by a Palestinian suicide bomber, you will never want peace with Palestine. We need to stop letting the extremists sabotage the entire peace process.

But, that of course, requires a will to actually see the peace process happen, which may or may not be Israel's aim.

[DogOnPorch]

If Israel wants to negotiate in good faith, they need to factor in occasional rocket attacks etc, and put in place a mechanism for dealing with them, that discourages Palestine from doing them, but does not completely dismantle all progress towards a solution.

That's nuts. It's like saying you should factor in the occasional gunshot wound to the kneecap if you're unlucky enough to live next to a crack house so as not to upset the junkies inside.

[myata]

That's the biggest myth of all.

There is no group in Palestine that can completely shut down the attacks on Israel, and Israel knows this very well.

So, all their agreements revolve around ending the attacks, so that when an attack invariably occurs, Israel can opt out of the accords, and claim that it was the Palestinians that failed to live up their end of the bargain.

There's a couple of obvious differences that must be highlighted here,

First one is between belligerent, aggressive policy endorsed and perpetrated by the state, such as construction of settlements on the occupied territory; and hostilities initiated by isolated, private groups. To the best of my knowledge, attacks on Israel are limited to one isolated local area (border of Gaza) perpetrated by several splinter groups - as far as I'm aware, even participation of Hamaz in these attacks haven't yet been proven. Till that is proven beyond speculation, to somehow insist on equating state policy of aggression perpetrated by Israel with attacks by isolated groups is pure nonsense.

Second is of course that everybody should and does have lawful right to resist oppression and aggression, even by force if necessary. So the attacks perpetrated by Israel in the occupied territories can in no way be equated with armed resistence to occupying forces outside of Israel proper.

For that reason the logical and fair requirement for in good faith participation in negotiations should be: complete cessation of aggressive land acquisition in the occupied territories by Israel; and complete cessation of state endorsed attacks on Isreal proper, plus a genuine effort in curbing and persuing initiators of such attacks by Palestinians. Cessation of resistence in the occupied territories can never be required while occupation persists (it would be equivalent to approving and endorsing occupation) although temporary truths can be negotated as needed.

Edited December 12, 2010 by myata

[DogOnPorch]

...plus a genuine effort in curbing and persuing initiators of such attacks by Palestinians.

I'm sure they'll get right on it.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm sure they'll get right on it.

LOL! The only "genuine effort" I've seen to date comes from the IDF.

[DogOnPorch]

LOL! The only "genuine effort" I've seen to date comes from the IDF.

No worries...No doubt a "Stop The Rockets" flotilla is being organised as we speak.

Edited December 12, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[myata]

Remember that part, "beyond speculation"? It is a clear fact now that the current government of Israel endorses and perpetrates aggression, that from any logical point of view should nullify its claims to genuinely seeking the peace. Now it's your turn to prove, beyond speculation or all-knowing but still all hollow from factual perspective cheerleading that the opposite side is involved in anything of the kind.

So your turn, only facts and proven evidence please, or we'll just have to assume that beside self assuring and confidence building cheering you have very litte (or nothing at all?) to show.

[Bob]

Whatever the motivation(s) for the recent recognition of Palestinian statehood from several South American states, it's the wrong decision to make, morally and practically - at least with respect to the "peace process".

These states certainly have greater economic ties to the Arab states, and are inclined to support their positions at least in the sense of maintaining relations. These states have much more to lose economically from upsetting the Arab states than upsetting tiny little Israel. Beyond that, I have a suspicion that the leaders of the South American countries that recently extended their recognition of Palestinian statehood in all the territory east of the 1948 armistice lines (deceitfully described by the villainous and the ignorant alike as "1967 borders") sincerely believe that that land, at a minimum, belongs to the Palestinians. I don't think they're merely playing politics, but acting on warped moralities and/or massive ignorance of history and contemporary issues.

At the end of the day, however, this "recognition" means very little and changes nothing.

[Bob]

To the best of my knowledge, attacks on Israel are limited to one isolated local area (border of Gaza) perpetrated by several splinter groups - as far as I'm aware, even participation of Hamaz in these attacks haven't yet been proven.

You're way off. Threats against Israel and the Jewish people are much wider in scope than that. "To the best of your knowledge" isn't worth much. You have not he faintest idea what types of sacrifices are made by Israel and the Jewish people towards our security, every single day. Your ignorance of the threats don't make them go away. In other words, the world doesn't disappear when you close your eyes.

Till that is proven beyond speculation, to somehow insist on equating state policy of aggression perpetrated by Israel with attacks by isolated groups is pure nonsense.

You're trying to play down nearly a decade of terrorism from Arabs against the Jewish people, not to mention every war waged against Israel, to "attack by isolated groups". Get real. If you don't yet recognize the threats against Israel and legitimate fears we have with respect to our lives, then you probably never will.

Second is of course that everybody should and does have lawful right to resist oppression and aggression, even by force if necessary. So the attacks perpetrated by Israel in the occupied territories can in no way be equated with armed resistence to occupying forces outside of Israel proper

I see. I should've read this part before I clicked "reply". Killing Jews is legitimate, because we're apparently we're occupying land that doesn't belong to us.

In all seriousness, you need more practice your writing. Your spelling is pretty poor if English is your first language. My advice - less videos games and more reading. That's the first and last time I'll tell you that when you make elementary spelling mistakes in the only language you speak, it doesn't convey and impression of intellect or wisdom.

[myata]

You're way off. Threats against Israel and the Jewish people are much wider in scope than that. "To the best of your knowledge" isn't worth much. You have not he faintest idea what types of sacrifices are made by Israel and the Jewish people towards our security, every single day. Your ignorance of the threats don't make them go away. In other words, the world doesn't disappear when you close your eyes.

Neither has it begun in 1967 (or 1948 or even 1939) no matter how much some would want to have it this way. Everybody knows that this conflict has long and twisted history in which neither side could claim moral superiority.

Yet as things stand today, Isreal's government must take the sole responsibility for the collaps of yet another faint attempt at finding peace. At least I see no other logical interpretation of these recent developments.

You're trying to play down nearly a decade of terrorism from Arabs against the Jewish people, not to mention every war waged against Israel, to "attack by isolated groups". Get real. If you don't yet recognize the threats against Israel and legitimate fears we have with respect to our lives, then you probably never will.

Yet you would not recognise as legitimate the fear Isreal's occupation and illegal appropriation of land instills in citizens of these lands?

I see. I should've read this part before I clicked "reply". Killing Jews is legitimate, because we're apparently we're occupying land that doesn't belong to us.

You should indeed read what you about to reply to first. Because of course you're the only one saying that. I only commented that everybody has the right to resist occupation and oppression.

In all seriousness, you need more practice your writing. Your spelling is pretty poor if English is your first language. My advice - less videos games and more reading. That's the first and last time I'll tell you that when you make elementary spelling mistakes in the only language you speak, it doesn't convey and impression of intellect or wisdom.

Well, that was quick! I gather we'll see no other valueable insights on the topic from you here?

[bloodyminded]

In all seriousness, you need more practice your writing. Your spelling is pretty poor if English is your first language. My advice - less videos games and more reading. That's the first and last time I'll tell you that when you make elementary spelling mistakes in the only language you speak, it doesn't convey and impression of intellect or wisdom.

Spelling mistakes "[don't] convey and impression of intellect or wisdom"?

Ok then.

[Bob]

Spelling mistakes "[don't] convey and impression of intellect or wisdom"?

Ok then.

There's a big difference between an ignorant misspelling of something and a typo. An intelligent person should be able to identify the difference.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Bob