Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2016 14:47:24 GMT -5
Another anti-Israel UN resolution passes the Security Council. The US abstains.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 23, 2016 14:55:29 GMT -5
The most anti-Israel Administration in my lifetime goes out with a feckless, cowardly whimper.
Well done, Sir.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Dec 23, 2016 15:22:34 GMT -5
Israel should probably reject the tens of billions of dollars we give them then.
Unless I missed that a condition for us GIVING them money and aid and protection is that we have to ignore their illegal actions that cause headaches for us around the world.
Turns out beggars can be choosers after all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2016 16:18:55 GMT -5
We give them about 3 billion dollars a year. Almost all of that goes to military and development which is shared with the US. Almost all of our drone program is based on Israeli technology. The technology to shoot down missiles is also Israeli technology. Illegal actions--nonsense. Israel took the West Bank after they were attacked by a group of people who wanted to drive them all into the sea. We stole tens of millions of acres from the Indians, and states from Mexico. Of course that is fine. No one cares about China's current occupation of Tibet, or Turkey's current occupation of Cyprus, or that the Palestinians of Yarmouk are being exterminated (that is fine because it is other Arabs who are doing it). Arabs and Palestinians can and do own land in Israel, but of course Israelis cannot own land on the West Bank. On the west bank, parks and statues are named in honor of terror/murderers. While the UN passed a resolution condemning the use of chemical weapons, there are no resolutions condemning Assad.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Dec 23, 2016 16:59:06 GMT -5
I don't dislike Israel and I'm not interested in a biased info dump about their existential goodness/badness.
The illegal settlements are illegal regardless of the fact that other countries do bad things. It's a huge geopolitical headache for us.
They have no problem giving our government the middle finger when they want to do something their own way, I'm not sure why I, as an American, am supposed to be outraged when our government does something it feels is in our best interest.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 23, 2016 17:19:01 GMT -5
I don't dislike Israel and I'm not interested in a biased info dump about their existential goodness/badness. The illegal settlements are illegal regardless of the fact that other countries do bad things. It's a huge geopolitical headache for us. They have no problem giving our government the middle finger when they want to do something their own way, I'm not sure why I, as an American, am supposed to be outraged when our government does something it feels is in our best interest. Or when our government does what Mr Obama thinks is best irrespective of what is in our best interests. We have one real ally in the Middle East and Obama had crapped on them from day one. No one can be surprised at this 11th hour insult.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2016 18:03:48 GMT -5
Hi YaBoy There are resolutions from the General Assembly and groups like Human Rights Committees which last year declared that Israel was the World's greatest abuser of Women, or Unesco's claim that the Wailing Wall is not Jewish, that it is Muslim. Or the General Assembly's resolution, that Zionism was racism. Basically the settlements are expanding due to natural population growth. the population of the Settlers have children, they have to expand. The Settlements are not an obstacle to peace. Olmert offered Arafat 95% offered of the West Bank, and was turned down. Also, the Oslo Accords didn't even mention the Settlements. The problem of the settlements are recent.
With respect, your first sentence is not logical. Anti Israeli resolutions are continuously being introduced in the Security Council, even though in the past, the US has vetoed them. No one says a word about China's occupation of Tibet, or Turkey's occupation of Cyprus. Yarmouk Syria is a large Palestinian City which used to have 160,000 inhabitants. As of 12 months ago, they were down to 18,000. Many have left, but an almost equal amount have been exterminated by both ISIS and Syrian Troops. No resolutions are seen in support of those unfortunate people. BTW, Israel has never interfered or criticized US foreign policy even when we have been wrong.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 23, 2016 18:20:24 GMT -5
Jerry:
Your points are all spot on and valid. Unfortunately, to many they will have no weight because they dare point out the Emperor has no Clothes on this issue.
If Mr. Obama would admit his antipathy toward Israel one could at least admire his candor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2016 21:32:33 GMT -5
Hi YaBoy There are resolutions from the General Assembly and groups like Human Rights Committees which last year declared that Israel was the World's greatest abuser of Women, or Unesco's claim that the Wailing Wall is not Jewish, that it is Muslim. Or the General Assembly's resolution, that Zionism was racism. Basically the settlements are expanding due to natural population growth. the population of the Settlers have children, they have to expand. The Settlements are not an obstacle to peace. Olmert offered Arafat 95% offered of the West Bank, and was turned down. Also, the Oslo Accords didn't even mention the Settlements. The problem of the settlements are recent. With respect, your first sentence is not logical. Anti Israeli resolutions are continuously being introduced in the Security Council, even though in the past, the US has vetoed them. No one says a word about China's occupation of Tibet, or Turkey's occupation of Cyprus. Yarmouk Syria is a large Palestinian City which used to have 160,000 inhabitants. As of 12 months ago, they were down to 18,000. Many have left, but an almost equal amount have been exterminated by both ISIS and Syrian Troops. No resolutions are seen in support of those unfortunate people. BTW, Israel has never interfered or criticized US foreign policy even when we have been wrong. I'll answer the rest of your points later but u asked why there's been no resolution against Assad. They've been introduced its because Russia vetos them...It's been the stance of the Bush Administration and the Obama administration that there be no new settlements so again when is enough enough? Everybody in the World damn near says hey guys stop building and they continue. Palestinians have a right to exist also, do they not? The Palestinian population has increased as well, they're not seizing land. Why are you only concerned with there being enough space for the Jewish population and not the people whose homes and land is currently being taken from them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2016 22:12:13 GMT -5
Hi again Yaboy I just don't what to say. 1. You say that there are no resolutions against Assad because Russia vetoes them. Yaboy that makes absolutely no sense. There are numerous resolutions against Israel even though the US vetoes them. You just can't have it both ways. Also the UN human rights commission has decided that Israel is the greatest abuser of women's rights (that's laughable). Enesco has decided that the Wailing wall is actually Islamic and not Jewish. These are UN Committees 2. For the most part, these are NOT new settlements. The are expansion of existing settlements due to population growth. 3. Are you really saying that the Palestinians don't have the right to have children?? You can't be serious. The Palestinians actually administrate themselves. They have their own police, Courts, etc. They have more rights than Arab citizens in almost any other Arab country. Their land is not being taken from them. I have been on the West Bank and there is plenty of room. The area of settlements is tiny. When a Palestinian buys land in Israel, are they taking Israeli land?? 4. The stance of the US government is "no more settlements." So that makes it right?? The bottom line is that the Palestinians won't negotiate, won't recognize Israel as a Jewish State, name parks after murderers, teach their children in their schools to hate Jews and Israeli's, etc. Israel learned their lesson after Gaza when they withdrew unilaterally in 2005. From 2005 to 2007 the checkpoints were all open. There was no "so called siege." What did they get?? rockets and terror attacks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2016 2:47:57 GMT -5
Hi again Yaboy I just don't what to say. 1. You say that there are no resolutions against Assad because Russia vetoes them. Yaboy that makes absolutely no sense. There are numerous resolutions against Israel even though the US vetoes them. You just can't have it both ways. Also the UN human rights commission has decided that Israel is the greatest abuser of women's rights (that's laughable). Enesco has decided that the Wailing wall is actually Islamic and not Jewish. These are UN Committees 2. For the most part, these are NOT new settlements. The are expansion of existing settlements due to population growth. 3. Are you really saying that the Palestinians don't have the right to have children?? You can't be serious. The Palestinians actually administrate themselves. They have their own police, Courts, etc. They have more rights than Arab citizens in almost any other Arab country. Their land is not being taken from them. I have been on the West Bank and there is plenty of room. The area of settlements is tiny. When a Palestinian buys land in Israel, are they taking Israeli land?? 4. The stance of the US government is "no more settlements." So that makes it right?? The bottom line is that the Palestinians won't negotiate, won't recognize Israel as a Jewish State, name parks after murderers, teach their children in their schools to hate Jews and Israeli's, etc. Israel learned their lesson after Gaza when they withdrew unilaterally in 2005. From 2005 to 2007 the checkpoints were all open. There was no "so called siege." What did they get?? rockets and terror attacks. 1) I just turned 30 man and I have a lot to learn but this is where the confusion lies. How does a resolution pass the UN Security Council if even one P5 nation vetoes it? Also I took you at your word but a quick google search shows they have passed resolutions against Assad. The one involving chemical weapons probably the most significant en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_SyriaHere's an article that shows Russia vetoing more serious resolutions frustration other Security Council Members www.justsecurity.org/33456/5-counting-russia-vetoes-no-fly-zone-security-council/2)"For the most part" 3) Not saying that at all... There is at minimum over a half a million people living in these settlements and that is a very very conservative number. Your definition of small could be different than mine though so it is what it is. 4) It's been the stance of the Israeli Governments from time to time as well. To answer your question sure Israel is free to build settlements if the choose but the US isn't obligated to support there every move if they do. The last part is awful. I don't know enough to comment really but I don't like it at all. On a side note though don't forget we also have streets parks and holidays named after murderers and terrorists in the USA. How those things are defined sometimes depends on your viewpoint. I'm sure a lot of Indians would consider Columbus a rapist murderer and a terrorist for instance, yet.... Update: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_PalestineA list of all the resolutions passed regarding Israel and Palestine... Didn't know President Reagan had abstained from so many resolutions regarding Israel, almost 30 in total, Obama 1? Maybe somebody was joking again or not alive during the Reagan Administration...
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Dec 24, 2016 11:36:21 GMT -5
"4. The stance of the US government is "no more settlements." So that makes it right??"
Not sure what the point is here. Are you saying the United States is wrong here and you support the Israeli policy of additional and expanding settlements?
It's weird to start a ridiculously biased thread over us following through on our stated policies - the fact that you don't like them doesn't make it somehow shocking or unfair.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2016 15:00:32 GMT -5
Hi Yaboy-none of those resolutions are critical of the Assad Regime. Quick-We can argue about the legality of those settlements forever. My concern is that the US is not demanding the Palestinians recognize Israel, or sit down at the negotiating table which Israel has agreed to do, but the Palestinians refuse. Or to demand that the Palestinians stop naming streets and Parks after terrorists, for example. It is one sided. Israel has never criticized the US on any of their policies even when they disagree. The US continuously interferes with Israel's foreign policy. Once again, Palestinians can and do buy property in Israel, but Israel is prohibited from doing the same on the West Bank. BTW-under Israeli occupation, the West Bankers have infinitely more rights than do the Gaza's under Hamas.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Dec 27, 2016 10:50:46 GMT -5
Jerry - I completely disagree with you and think you have it backwards.
Israel doesn't believe its settlements are illegal. Everyone else does. It's like me saying we could debate all day whether or not I own the moon.
But what we definitely can argue about forever is which side is 'good' and which side is 'bad.' There are no innocent sides in this issue, and part of finding a solution means being able to demand changes from both sides. These settlements are a serious impediment to that, and that fact doesn't change just because we can also point to bad things on the Palestinian side.
I generally support Israel. I generally support the Palestinian people. I think throwing out a few biased anti-Palestinian claims isn't really making that serious a point; THIS is the exact thing we can go back and forth on forever.
I find it strange to defend the illegal actions of a foreign nation that are in direct contention with our own goals.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Dec 27, 2016 11:15:34 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,441
|
Post by TC on Dec 27, 2016 11:50:49 GMT -5
Israel has never criticized the US on any of their policies even when they disagree. The US continuously interferes with Israel's foreign policy. Israel has not only criticized and threatened US foreign policy (Iran deal) but Netanyahu got very publicly involved in the 2012 election. I'm not saying that the US haven't done the same thing (Clinton / 2000 Israeli elections), but this argument of one-sided US meddling and Israel being a silent ally is a little nuts. Where does Trump land on Israel? He has no cultural attachment to them, he campaigned on being "neutral" in terms of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (read: does not care about any sort of accord), and his ties with Putin probably rank above any other international alliance and will determine a lot of US foreign policy. On the other hand, he doesn't care about human rights, he's radically anti-Muslim, and the Evangelical vote and the alt-right probably land in support of Israel for different reasons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2016 12:01:11 GMT -5
Jerry - I completely disagree with you and think you have it backwards. Israel doesn't believe its settlements are illegal. Everyone else does. It's like me saying we could debate all day whether or not I own the moon. But what we definitely can argue about forever is which side is 'good' and which side is 'bad.' There are no innocent sides in this issue, and part of finding a solution means being able to demand changes from both sides. These settlements are a serious impediment to that, and that fact doesn't change just because we can also point to bad things on the Palestinian side. I generally support Israel. I generally support the Palestinian people. I think throwing out a few biased anti-Palestinian claims isn't really making that serious a point; THIS is the exact thing we can go back and forth on forever. I find it strange to defend the illegal actions of a foreign nation that are in direct contention with our own goals. The settlements will be used as bargaining chips. Everyone else does not believe the settlements are illegal. Please explain how they are illegal in the context of history. As you recall, Jordan launched an attack on Israel in 1967 with the purpose of destroying Israel and pushing the inhabitants into the sea. At that time, Jordan was in control of East Jerusalem and refused to allow Israeli's access to the Wailing Wall. As a matter of fact they used the wall as a public urinal. Is it no wonder, that Israel refuses to give back any part of Jerusalem. At the present time, the Palestinian authority refuses to recognize Israel or to negotiate with them. Maybe you are not aware, but a couple of years ago, Israel agreed to stop all Settlement activity for a year and the Palestinian Authority refused to negotiate for 9 months. Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza and left all of the check points wide open for two years. People could move in and out without restrictions What did they get?? Terrorist attacks, rockets. Some peace. Israelis are very worried (and with good reason), that as soon as they withdraw, Hamas or ISIS will take over. What you have to keep in mind is that Ben Gurion Airport is only a mile and a half from the border of the west bank. It would take only one rocket, or actually a mortar to close it down for months. Let me close with two questions. 1. What makes you think a peace agreement with the West Bank is going to end any better than it did in Gaza. In other words, what makes you think it will result in peace. Presently, parks and streets are named after terrorists. 2. Why are the settlements any more illegal than San Antonio, Los Angeles, or San Francisco. And remember, Mexico has never threatened to wipe out the US and drive the inhabitants into the sea. '
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2016 12:06:14 GMT -5
Israel is a Democracy and like the US, there are checks and balances. Past Prime Minister Olmert was convicted and spent a couple of years in jail. Israel will conduct an honest investigation and if he is found guilty, he will be sent to the slammer. How many other countries would do that. Are you waiting for Putin to be investigated?? Israel isn't perfect and there is a lot that could be improved on. Arab Israelis while granted full rights are discriminated against, just like African Americans are in the US.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Dec 27, 2016 12:44:59 GMT -5
Israel is a Democracy and like the US, there are checks and balances. Past Prime Minister Olmert was convicted and spent a couple of years in jail. Israel will conduct an honest investigation and if he is found guilty, he will be sent to the slammer. How many other countries would do that. Are you waiting for Putin to be investigated?? Israel isn't perfect and there is a lot that could be improved on. Arab Israelis while granted full rights are discriminated against, just like African Americans are in the US. I'm just sharing news in the most relevant thread... To answer your question: in an ideal world, Putin would be investigated.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Dec 27, 2016 13:04:26 GMT -5
Jerry - I completely disagree with you and think you have it backwards. Israel doesn't believe its settlements are illegal. Everyone else does. It's like me saying we could debate all day whether or not I own the moon. But what we definitely can argue about forever is which side is 'good' and which side is 'bad.' There are no innocent sides in this issue, and part of finding a solution means being able to demand changes from both sides. These settlements are a serious impediment to that, and that fact doesn't change just because we can also point to bad things on the Palestinian side. I generally support Israel. I generally support the Palestinian people. I think throwing out a few biased anti-Palestinian claims isn't really making that serious a point; THIS is the exact thing we can go back and forth on forever. I find it strange to defend the illegal actions of a foreign nation that are in direct contention with our own goals. The settlements will be used as bargaining chips. Everyone else does not believe the settlements are illegal. Please explain how they are illegal in the context of history. As you recall, Jordan launched an attack on Israel in 1967 with the purpose of destroying Israel and pushing the inhabitants into the sea. At that time, Jordan was in control of East Jerusalem and refused to allow Israeli's access to the Wailing Wall. As a matter of fact they used the wall as a public urinal. Is it no wonder, that Israel refuses to give back any part of Jerusalem. At the present time, the Palestinian authority refuses to recognize Israel or to negotiate with them. Maybe you are not aware, but a couple of years ago, Israel agreed to stop all Settlement activity for a year and the Palestinian Authority refused to negotiate for 9 months. Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza and left all of the check points wide open for two years. People could move in and out without restrictions What did they get?? Terrorist attacks, rockets. Some peace. Israelis are very worried (and with good reason), that as soon as they withdraw, Hamas or ISIS will take over. What you have to keep in mind is that Ben Gurion Airport is only a mile and a half from the border of the west bank. It would take only one rocket, or actually a mortar to close it down for months. Let me close with two questions. 1. What makes you think a peace agreement with the West Bank is going to end any better than it did in Gaza. In other words, what makes you think it will result in peace. Presently, parks and streets are named after terrorists. 2. Why are the settlements any more illegal than San Antonio, Los Angeles, or San Francisco. And remember, Mexico has never threatened to wipe out the US and drive the inhabitants into the sea. ' Jerry, you throwing as much crap at the wall as possible to see what sticks is not a serious point. If you'd like I can write a few paragraphs about the horrific things the Israeli government has done, including the use of white phosphorous, human shields, and collective punishment. The tit for tat isn't productive - BOTH sides have committed serious atrocities. If you can't acknowledge that reality, you're just not making any serious points. Which countries believe the settlements to be legal besides Israel?
|
|