New developments in the Middle East

[Tangled up in Blue]

I notice after the UN's overwhelming vote to recognise Palestine's state status,Israel has now threatened to build another "3,000 housing units" in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
I hope the PLO will now use their state status to take this matter before the International Criminal Court(ICC).
Apparently,there are already half a million "settlers" living illegally in Gaza and the West Bank.That should also be a matter for the ICC to investigate too, since "some international lawyers believe" it's "a breach of the Geneva convention that prevents "belligerent nations" from moving their nationals to live on occupied territories."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20564484

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/30/israel-build-jewish-settlement-un-palestine

 

[Midnight Rambler]

spot the difference...

population of Israel - just under 8 million
population of Israel's neighbours - most of which would like to see Israel wiped off map - approx 350 million
equals Israel is a belligerent neighbour and lots of angry western lefties

population of china - approx 1.3 billion
population of tibet - maybe 5 million of which 2 million are ethnic chinese deliberately settled there by chinese goverment with intent of destroying tibetan identity
equals Martin Jacques (UK leftie) given a series of weekly spots on Radio 4 on sunday mornings praising China to the skies

 

[londonblue]

I notice after the UN's overwhelming vote to recognise Palestine's state status,Israel has now threatened to build another "3,000 housing units" in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
I hope the PLO will now use their state status to take this matter before the International Criminal Court(ICC).
Apparently,there are already half a million "settlers" living illegally in Gaza and the West Bank.That should also be a matter for the ICC to investigate too, since "some international lawyers believe" it's "a breach of the Geneva convention that prevents "belligerent nations" from moving their nationals to live on occupied territories."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20564484

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/30/israel-build-jewish-settlement-un-palestine

Your use of parentheses is interesting. The phrase "living illegally" should also be within them. Even the BBC recognises that Israel disputes that they are "living illegally".

BTW, the PLO doesn't really exist any more. Personally I think Israel is just trying to make a point: If the Palestinians don't need to honour agreements (to not unilaterally request observer status from the UN) then nor do they (to refrain from building settlements). It'll be interesting to see how this pans out...

This video will explain the Israeli view far better than I ever could:

[video=youtube_share;XGYxLWUKwWo]http://youtu.be/XGYxLWUKwWo[/video]

For the record. I'm not saying I agree one way or the other. I'm just saying that just because you consider something to be illegal, it doesn't make it so. As with all things, there are at least three sides to an argument. In this case there is the Israeli side, the Arab side, and somewhere in the middle is the truth...

 

[A Century United]

I notice after the UN's overwhelming vote to recognise Palestine's state status,Israel has now threatened to build another "3,000 housing units" in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
I hope the PLO will now use their state status to take this matter before the International Criminal Court(ICC).
Apparently,there are already half a million "settlers" living illegally in Gaza and the West Bank.That should also be a matter for the ICC to investigate too, since "some international lawyers believe" it's "a breach of the Geneva convention that prevents "belligerent nations" from moving their nationals to live on occupied territories."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20564484

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/30/israel-build-jewish-settlement-un-palestine

Once again, they have not been granted "State" status. They are Observers.


"Belligerent nation".... I repeat, the reason that Israel occupies territories that were not part of the original 1948 Nation is that Israel's peace-loving, women's and gay-rights defending, democratic neighbours tried to wipe Israel literally off the map - and astonishingly lost, and lost badly. Where is the outcry over the occupation of former German territory after the Second World war...?

And Midnight Rambler's point about the complete lack of interest in the plight of the Tibetan people can be extended to asking why there is such silence over the persecution of the Kurds by a number of Arab/Muslim nations.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Once again, they have not been granted "State" status. They are Observers.

I think we can both agree that their state "status" was upgraded by the UN last week.They're now on a par with the Vatican and can now apply for membership of the ICC.Incidentally,Switzerland held the same status, for many years, until they eventually upgraded to full member status.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

BTW, the PLO doesn't really exist any more.

That's funny.I'm sure I saw the Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, speaking at the UN last week.

 

[Uncle Leo]

I think we can both agree that their state "status" was upgraded by the UN last week.They're now on a par with the Vatican and are members of the ICC.

I'd fancy England's chances against them at cricket. Might be a good opportunity for Stuart Broad to get back in to form.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I'd fancy England's chances against them at cricket. Might be a good opportunity for Stuart Broad to get back in to form.

I was referring to the International Criminal Court(ICC).:smiles:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Your use of parentheses is interesting. The phrase "living illegally" should also be within them. Even the BBC recognises that Israel disputes that they are "living illegally".

I certainly agree that words are powerful tools in any dispute.This is something well know by politicians,diplomats,writers and others).It's also presumably why five European nations called in their respective Israel Ambassadors for a dressing down yesterday.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/03/israel-defiant-settlement-expansion-europe

Personally I think Israel is just trying to make a point: If the Palestinians don't need to honour agreements (to not unilaterally request observer status from the UN) then nor do they (to refrain from building settlements). It'll be interesting to see how this pans out...

I tend to agree with this though I'm not sure that the Palestinians had actually entered any agreement with Israel not to apply for observer state status from the UN.

This video will explain the Israeli view far better than I ever could:

[video=youtube_share;XGYxLWUKwWo]http://youtu.be/XGYxLWUKwWo[/video]

I notice this video was made by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.While I understand that words are powerful tools(see above)I find it hard to swallow the idea of the "occupied" territories as the "disputed" territories.In what way are they "disputed", unless Israel is actually staking a claim to them?

For the record. I'm not saying I agree one way or the other. I'm just saying that just because you consider something to be illegal, it doesn't make it so. As with all things, there are at least three sides to an argument. In this case there is the Israeli side, the Arab side, and somewhere in the middle is the truth...

What is clear, is that if Israel builds another three thousand homes in East Jerusalem,(seen as the likely capital of a future Palestinian state),then any possible chance of a two-state solution to the conflict might finally be at an end.

What is also fairly clear, is that America under Obama, seems to have lost the will to even try to enforce a two-state solution on Israel and Palestine and the rest of the Arab world.(Presumably for geo-political reasons).

 

[Uncle Leo]

I was referring to the International Criminal Court(ICC).:smiles:

No. Really?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

No. Really?

Incidentally what's your ICC stand for? International Cricket something I imagine.:unsure:

 

[Midnight Rambler]

And Midnight Rambler's point about the complete lack of interest in the plight of the Tibetan people can be extended to asking why there is such silence over the persecution of the Kurds by a number of Arab/Muslim nations.

The answer to this is that there is no-one more racist than a left-winger even though they set themselves up as morally superior judges over the rest of us on matters of race
Despite the Middle Eastern Asian origin of the Jewish people, the twisted logic of western lefties defines Jews people as White and their closely related Arab neighbours as non-White. Lefties see Israel as in the wrong and White people treating non-white people badly is something White lefties regard as infinitely worse than non-White people treating non-White people badly.
When the White rulers of Rhodesia treated the Black population badly, western lefties broadcast their self-righteous anger on the news every night, now that a Black ruler mistreats the Black population of the same country on ethnic grounds (those of a different tribe from Mugabe) it only makes the news once every few years (when a rigged election is held).

 

[Uncle Leo]

The answer to this is that there is no-one more racist than a left-winger even though they set themselves up as morally superior judges over the rest of us on matters of race
Despite the Middle Eastern Asian origin of the Jewish people, the twisted logic of western lefties defines Jews people as White and their closely related Arab neighbours as non-White. Lefties see Israel as in the wrong and White people treating non-white people badly is something White lefties regard as infinitely worse than non-White people treating non-White people badly.
When the White rulers of Rhodesia treated the Black population badly, western lefties broadcast their self-righteous anger on the news every night, now that a Black ruler mistreats the Black population of the same country on ethnic grounds (those of a different tribe from Mugabe) it only makes the news once every few years (when a rigged election is held).

You see this I've never really got. A lot of my mates are loony lefties and some of the anti-Israeli stuff they have been posting on Facebook of late has been shocking - essentially along the lines of 'Israel doesn't deserve to exist'. I'm surprised that this is an opinion that appears to be acceptable.

Given that the Jews had rather a rough time of it in the first half of the 20th century - not to mention throughout the rest of history - you'd have thought there would be a little more sympathy for their desire for a nation state.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I'm not anti-semitic but I am anti-Zionist.They're not the same thing you know.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

I have sympathy with the history of Jews and the difficulties for Israel BUT it is all a bit apartheid there now; and contrary to good sense what is happening, We should study history and learn from it. If, on formation of Israel the Palestinians had been treated fairly and equally then most of the current problems would not exist. Ramping up the stakes is n't helping anyone other than warlords, weapons dealers and terrorists.

 

[londonblue]

I have sympathy with the history of Jews and the difficulties for Israel BUT it is all a bit apartheid there now; and contrary to good sense what is happening, We should study history and learn from it. If, on formation of Israel the Palestinians had been treated fairly and equally then most of the current problems would not exist. Ramping up the stakes is n't helping anyone other than warlords, weapons dealers and terrorists.

Really? Have you visited?

The term “apartheid” refers to a country segregating or discriminating based on race or religion, and Israel does the exact opposite.

All people in Israel enjoy equal rights. Arab citizens of Israel vote in elections and elect Arab members of parliament. Yes, there are Arab MPs in Israel. Many also serve side-by-side with Jews in the Israeli Defense Forces and become high-ranking officers. There is no segregation (as the term apartheid suggests) in education, healthcare etc.

That's not to say Israel is perfect, after all it is a society made up of individuals, and no individual is perfect. But, there is not one Israeli policy that discriminates against a minority.

Let's compare that to Iran, where a Jewish woman (believe it or not there are still about 25,000 Jews living there) was allegedly murdered last week because she dared to take the mosque next door to court over them deciding unilaterally to annex part of her house for their extension.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Really? Have you visited?

I have.
I spent nearly three months on a Kibuttz on the border with Lebanon in the mid-70's and went back twice afterwards to visit an Israeli girl I'd met in Jerusalem.
My memories and impressions are rather different to the democratic Israeli paradise you describe, however,especially for any Palestinian Arabs living there.


Let's take one example.
The kibbutz I was working and living on was built on land left vacant by Palestinian Arab farmers in 1948.(They literally fled for their lives at the outbreak of war).
These farmers were not offered their land back at the end of the war.Nor were they ever compensated for the loss of their land.Not much equality or democracy for them then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab–Israeli_War

 

[londonblue]

I have.
I spent nearly three months on a Kibuttz on the border with Lebanon in the mid-70's and went back twice afterwards to visit an Israeli girl I'd met in Jerusalem.
My memories and impressions are rather different to the democratic Israeli paradise you describe, however,especially for any Palestinian Arabs living there.


Let's take one example.
The kibbutz I was working and living on was built on land left vacant by Palestinian Arab farmers in 1948.(They literally fled for their lives at the outbreak of war).
These farmers were not offered their land back at the end of the war.Nor were they ever compensated for the loss of their land.Not much equality or democracy for them then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab–Israeli_War

I'm not sure if you realise, but the 1970's was about 40 years ago. I was there in April. I also don't get the point of your example, this happened in 1948, during a war. A war started by the Arabs that wanted their land back afterwards. The point we were discussing was that Blue and Pink Army believed Israel is an apartheid state now not in 1948, or even in 1970. Things that old are simply not relevant. It's like saying the UK is a racist country because there were race issues in the 1960s. We've come a long way since then, and Israel has too.

I'll give you a more recent example. I visited a home for mentally and physically handicapped children. It allows them to make simple things such as candles, and sell them. They get a sense of their own self worth by earning their own money and buying things with their money. It's a very uplifting place, and it caters for both Jews and Arabs.

I'll give you another example. We also visited a soup kitchen in Jerusalem (that my wife and I now support financially). It feeds both Jewish and Arab homeless people.

Schools also teach both. Have a look at this:

Hand in Hand

If Israel was an apartheid state, things like that wouldn't happen.

I also never said Israel was a "paradise". I said it doesn't have any discriminatory policies, and is therefore not an apartheid state. I also said it wasn't perfect. Please don't put words into my mouth.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I'm not sure if you realise, but the 1970's was about 40 years ago. I was there in April. I also don't get the point of your example, this happened in 1948, during a war. A war started by the Arabs that wanted their land back afterwards. The point we were discussing was that Blue and Pink Army believed Israel is an apartheid state now not in 1948, or even in 1970. Things that old are simply not relevant. It's like saying the UK is a racist country because there were race issues in the 1960s. We've come a long way since then, and Israel has too.

I'm sure Israel is a very different place now from the country I first visited in 1975.However,I doubt if the power stucture within Israel has changed that much.If anything, from I hear and read, relationships between Israelis and Arabs both within and outside Israel seem to have worsened considerably.

Surely you can appreciate that modern Israel's problems with its Arab neighbours date from 1948(if not earlier with the Balfour declaration in 1928)?


(After 1948) "Important demographic changes occurred in the country. Between 600,000 and 760,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel and became Palestinian refugees. On the other hand, around 10,000 Jews were forced to leave their homes in Palestine. The war and the creation of Israel also triggered the Jewish exodus from Arab lands. In the three years following the war, about 700,000 Jews immigrated to Israel, residing mainly along the borders of the State"

Don't you think that Palestinian Arab farmers are entitled to be compensated for the loss of their land?
After all they didn't start the war.

 

[londonblue]

I'm sure Israel is a very different place now from the country I first visited in 1975.However,I doubt if the power stucture within Israel has changed that much.If anything, from I hear and read, relationships between Israelis and Arabs both within and outside Israel seem to have worsened considerably.

Surely you can appreciate that modern Israel's problems with its Arab neighbours date from 1948(if not earlier with the Balfour declaration in 1928)?


(After 1948) "Important demographic changes occurred in the country. Between 600,000 and 760,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel and became Palestinian refugees. On the other hand, around 10,000 Jews were forced to leave their homes in Palestine. The war and the creation of Israel also triggered the Jewish exodus from Arab lands. In the three years following the war, about 700,000 Jews immigrated to Israel, residing mainly along the borders of the State"

Don't you think that Palestinian Arab farmers are entitled to be compensated for the loss of their land?
After all they didn't start the war.

We were discussing whether or not Israel is an apartheid state now. An example of something that happened in 1948 doesn't prove that at all. I'm not debating a specific issue because I don't know anything about it.

Surely you can see that:

• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs, to have a vote
• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs to serve in the Israeli Parliament
• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs to serve in the Army (should they want to - they also have the right not to, something Jews don't have)
• Having no policies of segregation
• Having no policies of discrimination

Proves that Israel is not an apartheid state.