Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lou Weed who wrote (130008)	4/25/2004 12:36:50 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Incorrect, as you just said, England recognized Jordanian control in 1967 therefore there is only one unrecognized occupation Yes, and Saudi Arabia recognized the Taliban as the government of Afghanistan. But that didn't give the Taliban international recognition either. No single country can confer international recognition. So England is neither here nor there wrt the argument. Internationally both occupations were recognized only as occupations; Jordan's attempts to annex were not recognized. Neither has Israel's annexation of parts of Jerusalem. Had it been any country but Israel, the international community would not have cared what Israel did with the land, since it was taken in a defensive war. After WWII, the Czechs deported close to a million Sudaten Germans; who complained? Poland took over a hundred miles of what had previously been German land; who cared? The Germans had started the war and had lost. Of course, in Israel's case, they thought the aggressor should get a do-over on the war, but even there, the UN recognized that it was not an aggressive occupation and said the borders should be settled by negotiation with secure borders for all states in the region.