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 (226897)	4/13/2007 8:05:14 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

Israel is not the de jure owner but it is de facto and something they never wanted at least before Likud and the greater israel garbage. Yesterday i proposed the people in Gaza should be relocated--lets say to San Francisco. Gaza could become a theme park with a world class golf course. The Gaza open--i can see it now. No sand traps as the course will be sand--they can have grass traps. Golfers can be presented with mideast specific problems to overcome like IEDs in the traps, suicide hot dogs, the 19th hole sans alcohol.

To: Lou Weed who wrote (226897)	4/13/2007 2:41:43 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Its also interesting to see that Nadine has not answered my last question for days now.... You mean it was like a homework assignment? I owed you an answer? Sheesh, these arguments have been gone over thousands of times, do you really want another rehash? The Wikipedia article lays them out well The official Israeli government position is that: East Jerusalem is annexed and belongs to Israel, while the Golan Heights is unofficially annexed with the ratification of the Golan Heights Law. The West Bank and Gaza are "disputed" and not occupied territories, because: They were part of the Mandate in Palestine and therefore part of what was to become a "Jewish homeland" The Arab states rejected the 1947 partition plan, thus making it non-binding No attempt was ever made to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza between 1949 and 1967 (See Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt and Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan.) The Geneva Conventions only apply to sovereign territories captured from a signatory to the conventions Israel took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war. The language of "occupation" has allowed Palestinian spokesmen to obfuscate this history. By repeatedly pointing to "occupation," they manage to reverse the causality of the conflict, especially in front of Western audiences. Thus, the current territorial dispute is allegedly the result of an Israeli decision "to occupy," rather than a result of a war imposed on Israel by a coalition of Arab states in 1967. Former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel's case: "Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title. [4] The international perspective, excepting the U.S. in some cases, is that: The annexation of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are illegal and not recognized by international law The West Bank and Gaza are "occupied," because: They were captured by force of arms and against the will of their populations The residents in these areas were stateless Israel has put the territories under military rather than civilian administration, creating a de facto state of occupation Non-Jewish residents who reject Israeli citizenship and/or hegemony have the right to self-determination en.wikipedia.org and of course, I can come back right at'cha: Was the 1967 War an offensive or a defensive war for Israel?