Old realities

WASHINGTON -- The United States government is not a speed reader, but after 37 years of reading U.N. Resolution 242, on Wednesday the government finally read it accurately. The government saw what is not there -- the missing definite article, ``the.''

Passed after the 1967 Six Day War, 242 mandated the withdrawal of Israel ``from territories occupied in the recent conflict.'' Not from ``the territories.'' Israel insisted on deletion of the ``the'' because it implied, as Arab and other powers acknowledged by their vehement opposition to the deletion -- withdrawal from all territories.

This was strategic ambiguity. On Wednesday, ambiguity was abandoned. In his letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, President Bush said:

``In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of the final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.''

It is fine to talk about ``new realities,'' such as patterns of settlement, but this new U.S. policy also, and primarily, comes to terms, at long last, with an old reality. It is that 242 also recognized the right of every state in the region to ``secure and recognized boundaries,'' which Israel's 1967 borders were not.

But wait. Palestinian spokesmen, denouncing the new U.S. position, speak not of the 1949 armistice lines but ``the 1967 borders.'' It is not in the interest of the Palestinian Authority to have the world reminded -- being willfully forgetful, it needs much reminding -- that the borders of Israel in 1967 were accidents of the military facts on the ground 18 years before that.

Bush, by emphasizing 1949 rather than 1967, reminds those who are forever saying ``Israel is being provocative'' that for 56 years -- since Israel's founding in May 1948 -- the problem has been that, to Israel's enemies, Israel's being is provocative. Hostility to Israel predated 1967 and would not be cured by a return to 1967 realities.

The territories occupied by Israel since 1967 have been lawfully held because a nation that occupies territories in the process of repelling aggression launched from them can hold them until the disposition of the lands is settled by negotiations between the relevant parties .......

[Judea, Sumaria and Gaza] -- [RE] occupied by Israel since 1967 have been lawfully held because a Nation that occupies territories in the process of repelling aggression launched from them can hold them until the disposition of the lands is settled by negotiations between the relevant parties .......

Two of which relevant parties, by the way, just happen to be the dictatorships [By any other name] of Egypt and of the "4,000 years old Hashemite 'kingdom' of Jordan" the limeys fantasized into existence eighty odd years ago.

The territories occupied by Israel since 1967 have been lawfully held because a nation that occupies territories in the process of repelling aggression launched from them can hold them until the disposition of the lands is settled by negotiations between the relevant parties .......

I interpreted that to mean that both Israel and the Palestinian refugees would hold their existing positions until the issue of the Palestinian refugees could be resolved.

However, Israel began to build settlements in the occupied lands before any resolution for the Palestinian refugees had been reached. The Palestinian refugees had very little recourse when Resolution 242 was not enforced.

There can be benefit in examining the time line for various events in order to gain perspective.

Compare the beginning of the construction of Israeli settlements in the occupied land to the increase in suicide bombing. The entire world turned their back on the plight of a few Palestinians by not enforcing Resolution 242. What possible actions could the Palestinians take? Who has not heard Zapata’s famous quote "It is better to die on your feet, than to live a lifetime on your knees". How many years need pass after Resolution 242 in 1967 to qualify as a lifetime on one’s knees?

Winston Churchill had to advise the British that “you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may be even a worse fate. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

What would you do?

There were no "palestinians" when Israel, in 1967, for the umteenth time defended itself against the Egyptians, Lebanese, Jordanians and Syrians, who at time were the occupiers of those parts of Greater Israel called Gaza, Samaria and Judea and which are now claimed by the squatting Egyptians, [Of whom the mass-murderer, Daschle Arafat is one] Trans-Jordanians, Lebanese, Syrians and various other assorted Arab and islamofascist terrorists who now call themselves "palestinians."

As for what I would do? The psychopathologically-hesperophobic, insane-paedophile-following, moon-rock worshipping death-cultist islaofascists presently squatting in Greater Israel's 1967-reinstated lands are making war on Israel and if it were up to me I would wage total war against them and defeat them so soundly, [Think Dresden! Think Berlin! Think Tokyo! Think Hiroshoma, Think Nagasaki!] there would be no mistaking their defeat for a boy scout picnic, say -- and would then drive every last survivor from all of Israel -- and back into their native lands.

After all, if the Civilized World could absorb Europe's 50,000,000 displaced persons during the first three or four years after World War Two -- it shouldn't take the Arabs much longer than the 56 years they've had so far to soak up the handful that, in 1948, [Voluntarily] ran away in the face of their various countrymen's cowardly, unprovoked, savage, babaric and viscious attacks on Israel!

You obviously have swallowed the Paleostinian propaganda lie that if only Israel would remove all Jews off Gaza/West Bank it would get peace in return. That "occupation" is the prime stumbling block rather than the murderous, Jihadist, Jew hating mentality of the Paleostinians and the Muslim world at large.

There was terrorism before Israel got Gaza/West Bank and there will terrorism after Israel gives Gaza and (part of) the West Bank to the Paleostinians as it now plans to do.

I interpreted that to mean that both Israel and the Palestinian refugees would hold their existing positions until the issue of the Palestinian refugees could be resolved.

The proper interpretation is that the Israelis conquered the West Bank territories. The Palestinians live there at the pleasure of the Israelis until such time as another arrangement is negotiated.

Israel began to build settlements in the occupied lands before any resolution for the Palestinian refugees had been reached.

What this really means: Arabs demand the "right" to swarm and overwhelm Israel while keeping all Arab-occupied land completely ethnically cleansed of Jews.

"Settlements" = Jews moving into areas that have been declared Judenrein.

Think Dresden! Think Berlin! Think Tokyo! Think Hiroshoma, Think Nagasaki!

I have always found it ironic to observe first hand that there are still people who favor a final solution. It can only be made more ironic when a final solution is favored by a Jewish person.

I consider the statement that there were no Palestinians about as moronic and uninformed a statement as it is possible to make. In order to be able to acknowledge such a misguided position requires the ability to totally ignore thousands of years of recorded history. I guess for those favoring a final solution that is not such an insurmountable task.

<< I have always found it ironic to observe first hand that there are still people who favor a final solution. It can only be made more ironic when a final solution is favored by a Jewish person. >>

Interesting that you should so blatantly project Herr Hitler's language into this discussion -- but in no way, the content of your character having long ago revealed itself -- surprising.

Also, having neither offered a "final solution" [Only the essential requirement of Victory over psychopathologically-hesperophobic barbarism as the prerequisite to "peace"] -- nor being "a Jewish person" -- I shall have to take you at your word that "final solutions" and "Jewish persons" offer you emotional stimuli and that irony is your emotion of choice. [I see no evidence of that, either. Your cynicism is all that shows]

<< I consider the statement that there were no Palestinians about as moronic and uninformed a statement as it is possible to make. >>

Given that you are again responding to only that which you have projected I shall again have to remain an outsider looking in -- and take you at your word that you are moronic and uninformed for saying there are no Palestinians.

The Palestinians -- as distinct from those Trans-Jordanian, Egyptian, Lebanese, Syrian and other islamofascistic followers of the terrorist murderer and Egyptian, Daschle Arafat -- are the Jewish ancestors of those who comprise the Nation of Israel. It has always been, it is as it was -- and always shall be.

<< In order to be able to acknowledge such a misguided position requires the ability to totally ignore thousands of years of recorded history. I guess for those favoring a final solution that is not such an insurmountable task. >>

Given your exclusive occupancy of those positions [And despite your puny attempt to impugn me with them both] you again have me at a disadvantage -- but I shall give you the benifit of the doubt and accept your remarks on their face.

Cordially -- Brian

BUMPping

After all, if the Civilized World could absorb Europe's 50,000,000 displaced persons during the first three or four years after World War Two -- it

Actually there were some European diplaced persons of a particular religious persuasion the civilized world wasn't willing to absorb, at least not in their homelands, either before the war or after, when there were a lot less to absorb. They ended up in Israel. How quickly Europe forgets.

<< Actually there were some European diplaced persons of a particular religious persuasion the civilized world wasn't willing to absorb, at least not in their homelands, either before the war or after, when there were a lot less to absorb. They ended up in Israel. How quickly Europe forgets. >>

Europe has long [For way more than a century, that is] been populated only by the intellectually and moraly dead and decadent and given to coddling Christian-hating, anti-semitic, death-and-destruction-worshipping, pagan-heathen/pantheist, psychopathologically-hesperophobic, fascisocialist totalitarian monsters and machinations the likes of Herr Hitler, Comrade Stalin and more recently the velvet-gloved envy-motivated, hatred-engined and rage-driven Brussels-based Neo-Soviet.

I was fortunate, though, to have been born in New Zealand and to have spent a couple of the intervening decades in Australia and in South Africa and and am proud to say that in all three places we welcomed with open arms countless thousands of those of whom you speak. As, of course -- after we rid ourselves of the traitor, Roosevelt and his loathesome and fearsome Soviet-agent-infiltrated gang -- we did in America, which has always been the safest and best place on Earth for all Men of Good Faith!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.