Posted on 06/25/2002 1:20:13 PM PDT by Johnny Shear
This is an honest question, no offense towards anyone is intended...
I won't try to claim I'm any kind of scholar on the subject of Isreal Settlements but I have done a bit of research on the subject. Yet, one question still remains...
I can't justify the Isreal Settlements in The West Bank and Gaza...In my own mind, anyway...
As far as I can tell, Isreal officially justifies these settlements based on the fact that they lay claim to Gaza and the West Bank due to defeating Arab aggressors in the 1967 war. And, Isreal is still technically at war with some Arab states so they can continue occupying these areas...
What I don't understand is how they justify the settlements. Occupation is one thing (Based on protecting themselves against an aggressor) but settlements are something completely different (In my opinion, anyway).
If anyone can educate me, I know Freepers can. And as a bonus, if anyone can supply information or sources on how the Palestinians "See Things", that would be great. (In the spirit of "Two sides to every story").
What "things" have they actually done?
They have been accused of a variety of crimes they did not commit, such as, blood in the Purim cookies, or, assorted unsolved drive-by shootings of Palestinian families subsequently revealed to have been "collaborators," but, apart from the Goldstein rampage of 8 years ago, can you provide a recent, documented, proven atrocity actually committed by a Hebron Jew? Something "typical" like tearing apart a human being with their bare hands (such as the act commemorated by the Palestinian child pictured in my post #278), or shooting a 10-month-old baby in the head (like Shalhevet Pass), or skinning alive a boy hiking in the wadi (like the 14 year olds Yossi Ish Ran and Koby Mandell--who BTW was a U.S. citizen)
....they simply "Occupied" it, and now we have all these problems.NOW have all these present day problems? Seems to me that numerous Arabs armies were allied against Israel for some time prior to 'all these problems'. Israel didn't occupy' it prior to the 1967 'war'. What would you state the problems were prior 1967?
every nation on Earth agrees don't belong where they areIf they signed the Geneva Convention they do. UN Geneva Conference Adjourned."Every nation on Earth"? Well, there's Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc...France probably qualifies.
The 103 countries attending the Swiss-chaired conference unanimously published a statement saying that the Geneva Convention on the conduct of war is applicable to "the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem."The United States did not attend this conference. However, the Mitchell Report clearly states that the settlements violate the Geneva Convention.
-Eric
You mean, the Western Wall and the "Jewish Quarter" of the Old City? The Jews have no right to that?
"the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem."The settlement I would support would give the Palestinian state the Muslim quarter and the mosques on Mount Moriah/Temple Mount/Haram-al-Sharif. Israel would get the rest of Jerusalem (and would keep the Golan Heights). In particular they would get the Western Wall.You mean, the Western Wall and the "Jewish Quarter" of the Old City? The Jews have no right to that?
Another option might be to give the various religious shrines in the area embassy status, if they fall outside the governed area of their faith. The Christian Churches in Bethlehem could have Vatican, Greek, or Armenian status, Jewish shrines in Palestine Israeli status, and the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa would have Saudi status until the Palestinian state is in place. Those shared by two or more faiths (such as Patriarchs in Hebron) could fall under a commision including all the faiths, or a neutral faith.
And no, I haven't been reading too much Tom Clancy. >:)
-Eric
1. The Likud has 24 seats or 20% of the Knesset. They are in coalition with the Labor Party. The right holds under 50 seats.
2. Localities also count. Most towns are run by Labor.
1. The Muslims countries were backwards and lacked much of this technology.
2. The US had minimal involvement until the 1970s. The Middle East was British dominated and there were attacks on them.
.So you agree that the Palestinians are human? I don't. I think they're animals. The Israelis are human, at least. Unfortunately, they don't respect property rights. Why do you think so many Jews remain in the West rather than move to Israel so their superior numbers can overwhelm the Palestinians?
Jews remain in the west, mostly because they are contented liberals. Israel is a fairly socialist country. However, the Americans and other Jews moving there are changing that.
Rush Limbaugh repeated the lie again yesterday that Israel was attacked and pretty much wiped out the Jordanians, Egyptians and Syrians.
In Limbaugh's case, he knows it is a lie but it wouldn't fit into his agenda for his starstruck admiration for Colin Powell.
Israel launced a pre-emptive strike (smarmy cover for...we need to be victims 'cause the Sheik kicked the sand in my face first, teacher)..
One last time folks...Israel was the aggressor and must accept 242.
Using your logic, Israel was an agressor because it responded to its attacker who boasting of their desire to kill all the Jews.
One last time folks...Israel was the aggressor and must accept 242.
One last time, you are lying and I'm sure you would like NATO to bomb Israel into surrender.
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.