Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10
th, 2011 at 8:30pm:
chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10
th, 2011 at 10:53am:
Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10
th, 2011 at 10:16am:
....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory?
Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague.
Otherwise it's just banter.
And I'm assuming that 'Occupied Palestinian' land you are referring to is the West Bank.
If this is so, the Israeli's seized that land in the West Bank in 1948 off the Jordanians, who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans, who got it off the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians etc.
Perhaps the Jordanians should have learnt to make war better when attacking their neighbor.
In fact you might be better off calling Jordan 'Occupied Palestinian' land as this countries population is actually 60% Palestinian.
And the Arab League actually gave their opinion of the proposed 2 state solution way back in 1948, when they attacked Israel and were repulsed.
What boundaries did Israel agree to in 1948?
Why hasnt Israel retreated to pre 1967 boundaries as required by UN resolutions and the UN charter of the rigth of return.
(Surely you are kidding about the nature of the many Israeli the war crimes carried out by the IDF in occupied Palestinian territory? These are on the public record)
Agree, there was no agreement.
Israel got what it was given.
The bounderies were established by the UN in 1948 which included land allocated for Palestine, and it was those bounderies set during the time of Partition that the Arab League took exception to, and attacked Israel with the intent of reclaiming all the territory.
If those Arabs succeeded in destroying that fledgling Israel, would there be one today do you think?
And why on earth would Israel ever retreat to the 1967 borders?
Those countries which attacked Israel again in 1967 after 1956 and 1948 should have been happy Israel settled for what it did.
If Israel was overrun in 1967, would the Arabs have handed the land back or would Jordan, Syria and Egypt have kept the land for themselves?
So take your pick because I don't believe for one moment they would have handed the land back to Israel and the UN would have done what they always do, nothing.
Do you honestly think they would have established a 'Palestine', because they had thousands of years to do this and never did let alone speak or write about this.
The Ottomans certainly never did.
Handing back those territories only places Israel's major cities closer to former and potential enemies, and those countries rolled the dice of war four times and lost every time.
It's called the spoils of war.
And as far as the 'Palestinians territories are concerned, I guess where some would call something a war crime, others would call it war.
Some would call firing missiles into Israel's towns or blowing up schoolbuses and seaside cafeteria's a war crime too, but none outside Israel discuss those things.
And whether you like it or not, the only democratic country in the Middle East, Israel, has a right to defend itself and yes innocents are hurt in war.
The days are 66 long years gone where the Jews used to line up naked in the snow and shuffle off silently to the 'showers' to be sent up the chimney, whilst the Mufti of Jeruselem supplied men to serve Hitler.
Forum
Pages: 
