Australian Politics Forum

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 46508 Gender:	Re: Zionism Reply #960 - Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:13pm Quote: UN 181 says Jerusalem is to be shared by3 major religions - the rational solution ...but rational actors re Jerusalem are few. Jerusalem is shared by the three major religions. Being Israel's capital doesnt change that.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46508
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #961 - Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:16pm

Quote:

"United Nations Resolution 242, resolution of the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted on November 22, 1967, in an effort to secure a just and lasting peace in the wake of the Six-Day (June) War, fought primarily between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.

So we are NOT "going back to PRE- 1967. We are attempting to draw a line under the conflict.

So WHAT are the actual borders for a Palestinian state? What actual Israeli borders would the Muslims be happy with? Parrot about that.

They went to war about the 1948 borders, the 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982 borders. They will not rest as long as Israel exists.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:22pm by Frank »

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide Gold Member Offline Australian Politics<br /> Posts: 12973 Gender:	Re: Zionism Reply #962 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:49am freediver wrote on Aug 20^th, 2023 at 6:31pm: Quote: The borders need to be defined BEFORE a constitution outling the institutions required for the rule law can be written. Is this a rule you just made up? The point is a land with unknown borders can't write a constition, as Israel showed in 1950.
Back to top	IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12973
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #963 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:51am

Frank wrote on Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:16pm:

Quote:

"United Nations Resolution 242, resolution of the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted on November 22, 1967, in an effort to secure a just and lasting peace in the wake of the Six-Day (June) War, fought primarily between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.

So we are NOT "going back to PRE- 1967. We are attempting to draw a line under the conflict.

So WHAT are the actual borders for a Palestinian state? What actual Israeli borders would the Muslims be happy with? Parrot about that.

The pre-1967 borders.

Quote:

They went to war about the 1948 borders, the 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982 borders. They will not rest as long as Israel exists.

Just shows the UNSC veto system can't prevent war.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49075
At my desk.

Re: Zionism
Reply #964 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:51am

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:49am:

freediver wrote on Aug 20^th, 2023 at 6:31pm:

Quote:

The borders need to be defined BEFORE a constitution outling the institutions required for the rule law can be written.

Is this a rule you just made up?

The point is a land with unknown borders can't write a constition, as Israel showed in 1950.

Is this another rule you just made up? Or is this the sort of nonsense they teach in schools under the CCP?

You know that people make constitutions, not lands, right?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12973
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #965 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:57am

Frank wrote on Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

Quote:

UN 181 says Jerusalem is to be shared by3 major religions - the rational solution ...but rational actors re Jerusalem are few.

Jerusalem is shared by the three major religions. Being Israel's capital doesnt change that.

I think UN res 181 envisioned a UN-adminstered city (given the complex politics).

But the current plan is for a divided city, each half being the capital of Israel and Palestine.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46508
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #966 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 11:43am

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 8:57am:

Frank wrote on Aug 20^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

Quote:

UN 181 says Jerusalem is to be shared by3 major religions - the rational solution ...but rational actors re Jerusalem are few.

Jerusalem is shared by the three major religions. Being Israel's capital doesnt change that.

I think UN res 181 envisioned a UN-adminstered city (given the complex politics).

But the current plan is for a divided city, each half being the capital of Israel and Palestine.

Except there is no such country as Palestine.

And a UN administered city?? What kind of kiss of death bs would THAT be. Idiotic nonsense.

The Jews accepted 181, the Arabs started a war about it. Compare and contrast, parrot. Go on.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

issuevoter Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 9200 The Great State of Mind Gender:	Re: Zionism Reply #967 - Aug 23^rd, 2023 at 4:43pm You can argue the toss til your blue in the face, but all you need to do is take a look at Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria to see there is no hope of a civilised outcome, if Israel were to let the so-called Palestinians have their way. Which they can't agree on anyway.
Back to top	No political allegiance. No philosophy. No religion. IP Logged

wombatwoody Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 3210 Wombat NSW	Re: Zionism Reply #968 - Aug 24^th, 2023 at 7:40pm freediver wrote on Aug 18^th, 2023 at 9:52pm: What are you talking about? Do try to keep up.
Back to top	We are benefiting from ... the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq. Benjamin Netanyahu, quoted in Ma’ariv, 16 April 2008 IP Logged

wombatwoody

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3210
Wombat NSW

Re: Zionism
Reply #969 - Aug 24^th, 2023 at 7:47pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2023 at 4:19pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2023 at 7:00pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2023 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 8:34pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 6:15pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 2:53pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 2:06pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 1:10pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 11:44am:

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 11:37am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 11:25am:

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 10^th, 2023 at 9:36pm:

And a constitution would also define the country's borders in which the constitution applied, obviating the presense of illegal settlers in the WB - settlers which an Israeli military spokesman yesteday described as "terrorists".

Who told you that?

Would you mind pointing out where Australia's, or America's constitution defines their borders?

Er ...Oz is an island......and the US constitution applied to the already existing 13 colonies.

You keep forgetting Israel's borders were determined by the UN, and a constitution should have recognized that fact.

Are you saying that those constitutions did not define the country's borders?

The borders were already defined for the writers of their respective constitutions.

Whereas Israel and the Arab states refused the UN designated borders for Israel and Palestine (in res 181 and 242).

Palstinians have at last agreed to the UN borders, Israel is still resisting and now its extreme rightwing government wants all of Palestine.

Can you give an example of any country with its borders defined in the constitution?

Countries write constitutions when they know who they are, what land they possess, and how they (the nation) wants to govern itself, iow, the land the nation occupies is a given, and therefore doesn't need to be specified in the constitution.

Israel doesn't have a constitution BECAUSE - after the creation of the UN Charter in 1946 - it's an illegal occupying state.

So how would an Israeli constitution define the country's borders in a way that "obviates" the presence of illegal settlers?

1. By accepting UN res. 181 and 242 (google for details).

2. By defining the role of Judaism - specifically the OT - in the modern Israeli state....ouch, I can hear the fundies screaming from here.....

Why would a constitution necessarily do either of those?

A constitution defines the foundation on which rule of law is based, in the particular nation.

So how would that define the country's borders?

The borders need to be defined BEFORE a constitution outling the institutions required for the rule law can be written.

Quote:

Can you give an example of any country whose borders are defined in its constitution?

Irrelevent. A country which doesn't know/recognise its own land area is headed for disputes with its neighbours...and the international community.

Quote:

Are you having difficulty following your own train of thought here?

No; I'm having difficulty overcoming your reptilian brain driven concept of "freedom" over-riding rule of law.

In Netanyahu's case, he wants to protect himself from rule of law, by disarming the Supreme Court... as well as conniving with the extreme right who want all of Palestine.

As explained earlier, the reason Israel refuses to define its borders is because of the expansion plans in store. Eretz Israel, Greater Israel, the Promised Land, all the land from 'the Nile to the Euphrates'.

That's what the religious nut-jobs want.

Back to top

We are benefiting from ... the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.

Benjamin Netanyahu, quoted in Ma’ariv, 16 April 2008

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46508
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #970 - Aug 24^th, 2023 at 8:12pm

Is the existence of Israel, within ANY borders, acceptable to Muslims?

That is the long and the short of it.
If the answer is YES, Muslims should say what the legitimate borders of Israel are.
They do not ever say this.

For Muslims the ONLY solution is the elimination of Israel.

Not going to happen except by another holocaust. Which is, truth be told, is what Muslims have been angling for since Mohammed the Epileptic.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 84775 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Zionism Reply #971 - Aug 25^th, 2023 at 11:33am So Aboriginalism - like Islamism - has no right to make its own constitution?
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12973
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #972 - Aug 26^th, 2023 at 3:15pm

Frank wrote on Aug 24^th, 2023 at 8:12pm:

Is the existence of Israel, within ANY borders, acceptable to Muslims?

Yes; after being FORCED to accept Israel's existance by force of superior arms, Muslims/Palestinians are ready to accept the post 1967 - UN 242- outlined borders.

Quote:

That is the long and the short of it.
If the answer is YES, Muslims should say what the legitimate borders of Israel are.They do not ever say this.

A classic presentation of bias; do try to keep up.

Quote:

For Muslims the ONLY solution is the elimination of Israel.

More extremist bias leading to further untruth.

Quote:

Not going to happen except by another holocaust. Which is, truth be told, is what Muslims have been angling for since Mohammed the Epileptic.

The fundamentalists - Yes, including among the Christians and Jews, all wanting the world to end ASAP.

They need to get out and smell the roses..... speaking of which, this gem of love poetry from a Master during Islam's Golden Age:

"There is a garden beyond all good and all evil; I will meet you there again one day."

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 26^th, 2023 at 3:20pm by thegreatdivide »

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46508
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #973 - Aug 26^th, 2023 at 5:24pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 26^th, 2023 at 3:15pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 24^th, 2023 at 8:12pm:

Is the existence of Israel, within ANY borders, acceptable to Muslims?

Yes; after being FORCED to accept Israel's existance by force of superior arms, Muslims/Palestinians are ready to accept the post 1967 - UN 242- outlined borders.

The day after Resolution 242 was adopted, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) rejected it as "fundamentally and gravely inconsistent with the Arab character of Palestine, the essence of the Palestine cause and the right of the Palestinian people to their homeland." and "disappoints the hopes of the Arab nation and ignores its national aspirations [... and] ignores the existence of the Palestinian people and their right of self-determination."

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12973
Gender: male

Re: Zionism
Reply #974 - Aug 27^th, 2023 at 11:46am

Frank wrote on Aug 26^th, 2023 at 5:24pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 26^th, 2023 at 3:15pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 24^th, 2023 at 8:12pm:

Is the existence of Israel, within ANY borders, acceptable to Muslims?

Yes; after being FORCED to accept Israel's existance by force of superior arms, Muslims/Palestinians are ready to accept the post 1967 - UN 242- outlined borders.

The day after Resolution 242 was adopted, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) rejected it as "fundamentally and gravely inconsistent with the Arab character of Palestine, the essence of the Palestine cause and the right of the Palestinian people to their homeland." and "disappoints the hopes of the Arab nation and ignores its national aspirations [... and] ignores the existence of the Palestinian people and their right of self-determination."

Misinformation: if the Israelis had been prepared to hand back the lands occupied (in 1967), the PLO would have accepted UN 242:

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/legal-and-political-magazines/un-resolution...

The wording of the resolution was deliberately non-specific in its recommendations, requiring the involved parties to negotiate a mutually acceptable solution. An earlier draft put forward by the USSR with support from the Arab states that required Israel to fully withdraw from all territories occupied after June 4, 1967 was vetoed by the United States of America, who were in favor of a less binding resolution. As a compromise, the British representative, Lord Caradon, put forward a draft that referred to the "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict." The main innovation in this draft was the removal of the words "all the" from the previous draft, thereby refusing to make a definitive statement about exactly which territories should be returned. The British draft, however, added the statement "emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war," thereby codifying the United Nation's position on the occupation and annexation of land through armed conflict, and pointing to the need for Israel's complete return of the conquered territory. The British draft was adopted as resolution 242 and the statement on the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war has since been referenced repeatedly as protecting the land rights and integrity of nations and their citizenry in the event of an armed conflict.

So the US zionists won the day - and caused the continuation of the conflict to this day.

Back to top

IP Logged