Jews settle in Palestinian Jerusalem

.

Not in this instance what? And I never said you said anything about resolutions. I was killing two birds with one stone.


Here is a neat article I found.


http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_un_194.php

I consider myself "pro-Israel", although I am becoming less so as time goes on. I completely agree with Logic's statements and would like to also add that these settlements are just plain wrong and will do nothing more than prolong the conflict and increase reprisals. Stupid policy.

I'm also somewhat pro-Israel. We created this state, and we have no right to take it away from them. But we must be able to force them to follow international laws and conventions. I never heard the "pro-Israel" crowd say this either: Why is Israel so ungrateful. They say it in every thread where France is mentioned.......

The settlements are one of the biggest problems in the peaceprocess. I think that Sharon knows that and the fact that he still today builds new settlements and moves Israelis into occupied areas make me very furious. He is willingly destroying the peaceprocess. How is that going to result in lasting peace?

In 1967, Egypt told the UN Peacekeeping forces to leave the Sinai so that Egypt could attack Israel. The UN complied, and Israel was left to defend herself.

After the war had ended and Israel emerged still intact despite Egypt and Syria's best efforts, Israeli Prime Minister Abba Eban went to the UN, and spoke, saying "What is the use of a United Nations presence if it is in effect an umbrella which is taken away as soon as it begins to rain?"

(quote from section 165 of http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/bd...525672700590136!OpenDocument )

That was only one of the first blows to UN credibility in Israeli eyes. Umpteen resolutions including one proclaiming that "Zionism is equal to racism" haven't helped either. Remember when the US and Israel walked out on the UN in Durban?

Also, Syria having such a strong role in the UN, pushing resolutions against Israel, while at the same time lobbing fire from the north into Israeli kibbutzes doesn't help the UN gain much respect with Israel.

You may not agree with the facts as I've expressed them, but you didn't ask for facts that agreed with your understanding, you asked why Israel isn't more of a cheerleader for the UN. Seen from the perspective I put forth in this post, I think you've got your answer now.

EDIT: found UN archives for Abba Eban's speech and corrected his quote for accuracy.

I think it comes down to you have to take a side:

1. Don't like UN... and will leave.

2. Tolerate UN, and accept it's decisions.

This goes for all countries.

Good point. Noone is forcing any nation to be a part of the UN.

file this under 'disturbing'. from the blog at the link shown.

http://www.grotto11.com/blog/

This is a circular argument.
If you don't risk your false security, you won't have any security at all.

There can be peace that quiets the riots. Just take a look at what happened to Rabin -- he was killed by an extremist (Jewish extremist, but as far as history goes (till now), it could've been a Palestinian, too). There will always be people of that kind on both sides. Do you want them to disrupt a permanent peaceful solution?

Israel is committing crimes against humanity, it has A weapons, they do have tortured people (even to death; my favorite is ?shaking the head': shake the head of the object until a) he speaks or b) he is whacko -- leave no traces of abuse), killed people without a fair trial, etc.

Oreo, we've covered this before, yet you repeat without introducing anything new, or clarifying your previous points any better.

Peace does not simply mean an absence of violence, peace is more than that. Peace is going to take the form of people living without fear of instigation or reprisal, of a complete absence of people threatening to push other people into the sea.

There is some sense of security now, and it is not false. It isn't peace, but it is security. You would have that given up first and then come to the table. It doesn't work that way, and any government who tried that wouldn't have the support of the voting public. Without the support of the voting public, any agreement made would not be sustainable.

As for your accusations of torture and weapons possession, they are cute: no proof offered for the weapons, a grisly description of torture, which you then say leaves no evidence. So there's an accusation that you can't back up, because there's no proof. You say it happens as a common practice, I say it doesn't.

People who have killed Israelis and not blown themselves up in the process, killed military and civilians alike, have stood trial and been sentenced in Israel. Israel holds trials, and they aren't for show to make you sitting in Germany feel good. They are a matter of
seeing that people who commit crimes are brought to justice. Some of the people who were sentenced are still in prison in Israel. Others were bargained with as a part of some prior talks, sent back to West Bank or Gaza territory, and meant to be imprisoned there. What happened instead? The Palestinian policemen released them, so they're out killing again.

I want to focus on this point, because I gotta go to class now.

We (as in the Germans) have experience with Walls (part of your ?new' security, not all, but an important part). Trust us, they don't work. You are caging yourself in, suffocating the Palestinians and -- in the end -- yourself.

The GDR has collapsed because the state was basically kept alive by Western Germany. Israel is very much dependent on funds from countries like the US and European Unioin (among others, Germany). If this support is withdrawn, there will be little money left to fund this insane machinery of military that Israel has. And there will be no money to build (or later to operate) the Walls.
Sooner or later Israel would collapse.

So it is necessary to negotiate for a peace even if there still is much violence in the streets.
Both sides have to learn peace, it won't fall from the sky by itself.

Which is way we should completely pull out of the Israel/Palestine conflict.

*there will never be peace*

no side wants it, no side craves it. No side needs it.

It will never happen. [book]mark my words.

I read that in a book once.

Must have been a good honest book.

Two sides, that love war...

Why/how would there be peace?

That's like Microsoft going open source.

Oh it was.


Not sure if BOTH sides love war. As in one side just want to KEEP their land.

I think it's similar to many elderly people...

They like having a bad hip or something... because it gets them attention. If they admit to feeling better... people stop serving them...

But as long as they keep the pain going... they get served.

the fact of the matter is that the only people that have a true claim to Israel (not Palestine, there is no Palestine on my world map), are the Jews. If you can find the word "jerusalem" in the koran... you can start your argument, but as far as i Know, it is not in there. so, pack up your bags, stop strapping dynamite to your chests and blowing people up... leave the land to the nurturers (the Jews), not the terrorists (Arabs).

There will be peace once the Arabs leave, or start behaving like people, not animals.

Do you support the annexation of Germany as part of reparation from WWII?