• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Settlers ? [W:60]

Apocalypse said:
There are supposed to be around 75,000 Palestinians living in actual Area C, a great portion of them work in the Jewish settlements.
Click to expand...

But you thanked the post from the poster that claimed there were none living there, without feeling it necessary to inform them of their error. And then you infer that without the illegal settlements they wouldn't be there.

And if you don't recognize the illegal Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem , which the world does not , thankfully, then it is perfectly right to include them in the population of area C

BTW the EU report on area C also confirms that which you deny, Ive highlighted it

On 25 January Israel decided to declare 154 hectares of land near Jericho in the West Bank as state land, and according to the latest reports, decisions have been taken to permit further settlement expansion, involving more than 150 new residential units. On 3 February several Palestinian residential structures in the south Hebron hills were demolished. This is particularly concerning both because of the extent of the demolitions and also the number of vulnerable individuals affected, including children who need support.
Click to expand...

https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters...ea-c-of-the-occupied-palestinian-territory_en

And on the effect of the still born Palestinian state that the Israeli leaderships and people like yourself would have thrust upon the Palestinians and ludicrously consider it to be just

Area C, 99% of which is excluded from Palestinian use, contains most of the West Bank’s natural resources and open spaces, access to which, according to the World Bank, would enable the Palestinians to halve their budget deficit and lead to an expansion of their economy by a third.[18][17] According to Danny Rubinstein: "Much land in Area C is undeveloped. Israel, however, does not permit Palestinian construction for residential, commercial or industrial purposes."[19]
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank_Areas_in_the_Oslo_II_Accord#Area_C
 
Bodhisattva said:
To try and explain what is happening now without acknowledging the history is extremely dishonest.
Click to expand...

All of which has nothing to do with the post you are replying to btw

I am happy to discuss the history , in fact I think it's critical to understanding the conflict but I don't accept the Zionist propaganda version of history that you obviously subscribe to
 
Toggle Almendro said:
That's odd. What are they doing in Area C and why isn't Israel expelling them?
Click to expand...


Asking what a Palestinian is doing in area C is like asking what an American is doing in Texas. That you can't see this it's what's truly " odd " imo

Worse still was to follow

So now having realized you were wrong you quickly move on to the promotion of ethnic cleansing.
 
oneworld2 said:
But you thanked the post from the poster that claimed there were none living there, without feeling it necessary to inform them of their error. And then you infer that without the illegal settlements they wouldn't be there.

And if you don't recognize the illegal Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem , which the world does not , thankfully, then it is perfectly right to include them in the population of area C

BTW the EU report on area C also confirms that which you deny, Ive highlighted it



https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters...ea-c-of-the-occupied-palestinian-territory_en

And on the effect of the still born Palestinian state that the Israeli leaderships and people like yourself would have thrust upon the Palestinians and ludicrously consider it to be just



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank_Areas_in_the_Oslo_II_Accord#Area_C
Click to expand...

Nowhere did I make a claim about, let alone "deny" as you say, the destruction of illegal Palestinian building, you're just continuing with the strawman arguments which is unfortunate as it seems to be the only available approach for you to this conflict.
 
Bodhisattva said:
What the heck is wrong with you? I never backtracked. I said:

"It may not be the best option but it is better to put some in risk in order to create a buffer for millions in Jerusalem. "

And I meant:

"It may not be the best option but it is better to put some in risk in order to create a buffer for millions in Jerusalem. "

I have not changed what I said and the fact that you think that I have is bizarre in the extreme.
Click to expand...

Ive already shown why and how you distanced yourself , get over it and move on.
 
Apocalypse said:
Nowhere did I make a claim about, let alone "deny" as you say, the destruction of illegal Palestinian building, you're just continuing with the strawman arguments which is unfortunate as it seems to be the only available approach for you to this conflict.
Click to expand...

Yes you did. \

your post 17

Apocalypse said:
Settlements weren't built on someone's home, people weren't kicked out of their homes so settlements could be established and settlers don't come live in someone else's home after they kick him out of it if that's the image you have created for yourself.
Click to expand...

That residential buildings have been demolished in the Hebron hills , as per the article I cited , to accommodate illegal Israeli settlement/settlers proves my point , as did the Btselem link , your denial of it is just that
 
Apocalypse said:
Nowhere did I make a claim about, let alone "deny" as you say, the destruction of illegal Palestinian building, you're just continuing with the strawman arguments which is unfortunate as it seems to be the only available approach for you to this conflict.
Click to expand...

You have no concept of legitimacy or legality imo

It is illegal that Israel denies the Palestinians the right to build houses in their own territory. In fact occupying powers have a legal responsibility to not interfere with the rights of those whom the occupy. The violations on housing are just one of many violations of the occupied Palestinians
 
Last edited:
oneworld2 said:
Yes you did. \

your post 17



That residential buildings have been demolished in the Hebron hills , as per the article I cited , to accommodate illegal Israeli settlement/settlers proves my point , as did the Btselem link , your denial of it is just that
Click to expand...

Where you are mistaken is in the "to accomodate illegal Israeli settlements" part. They were demolished because they were built illegally, on land that no Jewish settlers are allowed to live on as well by the way. The Oslo accords place area C under Israeli control and the Israeli law is applied there, building on lands meant for military use as was the case in the incident you referred to is illegal.

I fully expect you to recognize you were wrong now that that was made clear, if you have any intention on engaging in an honest discussion you would.
 
oneworld2 said:
You have no concept of legitimacy or legality imo

It is illegal that Israel denies the Palestinians the right to build houses in their own territory. In fact occupying powers have a legal responsibility to not interfere with the rights of those whom the occupy. The violations on housing are just one of many violations of the occupied Palestinians
Click to expand...

It's in accordance with the Oslo accords. Area C is under Israel's control, Palestinians can't just build in whatever way they want to there that's anarchy. They can build in their own villages and towns. If they build in areas Israel uses for military purposes then they will get whatever they build there destroyed, that you think this means I have no concept of legality is hysterical because it clearly shows it's the other way.
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
It's in accordance with the Oslo accords. Area C is under Israel's control, Palestinians can't just build in whatever way they want to there that's anarchy. They can build in their own villages and towns. If they build in areas Israel uses for military purposes then they will get whatever they build there destroyed, that you think this means I have no concept of legality is hysterical because it clearly shows it's the other way.
Click to expand...

Nope, it shows that you are okay with gross violations of international law like denying people the right to build homes in their own territory. This is basic morality here.

What is legal about an occupying power not allowing the occupied people the right to build homes for themselves in their own territory ?

It also proves the point Ganesh and myself ( and others ) have laboured in this sub forum. That the Israeli offers offered to the Palestinians , that you deem as grand gestures , are not genuine self determination at all. That you would foist this on the Palestinians and seek to call it just is enlightening
 
Apocalypse said:
Where you are mistaken is in the "to accomodate illegal Israeli settlements" part. They were demolished because they were built illegally, on land that no Jewish settlers are allowed to live on as well by the way. The Oslo accords place area C under Israeli control and the Israeli law is applied there, building on lands meant for military use as was the case in the incident you referred to is illegal.

I fully expect you to recognize you were wrong now that that was made clear, if you have any intention on engaging in an honest discussion you would.
Click to expand...

I don't accept Israeli control or lording it over the Palestinians in the OPTs

All the settlers are illegal

All the demolitions are illegal

The demolitions are a result of the occupation, to seek to justify or legitimize these violations is what's dishonest imo
 
Back in the 60s, LBJ famously asked Israel "What do you want?" Meaning how much was enough.

We never got an answer, but the half century since then does constitute an answer, they want it all.
 
oneworld2 said:
Nope, it shows that you are okay with gross violations of international law like denying people the right to build homes in their own territory.
Click to expand...

Is that their private land? No.
Is it land that is part of area C? Yes.
How is area C defined in the Oslo accords? Okay so you get the point.

This is basic morality here.
Click to expand...

It's really not.

What is legal about an occupying power not allowing the occupied people the right to build homes for themselves in their own territory ?
Click to expand...

Again, is that the private land of the people who decided to build there illegally? No.

It also proves the point Ganesh and myself ( and others ) have laboured in this sub forum. That the Israeli offers offered to the Palestinians , that you deem as grand gestures , are not genuine self determination at all.
Click to expand...

What? Self-determination is not "gestures", it will be when the Palestinians sign an agreement and get their own state.

That you would foist this on the Palestinians and seek to call it just is enlightening
Click to expand...

No idea what this means.
 
oneworld2 said:
I don't accept Israeli control or lording it over the Palestinians in the OPTs

All the settlers are illegal

All the demolitions are illegal

The demolitions are a result of the occupation, to seek to justify or legitimize these violations is what's dishonest imo
Click to expand...

It's very unfortunate that you chose not to respond to any of the points made especially for you, it's unfortunate you chose not to abide by logic as well.
 
oneworld2 said:
Ive already shown why and how you distanced yourself , get over it and move on.
Click to expand...

Lol. Since I made the statement and still agree with it i obviously did not distance myself. No idea why you would conclude such especially since i am now affirming i still agree with my initial statement but as i can see where this "debate" with you is headed ill simply watch as you continue to think you are good at this.
 
Apocalypse said:
It's very unfortunate that you chose not to respond to any of the points made especially for you, it's unfortunate you chose not to abide by logic as well.
Click to expand...

Or hear what people are actually saying...
 
late said:
Back in the 60s, LBJ famously asked Israel "What do you want?" Meaning how much was enough.

We never got an answer, but the half century since then does constitute an answer, they want it all.
Click to expand...

I think they might but who can blame them?
 
Apocalypse said:
It's a big problem that you don't understand the concept of nations, how they work.
Meaning; what are homelands, what are people, what is the right to self-determination, etc.
This comment really leaves no room for doubt about that.

Instead of getting angry and attacking Almendo for pointing out a concept you do not understand you should really engage this logically and see that you educate yourself on that concept, seriously. A Jew who lived in Iran in 1942 didn't just come out of nowhere, his ancestors came from the land of Israel. It's not just "tracing your DNA" thing, it's called a nation. The roots of the Jewish nation is in the land of the Jewish people, not in Iran or Germany. This is the very thing that grants a people the right to self-determination - a homeland, a place where they became a nation to begin with. Instead of reacting with distrust and anger at facts that contradict the point of view you came to believe in you should just try and understand reality for once.
Click to expand...

I can detect a phrase among the lion's roaring: not me, not me, I'm special. I have sad news for you Mr A, you are not special, you are a part of the animal kingdom, just like the rest of us.

During the last 2,000 years, humanity has been in flux, moving here and there, mixing and re-mixing. The Roman Empire came to an end, Germanic tribes flooded Western Europe, Europeans in turn sailed the world, and displaced the native inhabitants of the new world. Muslims stormed out of the Arabian peninsula while Mongols spread their seed across Eurasia. Tribes battled it out, even in the paradise of Hawaii.

The end results of all this have been variously celebrated and lamented. Some in Rome perhaps muse about an ancient empire, the Cherokee likely regret the trail of tears, and after the recent US election, I'd bet some there are fantasizing about life under Queen Elizabeth. We could fill pages. The thing is Mr A, after being broken and fixed again, mixed and re-mixed, transplanted and transfixed, it is impossible to roll back 2,000 years of history.

You can't walk into another country, and say sorry I'm late, but 2,000 years ago with was my place, please leave. People around the world today have almost all come from somewhere else, that's the way history goes. You can't wait two millennia, and say, well, a British cabinet member told me it was OK, so now everything changes. So whether some of your DNA originated in Palestine or not, you are not special, and need to live in the present world.

And speaking of DNA, are you really sure how many living in Israel even have much in the way of DNA from the inhabitants of there of centuries ago? The requirements for citizenship in Israel involve the practice of the Jewish religion, not proof of genetic descent from the inhabitants of the time in question. An Inuit tribesman from the Siberian tundra would qualify, if he had converted to Judaism. And more to the point, how much has this DNA been mixed and re-mixed over 100 generations of living in various different countries and cultures? In fact, Judaism is more of a state of mind than a defined ethnicity. It is a group of people who desire a certain belief systems and way of life. This is of course perfectly OK, but you are playing fast and lose with your definition of a nation, and even more so with its presumed rights.
 
Toggle Almendro said:
Well it's true. Why wouldn't I believe the truth?



Meaning your use of the term "myth" was incorrect.



Get a lawyer and give it a try. You never know, you might just succeed.



While that wasn't my answer, it seems factual enough.



They have the right to return to their ancient homeland in Israel if they choose.



I believe that every group that you listed was a non-indigenous invader of Britain.



My facts are already in order. And I am already coherent. That is why you failed to point out any facts that I am wrong about.
Click to expand...

Non-answers, just a re-assertion of your position. You should really try that Google function, it would be to your benefit.
 
Ganesh said:
I can detect a phrase among the lion's roaring: not me, not me, I'm special. I have sad news for you Mr A, you are not special, you are a part of the animal kingdom, just like the rest of us.

During the last 2,000 years, humanity has been in flux, moving here and there, mixing and re-mixing. The Roman Empire came to an end, Germanic tribes flooded Western Europe, Europeans in turn sailed the world, and displaced the native inhabitants of the new world. Muslims stormed out of the Arabian peninsula while Mongols spread their seed across Eurasia. Tribes battled it out, even in the paradise of Hawaii.

The end results of all this have been variously celebrated and lamented. Some in Rome perhaps muse about an ancient empire, the Cherokee likely regret the trail of tears, and after the recent US election, I'd bet some there are fantasizing about life under Queen Elizabeth. We could fill pages. The thing is Mr A, after being broken and fixed again, mixed and re-mixed, transplanted and transfixed, it is impossible to roll back 2,000 years of history.

You can't walk into another country, and say sorry I'm late, but 2,000 years ago with was my place, please leave. People around the world today have almost all come from somewhere else, that's the way history goes. You can't wait two millennia, and say, well, a British cabinet member told me it was OK, so now everything changes. So whether some of your DNA originated in Palestine or not, you are not special, and need to live in the present world.

And speaking of DNA, are you really sure how many living in Israel even have much in the way of DNA from the inhabitants of there of centuries ago? The requirements for citizenship in Israel involve the practice of the Jewish religion, not proof of genetic descent from the inhabitants of the time in question. An Inuit tribesman from the Siberian tundra would qualify, if he had converted to Judaism. And more to the point, how much has this DNA been mixed and re-mixed over 100 generations of living in various different countries and cultures? In fact, Judaism is more of a state of mind than a defined ethnicity. It is a group of people who desire a certain belief systems and way of life. This is of course perfectly OK, but you are playing fast and lose with your definition of a nation, and even more so with its presumed rights.
Click to expand...

Your claims would be a lot more accurate had one of the following been the case;

A) Jews as a people were not longing to return to the lands they were banished from for 2,000 years, as is widely documented.
B) There was an instance during the passing 2,000 years when there was no Jewish presence in the land.
C) The land already became the homeland of another people during that time, meaning a nation-state has been created there and existed.

None however are true.

You say there are a lot of people who came from other places, but there aren't many cases of people without a land of their own. If today the Chinese take over Japan by force and banish the overwhelming majority of Japanese people to scatter among the nations of the world for 2,000 years and then several hundreds of years later someone takes over that land from the Chinese and then someone else and someone else and the Japanese eventually reclaim their homeland through diplomacy would they be wrong in doing so? After all those people who take over their land one after the other have their own homelands, be it China for the Chinese or the Netherlands for the Dutch. Having a Dutch population in Japan doesn't mean that the Japanese people don't have a right to self-determination in that land, it's a bizzarre assertion to simply claim they do not.

And it's not really an issue of DNA, it's about belonging to the Jewish people who have originated in the land of Israel (what the Romans 1,000 years later renamed as Palestine), they have the right to self-determination in the land and that's why that right was recognized and they have built a state of their own. The Jewish people haven't originated in Germany just like the Cherokee people did not originate in Australia even if some will live there, if you don't understand this it is because you do not understand the difference between an individual originating from somewhere and a people originating from somewhere - two completely different cases.
 
oneworld2 said:
Nope, it shows that you are okay with gross violations of international law like denying people the right to build homes in their own territory. This is basic morality here.

What is legal about an occupying power not allowing the occupied people the right to build homes for themselves in their own territory ?

It also proves the point Ganesh and myself ( and others ) have laboured in this sub forum. That the Israeli offers offered to the Palestinians , that you deem as grand gestures , are not genuine self determination at all. That you would foist this on the Palestinians and seek to call it just is enlightening
Click to expand...

It was never "their" territory.

Might not be Israel's, but if the Palestinians never lived on or worked that land and have never had sovereignty over the land, it's a bit of a stretch for you to suddenly decide it's "theirs".

Just saying. When you've already come to a conclusion and refuse to view any deviation from that conclusion as legitimate, you end up ... well, where the Palestinians have ended up. Except they don't just want those territories, they want the rest of Israel too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom