• 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!

US: Israel broke its word on new settlements

ajn678 said:
Both sides need to take blame on what happens in the region. Its not as simple as saying Israel is right all the time, or Palestine is right all the time. Sadly, that's what most people do.
Click to expand...


Israel is only protecting its population against terrorism. Whether you like it or not, one side is the good guys and the other is the bad guys.
 
PeteEU said:
Israel almost always breaks its word.. nothing new there.
Click to expand...

The palistineans have been firing rockets into Israel for over 4 decades. What's your point?
 
PeteEU said:
This is about Israel breaking their word.. not PA, PLA or Hamas.
Click to expand...

What about the Palistineans breaking their word? Why the selective outrage?
 
ObamacareFail said:
Israel is only protecting its population against terrorism. Whether you like it or not, one side is the good guys and the other is the bad guys.
Click to expand...

Given that you have such a partisan name, I have doubts that it is even worth debating you.
 
ObamacareFail said:
What about the Palistineans breaking their word? Why the selective outrage?
Click to expand...

This is about Israel, not the Palestinians. There is no selective outrage here at all. Both sides break their word.
 
ObamacareFail said:
The palistineans have been firing rockets into Israel for over 4 decades. What's your point?
Click to expand...

And the Israelis have been abusing the Palestinians for over 5 decades... your point?
 
Excon said:
Bs.

This is not a new settlement, it is an expansion.
Click to expand...

By any honest assesment of the settlement, its not an expansion but a new settlement.

Israel has the fascinating habit of building new hilltop settlements, or outposts, and then extending the so-called "municipal boundaries" of the settlement to stretch thousands of feet, often miles, from the actual physical footprint of the settlement. This includes Shiloh, where the new 98 units of housing are supposed to go.

The new units are supposed to be placed a good 5,000 feet from any of the existing structures of Shiloh, even a good 2,000 feet away to the east from the neighboring "community" of Shvut Rahel.

If this was simply an expasion of Shiloh, as the Israeli government claims, the new buildings would be next to the existing structures of Shiloh. But they will not be.

The Israeli government may think they are clever, but with today's Google Maps, they are not.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
1. No.
2. No.
3. :lamo



Big difference between the two.
Christianity has changed to allow selective practice which does make it compatible with western culture/thought.
Islam has strict adherence to the Prophet as contained in the Quran.

You either submit and strictly follow the Quran, or you are not a muslim.
Click to expand...

Well, as a tit-for-tat, you should know that under the ancient rules of Judaism, if a Jew violates the Sabbath or tries to convince another Jew to abandon his faith, he is to be executed.

How is this compatible with Western secular culture and thought?
 
Sietske22 said:
By any honest assesment of the settlement, its not an expansion but a new settlement.
Click to expand...
No, it is an expansion.


Israel has the fascinating habit of building new hilltop settlements, or outposts, and then extending the so-called "municipal boundaries" of the settlement to stretch thousands of feet, often miles, from the actual physical footprint of the settlement. This includes Shiloh, where the new 98 units of housing are supposed to go.

The new units are supposed to be placed a good 5,000 feet from any of the existing structures of Shiloh, even a good 2,000 feet away to the east from the neighboring "community" of Shvut Rahel.


Sietske22 said:
If this was simply an expasion of Shiloh, as the Israeli government claims, the new buildings would be next to the existing structures of Shiloh.
Click to expand...
iLOL
No.
You do not get to determine what is or isn't an expansion, or how close it must be to be considered one.


Sietske22 said:
Excon said:
Big difference between the two.
Christianity has changed to allow selective practice which does make it compatible with western culture/thought.
Islam has strict adherence to the Prophet as contained in the Quran.

You either submit and strictly follow the Quran, or you are not a muslim.
Click to expand...
Well, as a tit-for-tat, you should know that under the ancient rules of Judaism, if a Jew violates the Sabbath or tries to convince another Jew to abandon his faith, he is to be executed.


How is this compatible with Western secular culture and thought?
Click to expand...
1. There is no tit-for-tat here.
2. Apparently you did not understand what you quoted, as it applied to christianity vs islam today. Not in yesteryear.
3. But since you didn't understand let me clarify. What I said applies to Judaism vs islam as well, today.

So just for you. Judaism and christianity have both changed to allow selective practice, which does make them compatible with western culture/thought.
 
Excon said:
iLOL
No.
You do not get to determine what is or isn't an expansion, or how close it must be to be considered one.
Click to expand...

Well, I am just one person, but the United Stated State Department and the vast majority of the international community will surely see this as a new settlement and not merely an expansion of Shiloh.

The USA should suspend its promise of $38 billion in aid to Israel until Israel promises to settle the illegal Amona settlers inside Israel proper. The time has come for the USA to stand up to Israel's violations of international law and demand that they stop building new settlements.
 
Excon said:
1. There is no tit-for-tat here.
2. Apparently you did not understand what you quoted, as it applied to christianity vs islam today. Not in yesteryear.
3. But since you didn't understand let me clarify. What I said applies to Judaism vs islam as well, today.

So just for you. Judaism and christianity have both changed to allow selective practice, which does make them compatible with western culture/thought.
Click to expand...

I am certain we can find many Muslim societies that do not 100% enforce the more barbaric and intolerant punishments prescribed by Sharia law. Turkey, Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, Kazahkstan, Turkmenistan, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, etc.
 
Sietske22 said:
but the United Stated State Department and the vast majority of the international community will surely see this as a new settlement and not merely an expansion of Shiloh.
Click to expand...
No, as it isn't. And with an apropriat eAdmin change they will side with Israel as they are not just correct, but in the right.


Sietske22 said:
The USA should suspend its promise of $38 billion in aid to Israel until Israel promises to settle the illegal Amona settlers inside Israel proper.
Click to expand...
iLOL No we shouldn't.


Sietske22 said:
The time has come for the USA to stand up to Israel's violations of international law and demand that they stop building new settlements.
Click to expand...
Again, no.False claims of violations are just that and should not even be entertained.


Sietske22 said:
I am certain we can find many Muslim societies that do not 100% enforce the more barbaric and intolerant punishments prescribed by Sharia law. Turkey, Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, Kazahkstan, Turkmenistan, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, etc.
Click to expand...
:lamo
You keep going to sharia when I am speaking of their quranic beliefs.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Until the palistinean side is ready to give up on and denounce terrorism, I cannot blame or crtiticize Israel for expanding settlements. The palistinean terrorist groups fire rockets into Israel on a daily basis and attempt to tunnel into Israel to carry out terrorism. In the past, Israel as torn down settlements and given disputed lands back to the palistineans and they answer by simply using those lands to move their rocket launchers that much closer to the heart of Israel.
Click to expand...

I think you have the cart before the horse and couldn't be more wrong

The terrorist attacks today are a response to an illegal occupation and illegal settlement programme that goes back 50 odd years and is a flagrant violation of international law.

What you are referring to , with the giving of land back to the Palestinians , is taking the prison guards out of the prison and placing them on the perimeter fence. Then strangling the prison population left there.

There's a fair bit of natural resource wealth in the territorial waters of Gaza , don't think it's an unimportant factor. Gazans could do with the revenue from it imo
 
Apocalypse said:
A) Israel has not broken its word, this is a planned expansion of an already existing settlement (98 homes within Shiloh) and not a new settlement. B) This specific expansion comes to offer a solution for those who will be evicted from the Amona illegal outpost that is set to be razed by Israel due to the decision of the Supreme Court. C) As told to Kerry by Netanyahu this plan isn't even likely to be executed as other solutions for those evicted from Amona are sought after.

Additionally expansions such as these always exist and will continue to exist as long as there is no solution to the conflict. As long as settlers live in settlements they will need more homes for their children, it's called natural growth, and thus homes will continue to be built all the time. This is not "new settlements". Israel will not simply withdraw from the West Bank without a solution to the conflict, it already has done so with Gaza and received only more threats to its security from the Palestinian terrorists that run things over there, no reason to believe it'd be any different in the West Bank. Any solution will also need to have the Palestinians recognize some settlements are going to remain in Israel's control due to the many years they have been under Israeli control and their massive development in return for lands from Israel south of the West Bank. They will also need to recognize that some Jews will stay and live in their homes while the land on which they exist will become part of a Palestinian state, just like many Arab citizens of the region became Israeli after the establishment of the Israeli state.

Finally the biggest obstacle to peace is clearly not the houses built within existing settlements but the refusal of the Palestinians to even engage in negotiations for peace since April 2014 and the fact that there is no real Palestinian leadership due to Hamas' control of Gaza and its influence within the West Bank as well.
Click to expand...

All the settlements are illegal , new ones , whether pre planned or not will also be illegal.

People shouldn't be talking about the validity of new settlements , they should be talking about an Israeli return to its own territories ( as per the law ) and the handing over of the settler houses to Palestinians as a means of going some way to compensate them for 50 years of torment , abuses and mass murder
 
justabubba said:
US: Israel broke its word on new settlements - CNNPolitics.com



israel is trying to pretend this is not a new settlement

another instance where we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
Click to expand...

The biggest issue is the general misconception people have about the 'settlements'. When it is reported that a settlement is being 'expanded' or that there is 'new construction' it conjures up images of plowing new land and erecting a new town. Really, this is almost always building upon existing plots of land. For example my family lives in what would be called a settlement, it's a very large town abutting the green line with delineated borders. Whenever any house, apartment, store---anything needs to be built they require Ministry approval and this is eventually termed 'settlement expansion'. With more than 600,000 Israeli's living in settlements it is impossible to avoid new construction. It's important to distinguish this routine development from the establishment of new outposts or the actual extension of the borders of existing settlements.
 
oneworld2 said:
All the settlements are illegal , new ones , whether pre planned or not will also be illegal.

People shouldn't be talking about the validity of new settlements , they should be talking about an Israeli return to its own territories ( as per the law ) and the handing over of the settler houses to Palestinians as a means of going some way to compensate them for 50 years of torment , abuses and mass murder
Click to expand...

Your comment clearly has nothing to do with any of the points I've made. Regardless I will repeat that Israel will only withdraw from the West Bank as a result of a conclusion to the conflict in the form of a peace agreement.
 
Apocalypse said:
Your comment clearly has nothing to do with any of the points I've made. Regardless I will repeat that Israel will only withdraw from the West Bank as a result of a conclusion to the conflict in the form of a peace agreement.
Click to expand...

Are all of the settlements illegal under international law ?

Isn't it true to say that Israel , even in peace agreement talks , still wants to hang on to territory it acquired through warfare , which is illegal ?
 
oneworld2 said:
Are all of the settlements illegal under international law ?

Isn't it true to say that Israel , even in peace agreement talks , still wants to hang on to territory it acquired through warfare , which is illegal ?
Click to expand...

Changes are made after peace agreements are achieved and not during the talks.
The current situation is however that the Palestinian position is to even refuse to talk.
 
Sherman123 said:
The biggest issue is the general misconception people have about the 'settlements'. When it is reported that a settlement is being 'expanded' or that there is 'new construction' it conjures up images of plowing new land and erecting a new town. Really, this is almost always building upon existing plots of land. For example my family lives in what would be called a settlement, it's a very large town abutting the green line with delineated borders. Whenever any house, apartment, store---anything needs to be built they require Ministry approval and this is eventually termed 'settlement expansion'. With more than 600,000 Israeli's living in settlements it is impossible to avoid new construction. It's important to distinguish this routine development from the establishment of new outposts or the actual extension of the borders of existing settlements.
Click to expand...

Are all of the settlements/settlers illegal under international law ?
 
Apocalypse said:
Changes are made after peace agreements are achieved and not during the talks.
The current situation is however that the Palestinian position is to even refuse to talk.
Click to expand...

Are the settlements/settlers illegal ?

Stop evading the question, isn't it true to say that Israel still wants to hold on to territory it illegally acquired in any peace deal ?
 
Sherman123 said:
The biggest issue is the general misconception people have about the 'settlements'. When it is reported that a settlement is being 'expanded' or that there is 'new construction' it conjures up images of plowing new land and erecting a new town. Really, this is almost always building upon existing plots of land. For example my family lives in what would be called a settlement, it's a very large town abutting the green line with delineated borders. Whenever any house, apartment, store---anything needs to be built they require Ministry approval and this is eventually termed 'settlement expansion'. With more than 600,000 Israeli's living in settlements it is impossible to avoid new construction. It's important to distinguish this routine development from the establishment of new outposts or the actual extension of the borders of existing settlements.
Click to expand...
you have pointed out the underlying problem: eliminate the settlers upon the lands of another people and you will have eliminated the need for settlements
and thank you for your first-hand perspective
 
oneworld2 said:
Stop evading the question, isn't it true to say that Israel still wants to hold on to territory it illegally acquired in any peace deal ?
Click to expand...

Answering a question =/= evading it.
You were asking if Israel will maintain the land during the talks, not as a conclusion of an agreement.
As to the question of whether it would maintain such land after such an agreement is reached, Israel probably does desire to hold parts of the land of the West Bank where the major settlements exist in return for land swaps from Israeli territory, there were already several offers made in the past to the Palestinians where these were the conditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom