Israel steals more Palestinian land

[PigletJohn]

As expected, Israel continues the policy of ethnic cleansing by dispossessing more Arabs in the Occupied Territories.

This is a continuation of Israel's racist policies.

a report

PigletJohn ..... are Islamic Jihadists "racists", or are they OK in your books as their reason to kill people is religion?

Most of the lands Israel occupies are now 'buffer zones' from those from countries that attacked them in concert, more than once, and in a worse political state since god knows when - and now Israel has more Sunni Islamic Jihadists having taken over the crossing at the Golan Heights.

if you were a jew/government, surrounded by Islamic Jihadist ISIS (who will kill anyone non Sunni), Hamas (who want to specifically kill jews), Iran (who wants to kill Sunnis other than Hamas and jews) and those countries directly around you are at civil wars going on for a few years now - WOULD YOU CURRENTLY GIVE BACK LAND and put your own lives at risk???

It appears what is called "racist" outside Israel, is called self survival in a State surrounded by violent chaos, that has NO respect for State lines or those living anywhere near them.

the concept of the buffer zone around Israel is incorrect.

Any country might try the illegal trick of extending its borders by, say, twenty miles into its neighbours, and claim that it was to create a buffer zone to help protect its citizens inside its original borders. If it them moves its citizens onto stolen land inside the occupied territories, it might them assert that it needed to extend its borders by a further twenty miles in order to help protect its citizens in its new illegal settlements. Followed by an additional twenty miles to help protect its citizens in the second buffer zone. This process would not end until the criminal state had invaded and occupied the entire world.

It is therefore a fallacious argument, and Israel's actions are illegal under international law.

PigletJohn ... I accept your main point as a valid one, especially if the external dimensions move more than once from the immediate post war area.

Unfortunately, whether looking at Russia in Eastern Europe and the Middle East as a whole, its all going Wild West rules.

This land around Bethlehem is not justifiable (by Israel) other than a FINAL acceptance there has to be two States and that they can never trust Palestinian's willing to accept a Hamas and all that brings down on the people, living within their State as a potential security problem every day.

While Hamas and the Palestinians are happy to play war by their rules, Israel on the other end of it, is not.

And as Hamas is going nowhere, especially with other Sunni Islamic Jihadists better at killing than them on the Israel/Golan border, if I was running Israel I'd say thats it, had enough, prepare for ever aggressive forces on our border but lets secure the inside. IMO

I'm not saying its fair, far from it, but this is not a time for inter - national negotiators negotiating with Jihadists within the wider Middle East, its a time to secure YOUR borders, watch things, and hope they quieten down.

People can still fight for Palestinian Rights, but like it or not Israel just sees Hamas, and this is not a time to be in real estate within the region.

Interesting how the media are using israel 'apropriates' or 'lays claims to..' instead of the obvious.. 'Israel steals more palestinian land' which has become a habit since israel conception.. And which is why if you see the before or after maps of israel and palestine.. You will realise that peace with the palestinians was never seriously considered...because
that would mean defining israels borders permanently and an end to STEALING palestinian lands.

The final solution rings a shivery bell.

Israel is ineffect wiping palestine off the map as we speak...it does not want a two state solution.

You're quite racist PigletJohn.

'Final Solution'??!! Wtf? I bet you don't use that terminology for any other conflict in the world. Right? I wonder why you'd borrow language from one of the world's worst mass genocides to describe the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Is it just coincidence that Israel is a Jewish state? [Hmm]

Imo, anyone who uses language or comparisons from the third Reich or holocaust to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is either stupid/ignorant or has an agenda. Which is it?

What Israel is doing certainly won't advance peace. But in the same way that short sighted Israeli policies by some administrations have led to Palestinian support for Hamas and extremism, Hamas and Palestinian terrorism as well as Palestinian denialism led to Netanyuahu administration 1, Sharon and Netanyahu administration 2. They complement each other and strengthen each other.

However, to speak of ethnic cleansing and a plan to commit genocide is delusional and inflammatory - completely divorced from reality - but typical of the kind of Israel hating I've seen.

Maami

If Israel didn't want a two state solution, why were the Palestinians offered statehood in camp David and Annapolis but twice turned it down? There's definitely historical precedent, they've always refused peace deals which didn't include the destruction of Israel - peel commission, UN partition plan, the three nos of khartoum.

Perhaps it's the Palestinians who don't want the two state solution? It's been offered to them, they said no thanks, we'd prefer to start the second intifada! You should read Dennis Ross' memoirs, enough to make you want to weep with frustration!

Shakshuka: Reading dennis ross is enough to make anyone weep in frustration... He is one of the most rabid pro israeli figure you could cite... How about you read noam chomsky as an antidote.? Because alot of your statements there do not ring true.

Does dennis ross ever mention taba.. The deal israel rejected..? Or the fact that the camp david accord was annexation of more land by isreal in a 9:1 ratio; and bu cutting the west bank up in 4 seperate settlements... Gaza being the 5th one....yet overall soverienty still sraeli hands.. If you think that is a great deal then the problem is obviously your thinking.

You also forget to mention.the accord was not only rejected by arafat but by also by human rights watch ;international law and UN security council etc..

Read 'the truth about camp david' by clayton e shwisher... Who was there with a slightly more open mind.

Finally the intafada was a reaction to sharon visiting and his soldiers killing palestinians..not due the fact that arafat rejected an accord.

The bigger question is...If israel was serious about peace... Why steal palestinian land and wipe it off the map..?

PigletJohn and Maami, this is terrible though unsurprising news. Thanks for drawing it to our attention.

I wonder if it is still worthwhile to argue with the people who think that the actions of Israel are defensible. The information is there, if they still believe that Netanyahu is right...

Imo, anyone who uses language or comparisons from the third Reich or holocaust to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is either stupid/ignorant or has an agenda. Which is it?

Well considering you are speaking about Your opinion... Feel free to choose either one.

Im not sure either of us agree with any those sentiments.

That's simply not true maami.

Ive seen the maps of camp david and Annapolis. The palestinians will never get a better offer. Both Barak and Olmert put their necks on the line and paid the political price when it was rejected.

Simply put, the Palestinians could have had their own state by now. But then again, look what they managed to do in Gaza. Rather than investing in schools, hospitals etc they spent hundreds of millions on missiles and terror tunnels. Not a good preceden!

Youve got to be pretty naive to believe that the second intifada was all because Sharon went to the temple mount. Next you'll tell me that Israel invaded lebanon in 1982 because of the attack on shlomo argov. The second intifada had been planned for ages. The Palestinians thought they'd get more bargaining power, led by their megalomaniac leader, who instead brought a disaster on his people. It's very sad.

Dennis Ross is objective, you just dont like what he says! Becuase he puts the blame firmly on Arafat.

Mexicanspringtime: you are corret. Anyone defending israeli actions in palestine are defending the morally indefensible.. It is very telling of thier lack of moral backbone. Even those sitting on the fence are deemed weak or ignorant at best...Its not something any rational humam being can justify or excuse its behaviour any longer.

Of course this is my opinion maami.

I have no claim to the absolute truth.

Yes, as soon as posters use Nazi comparisons i do think they are either ignorant or have an agenda. Totally go down in my estimation and ive never been able to have a reasonable discussion with any of them. That's my personal experience,

I do note that only Israel seems to enjoy these comparisons and i assume the fact that Israel is a Jewish county is not coincidental.

Shakshuka: dennis ross is a member of a pro israeli lobby amd is famous for seeing things only from the israeli pov. I have no time for him at all... Give me chomsky any time of the day.

I do note that only Israel seems to enjoy these comparisons and i assume the fact that Israel is a Jewish county is not coincidental.

Perhaps... But ive also noted anyone mentioning the term genocide/ethnic cleansing/ holocaust with regards to palestinians is labelled racist against jews whereas i see the offense taken itself as racist against the palestinians. These terms are not exclusive to any one race that you cannot use them to explain the treatment of another.

Then read Clinton's memoirs. They say the same thing: Arafat torpedoed it all.

I know it's more convenient to demonize Israel but reality is more nuanced.

I've read Chomsky. I don't agree with him but I don't discredit him because he's anti Israeli. In fact, all the more reason to read him.

Yes but there isn't a holocausr or genocide against the Palestinians. There isn't a 'Final Solution', ie a plan to.wipe out the Palestinians. No one is loading Palestinians on to trains to gas them to death in death camps, there are not eintzagruppen massacring entire villages and burying them in mass pits, Palestinians are not sent to Israel to work as slave labour and starved to death, no Israeli doctors are performing medical experiments on Palestinians. THAT is what the Nazis did to the Jews.

It's not Rwanda or Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge or Yugoslavia during the civil war or Darfur or Syria/Iraq under Isis recently. These perhaps are comparable to the horrors of Nazism.

That's not to say there aren't human rights abuses, that there isn't an ugly and brutal occupation which should end (although I don't see a way out). But it is absolutely not comparable to what happened in Nazi occupied Europe.

That's why people who use this comparison are either ignorant or are trying to achieve something by its use. That's my opinion.

Isn't it a rule of internet debates that the debate/discussion is brought to the point of no return and is dead in the water at the first reference to Nazism?

Godwin's Law I think YeGods.

I think the idea of the one-state solution of a binational, bicultural secular state is really interesting and worth exploring further. The land grabs by Israel are appalling and in no way conducive to achieving peace but I wish we could debate without the constant Third Reich comparisons.

PigletJohn, do you think Lebanon will ever give the Palestinians living there (some of whom are third and fourth generation by now) full citizenship?

Interesting opinion from a US President with experience of Camp David and an intense desire for improvement in Palestine.

Piglet John - the ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem in 1948 was all the Jews being thrown out of the Old City after it was taken by the Jordanian forces under Glubb. Jews weren't allowed to pray at the Western Wall or live in East Jerusalem for 19 years. That's ethnic cleansing, but I suspect that's not what you're referring to....