Quote:
|
If this is what you meant, then I might agree. This is a far cry from "greenlighting" someone or something. The US is not giving its permission for Israel to do anything. It doesn't have to, Israel is a sovereign nation.
|
Yes, this is what I mean. Also, yes, Israel is a sovereign nation, and can do what she wants. That doesen't change the fact that the US
is giving its permission for Israel to do certain things in this instance. Whether Israel chooses to follow this advice is another matter. It is important to remember though that Israel is the #1 recipient of US financial and military assistance in the world. If the US chooses to defy US "advice", there may be serious consequences. This, plus the fact that the US is the world's preeminent superpower, does give us a certain amount of leverage here.
In this case, US statements suggest that as far as we are concerned, we have no problem if Israel carry out actions that are illegal under international law. Aside from the moral implications of this, how do you think this affects our reputation as a nation which encourages the rule of law? How about our role as an "honest" broker for peace in the Middle East? What kind of message does this send to the Arabs and the world? I wonder if this is likely to make the Iraqis have more confidence in us as occupiers and liberators.
Quote:
|
By your own definition of what constitutes legal and illegal land rights, the armistice lines of 1949 are illegal. This land was gained by the British through war.
|
Its not *my* definition, its internationally accepted definitions that we are talking about here.
Also, the 1949 armistice lines dont have anything to do with the British; they refer to the first Arab-Israeli war. The British, while victims of terrorism during their occupation of Palestine, did withdraw in a legally acceptable manner, codified in UN GA
181 resolution
Quote:
|
Well, that's unfortunate. But it sounds like Israel's problem. Perhaps if she wasn't constantly worried about the next suicide bomber she could be more open with her borders. If a couple billion people were standing on my front door waiting to come in and kill me, I'd probably check a few ID's at the door too.
|
It is indeed unfortunate. However, the Palestinian refugee problem has been around for a long time,(since 48) much longer in fact than the tactic of suicide bombing, which started in the mid 90's.
Quote:
|
The Palestinians have numerously been given exactly what they've asked for and have consistently turned it down in favor of demanding even more.
|
They have?
Quote:
|
The political objectives of Hamas is to wipe Israel off the map. Representatives have stated it numerous times, it's in their charter, they won't stop until Israel is gone. Do you honestly believe that if everything were returned to the UN mandated borders that Hamas would be happy with a Jewish state right next door?
|
If the political objective of Hamas is the destruction of Israel, why would I beleive that they would be satisfied with a return to UN mandated borders and a "Jewish state next door"?
The goal of Hamas is the liberation of Palestine,
all of it. The PLO, or Fatah, has accepted the idea of a 2 state solution. I wouldn't be surprised if these actions spell the death of the whole idea of the 2 state solution. In my opinion the one state solution is the better idea, though I would like to see it achieved through nonviolent means. (maybe like the civil rights struggle of MLK) I hope the Palestinians can get their act together and start acting in a more effective manner.