What's new

United States officially grants immunity to Israel's occupation of Palestine

. . .
US lawmakers: Palestinians could lose US aid over statehood move - Israel News, Ynetnews

Couldn't happen anytime sooner, please do it quickly. :D

@PlanetWarrior

My sources are telling me reconciliation will be official very soon.

US lawmakers are bluffing. If they cut aid, then the Palestinian Authority will dissolve.
PA is the only protective layer left for Israel and US.
If that shuts down the responsibility of the entire West Bank falls back on Israel.

Im still clinging to hope that maybe Abbas is not the puppet I always thought he was. Maybe he will shut down the PA, which would be a major catastrophy for Israel.
 
.
BULLSHIT! You're justifying the Israeli occupation here! That's not a reason.

While @VCheng point is correct that the official US position has not changed, your point is also valid that the US has effectively (not officially) legitimized Israel's occupation. It is a de facto legitimization; not a de jure acceptance.

By demoting the issue to be a bilateral matter -- where one side is ridiculously more powerful and supported by the US -- the US has effectively given Israel a green light. It's the old Neville Chamberlain approach to international transgressions of human rights.


I hate to break this to you, but the GCC Arabs (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait) would support Israel over the Palestinians.

The whole setup is shifting and the GCC monarchs are obsessed with Iran. The new alignment is

-- Qatar, Egypt (MB), Palestinians, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. on one side
-- KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt (Sisi), Israel on the other side

I would have wished Pakistan to be on the right side of history but, sadly, we all know which side it will likely pick.
 
Last edited:
.
Dude, the title is soooooooo misleading. I hate people who do such things. :mad:
 
.
While @VCheng point is correct that the official US position has not changed, your point is also valid that the US has effectively (not officially) legitimized Israel's occupation. It is a de facto legitimization; not a de jure acceptance.

By demoting the issue to be a bilateral matter -- where one side is ridiculously more powerful and supported by the US -- the US has effectively given Israel a green light. It's the old Neville Chamberlain approach to international transgressions of human rights.



I hate to break this to you, but the GCC Arabs (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait) would support Israel over the Palestinians.

The whole setup is shifting and the GCC monarchs are obsessed with Iran. The new alignment is

-- Qatar, Egypt (MB), Palestinians, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. on one side
-- KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt (Sisi), Israel on the other side

I would have wished Pakistan to be on the right side of history but, sadly, we all know which side it will likely pick.

How you can be an PDF Think Thank Analyst is quite interesting with such posts. But I guess the nonsense that you have just written is based on the sect that you belong to and the bias that follows with that particular unnamed sect that starts with the letter s and ends with the letter a.

In any case thank you for the laugh.
 
.
While @VCheng point is correct that the official US position has not changed, your point is also valid that the US has effectively (not officially) legitimized Israel's occupation. It is a de facto legitimization; not a de jure acceptance.

By demoting the issue to be a bilateral matter -- where one side is ridiculously more powerful and supported by the US -- the US has effectively given Israel a green light. It's the old Neville Chamberlain approach to international transgressions of human rights.



I hate to break this to you, but the GCC Arabs (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait) would support Israel over the Palestinians.

The whole setup is shifting and the GCC monarchs are obsessed with Iran. The new alignment is

-- Qatar, Egypt (MB), Palestinians, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. on one side
-- KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt (Sisi), Israel on the other side

I would have wished Pakistan to be on the right side of history but, sadly, we all know which side it will likely pick.

That is honestly the alliances as of now, I do agree with you they would support Israel, but in a form of neutrality or condemnation/persecution of elements of one alliance. It's hard to tell what the future holds, the situation could explode.
 
.
How you can be an PDF Think Thank Analyst is quite interesting with such posts. But I guess the nonsense that you have just written is based on the sect that you belong to and the bias that follows with that particular unnamed sect that starts with the letter s and ends with the letter a.

In any case thank you for the laugh.

I don't take sides in the Iran-Arab conflict. I am equally critical of all military dictators, whether they are backed by Iran (Assad) or Saudi Arabia (Sisi).

However, in the context of the Palestinian issue, there is no doubt that Saudi Arabia's first priority is to challenge Iran, and if Israel helps them in that goal, then the Saudis will ally themselves with Israel. It's not that Saudi Arabia "likes" Israel, but "the enemy of my enemy is my friend (or, at least, partner of convenience)".

This becomes even more urgent in the face of improving relations between Iran and the West. Both the Israelis and Saudis are not happy with this thawing of relations between Iran and the West, and there is a possibility that Israel will do a false flag operation implicating Iran.
 
Last edited:
.
While @VCheng point is correct that the official US position has not changed,

That is exactly why I pointed out the intentionally false and malicious title of the thread.

Your point about de facto or de jure interpretations of US policy is a matter of debate, which, as I have also pointed out, is due to the complex and delicate nature of geopolitics in the Middle East.
 
.
I don't take sides in the Iran-Arab conflict. I am equally critical of all military dictators, whether they are backed by Iran (Assad) or Saudi Arabia (Sisi).

However, in the context of the Palestinian issue, there is no doubt that Saudi Arabia's first priority is to challenge Iran, and if Israel helps them in that goal, then the Saudis will ally themselves with Israel. It's not that Saudi Arabia "likes" Israel, but "the enemy of my enemy is my friend (or, at least, partner of convenience)".

This becomes even more urgent in the face of improving relations between Iran and the West. Both the Israelis and Saudis are not happy with this thawing of relations between Iran and the West, and there is a possibility that Israel will do a false flag operation implicating Iran.

Can you please then tell me how you can as an otherwise clever user and PDF Think Thank Analyst propagandize the false and absurd theories that the Mullah brigade on this forum are behind and propaganda channels such as PressTV (PissTV) propagandize on a regular basis?

Where is the evidence of KSA and Israel working together? There has never been such a thing in history.

Yet the same Iran was buying Israeli weapons and cooperating with Israel in their worst moments against a fellow Muslim country (Iraq).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Iran_during_the_Iran–Iraq_war

I think that you are taking this way to far. Last time I saw the GCC host dozens of Iranian refugees, political dissidents and businessmen amongst it borders so it can't be that bad.

But of course given the track record of the Mullah's since 1979 and their active support of STATE terrorism (totally different from individuals from country x or y going abroad to country x or y on their own) one can never trust that entity.
 
.


Why the peace talks are collapsing, part 94
Kerry’s well-intentioned but flawed oversight hasn’t helped, but it’s a deep asymmetry that is again dooming the negotiations
By David Horovitz April 3, 2014, 1:57 pm


Secretary of State John Kerry stands with Justice Minister and chief negotiator Tzipi Livni, left, and Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat, after the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, Tuesday, July 30, 2013, at the State Department in Washington. (photo credit: AP/Charles Dharapak)

Our objective will be to achieve a final status agreement over the course of the next nine months…. When somebody tells you that Israelis and Palestinians cannot find common ground or address the issues that divide them, don’t believe them.” US Secretary of State John Kerry, flanked by chief negotiators Tzipi Livni and Saeb Erekat, at the State Department on July 30, 2013.

For all of Secretary Kerry’s unfathomable optimism eight months ago, Israeli-Palestinian negotiations had been going nowhere for months before they crashed spectacularly this week.

The Palestinians halted direct talks with the Israelis way back in November, in protest at ongoing Israeli settlement construction. (Israel would argue legalistically that, according to the understandings that governed the resumed peace effort, it was not required to limit West Bank building.) The Palestinians then torpedoed Kerry’s efforts to draft a document setting out the “principles of final status,” under which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was prepared to agree to continued negotiations on the basis of the pre-1967 lines. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejected the Palestinian quid pro quo, which specified the goal of two nation-states for two peoples — a Jewish nation-state and a Palestinian nation-state.

All is nearly but not yet completely lost. As of Thursday afternoon, some of those in the know were describing the situation as “still fluid.” Tellingly, almost two days after Abbas dramatically signed up “Palestine” to 15 international treaties and conventions in an apparent screw-you gesture to the US and Israel, Netanyahu’s office was still batting away a deluge of requests for comment. The something-for-everybody deal — Israel releases the fourth and final batch of long-term terrorism convicts, including perhaps a dozen Arab-Israelis, as well as 400 security prisoners not involved in violent crimes; Israel halts new settlement housing tenders; the Palestinians come back to the table for at least nine more months and eschew the unilateral route to statehood; and the US releases Jonathan Pollard — could yet, just possibly, be revived. Netanyahu had been well on the way to mustering a cabinet majority for such an arrangement when Abbas got his pen out on Tuesday evening.


Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (R) signs a request to join 15 United Nations-linked and other international treaties at his headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Tuesday, April 1, 2014 (photo credit: AFP/Abbas Monami)

But in Jerusalem on Thursday there was a degree of bafflement as regards Palestinian intentions — today, and looking back over the unhappy eight months since Kerry so sunnily hosted Livni and Erekat in Washington. Netanyahu emphatically wants the talks to continue, even though there is no indication whatsoever that he and Abbas could ever find mutually acceptable positions on most of the core issues of a permanent accord. But does Abbas want the crisis resolved? Or was the entire Kerry-led negotiation exercise just a pretext, under which the PA would secure prisoner releases and then shift back to the unilateral route — bashing Israel in every possible forum, seeking international endorsement for statehood, while claiming to have negotiated in good faith?

Kerry’s confident assertion that he could midwife peace in nine months was always unwarranted. But one of the sadder aspects of this deeply troubled pregnancy is his own flawed midwife role — the facilitator who sometimes became a complicator.

For it was Kerry who inexplicably gave Abbas to understand that Israel would be prepared to free some of its own citizens in the course of the agreed, four-phase program of 104 terrorist releases — when Israel had made no such commitment. And it was then Kerry, flailing, who sought to sweeten that bitter pill, and wound up prompting a political uproar in the United States, by dragging Pollard into the equation.

It’s not clear that Israel would have released the final batch of prisoners as scheduled last weekend without a promise by Abbas to continue the talks. But the dispute over the Arab-Israelis on the list certainly didn’t help. And it was that delay in the prisoner releases that prompted Abbas’s international treaties stunt — heralding the current crisis.


Israelis settlers and right-wing activists hold evening prayers after attending a march in the area known as E1 near the Israeli settlement of Ma’ale Adumim on February 13, 2014. (photo credit: Miriam Alster/Flash90)

There will be plenty of dire consequence, including the terrible possibility of a lurch back into violent confrontation and an upsurge in terrorism, and plenty of blame to assign if this week does indeed mark the end of Kerry’s bid for a deal. The Palestinians have a weak president who, while no duplicitous, terror-fostering Arafat, never confronted the narrative bequeathed by his unlamented predecessor, to the effect that the Jews have no sovereign legitimacy in this part of the world. The Israelis have a prime minister who, facing a choice of confidence-building demands from the PA, opted not to take the pragmatic path of curbing settlement expansion and instead betrayed victims’ families, undermined the justice system, and encouraged future terrorists to believe they can get away with their crimes, by freeing dozens of vicious killers.

At the heart of the impasse, however, lies a fundamental asymmetry: Israeli Jews have come to believe that their own best interests, and specifically the imperative to retain a Jewish and democratic Israel, require an accommodation with the Palestinians. There is no comparable imperative on the Palestinian side — not, that is, so long as much of the international community persists in indicating to the Palestinians that they will be able to achieve full independence and sovereignty without the inconvenience of coming to terms with Israel.

dhorovitz2b-medium.jpg

David Horovitz is the founding editor of The Times of Israel. He previously edited The Jerusalem Post (2004-2011) and The Jerusalem Report (1998-2004). He is the author of "Still Life with Bombers" (2004) and "A Little Too Close to God" (2000), and co-author of "Shalom Friend: The Life and Legacy of Yitzhak Rabin (1996).
 
.
Such a polite , decent human being you are :)
PissTv as you call it had been a headache for all of you , i understand that !

i understand that as presstv is becoming much more popular around the world , and al jazeera being qatari and showing anti-saudi monarchy videos 24/7 , you feel corner-d .

what i dont understand is the pathetic name calling and language .....

US lawmakers: Palestinians could lose US aid over statehood move - Israel News, Ynetnews
Couldn't happen anytime sooner, please do it quickly.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

there was an Aid from US ? they can shove it any where they want .....

Muslims only rely on each other ....
 
.
I hate to break this to you, but the GCC Arabs (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait) would support Israel over the Palestinians.

The whole setup is shifting and the GCC monarchs are obsessed with Iran. The new alignment is

-- Qatar, Egypt (MB), Palestinians, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. on one side
-- KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt (Sisi), Israel on the other side

I would have wished Pakistan to be on the right side of history but, sadly, we all know which side it will likely pick.
ok lets see this alliance
qatar has the largest US base in the region and well know US allay also if they keep being hostile to the rest of GCC they will find a way to hit back
Egyptian MB a political group with links to terrorists in sainai cant do any thing in Egypt how could they help outside Egypt borders
Turkey a member of nato erdogan is good at talking nothing more
afganstan is fighting taliban not yet a country with army nothing much they can offer best of luck to them i have no problem with them
Iran of course they supports hamas but they wont risk their country for them especially if the US negotiations are successful
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom