You say this is not the one you refer to? carp says it is the one he refers to.

I would appreciate it if you could clarify. I don't know what you or carp are talking about.

Is there or isn't there a UN Resolution that you two have spent years discussing in more that 20 different occasions and threads?

Am i on a fool's errand in trying to find and understand this alleged Resolution 141 ?

Like I said you have to spend weeks reading the whole she-bang.

As for the UN Resolutions;
I read them from a open minded point of view.

KM, I believe only reads the resolutions from the Palestinian side of view <-- well that is what it seems like to me. Screw Israel no matter what and anyone who helps them to survive.

But really if you take the time to dive into it, with an open mind.
You will discover that whole sorry mess of hate - is really caused by both sides equally, with a dose of religion mixed in.

My mistake, I mentioned West Bank, I meant to say Golan Heights is Syria land.

The one I've explained to carp is Res 181 which defines the borders of the Jewish state. Six and I have pointed out to carp that Israeli settlements on the West Bank are in violation of 181 and that his charactersation of Israel having complied with it is wrong every time he says it.

km

The truth is there will never be peace in the Middle East as long as both countries never give in.

False equivalence - the point is that since the settlements are illegal the Palestinians never should give in whereas the Israelis have no choice but to bow to the will of the international community and the rule of law.

km

By which you mean don't condemn him, I presume.


My question wasn't really how you rated Israeli figureheads one to the other but whether those suspected of international crimes, such as Tzipi Livni for example who was responsible for the killings in Gaza in 2008, should be arrested and put on trial at the ICC? That's what's going to happen if she ever comes over here but of course it would be easier if our allies co-operated in upholding the law rather than shielding suspects from prosecution.

km

The point is KM - is that you only look at the Palestinian point of view.

181 clearly states that Israel is 100% correct in their assessment.

also.

Keep in mind of the 2 invasions by Syria and Egypt to wipe them off the planet. They lost and Israel won. They then annexed those lands to create, military buffer zones. Which Israel has every right to do, in order to defend her self.

Now you can argue that Israel should be building in those buffer zones - is a question? ? However the disputed lands are really about Jerusalem it self - I don't know about any construction in the annexed buffer zones?

The obvious answer: the numerous settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Under international law an occupying power does not have the right to settle land which it occupies. (As opposed to formally annexing the land as their own, which Israel has not done in the case of the West Bank) ...

My understanding is.

1 - Israel does NOT occupy the West Bank - yes they do have boarder crossing check points - I guess you could call that occupation ? ?

Where those lands annexed for buffer zones ? ?