Israel will retaliate if the Palestinians take further unilateral steps in pursuit of statehood.

[steve_bnk]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26910400


'...Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu sayshis country will retaliate if the Palestinians take furtherunilateral steps in pursuit of statehood.


He told a weekly cabinet meeting thatIsrael would not continue peace talks with the Palestinians at anyprice.


Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas hasapplied to 15 UN conventions, accusing Israel of backtracking on itspromises.,,'


Retaliate ...just t like the Arabsretaliated against the Jew unilaterally declaring a state and seizingArab lands.


My support for Israel has gone frompositive to neutral to negative.


If the UN recognizes a Palestinian itmeans Israel will be attacking and seizing lands in another country.Probably terrifies Netanyahu.


Israel has not followed through on pastagreements,. Thee PLO through Arafat formally accepted Israel. Abbasaccepts that. At this point it is all about Israeli taking land.


Considering how Israel came about adits following unprovoked aggression in the Suez War it ishypocritical for Israel to oppose a Palestinian state.


At this point to hell with Israel andits self made problems.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One of the agreements about the peace talks is that the Palestinians would not go making separate diplomatic actions during the talks. Thus what we are seeing is the Palestinians once again going directly against what they had just agreed to.

Why bother with peace talks when the other side doesn't abide by their agreements anyway?

 

[Underseer]

Don't conservative Israelis constantly point out that all Muslims are bad because they don't think Israel should exist as a nation?

So if we accept the logic of conservative Israelis, doesn't this prove that all Jews are also bad?

 

[steve_bnk]

Don't conservative Israelis constantly point out that all Muslims are bad because they don't think Israel should exist as a nation?

So if we accept the logic of conservative Israelis, doesn't this prove that all Jews are also bad?

That is the issue to me.

There is no possible military threat to Israel, even Iran. The problem for Israel is if the UN recognizes a Palestinian state, any actions Israel takes unliterary comes under international laws of actions between states..

 

[laughing dog]

One of the agreements about the peace talks is that the Palestinians would not go making separate diplomatic actions during the talks. Thus what we are seeing is the Palestinians once again going directly against what they had just agreed to.

Can you substantiate your claim about about that agreement?

Why bother with peace talks when the other side doesn't abide by their agreements anyway?

You are defending Abbas?

 

[Derec]

That is the issue to me.

There is no possible military threat to Israel, even Iran. The problem for Israel is if the UN recognizes a Palestinian state, any actions Israel takes unliterary comes under international laws of actions between states..

Iranian puppets shooting rockets at Israeli cities certainly qualifies as "military threat". Perhaps not existential threat at this point, but still unacceptable for any country.
The problem is that UN is very biased against Israel. Nobody believes that military aggression from Gaza would be treated "under international laws of actions between states". After all such military aggression from Lebanon is ignored, while Israel is made to be bad guys for defending themselves.

 

[steve_bnk]

Israel earned its right to exist theold fashion way, by force. I have no problem with its existence andsupprt its existence in general.


That being said there are two sides tothe issue. Israel took land by force without compensation. To manyPalestinians the war with Israel over their homeland inclusive ofwhat is mow Israel never ended. To them Iranian rockets are instruments of terror but instruments of war.


Pragmatically in spite of Netanyahuwailing Israel is under imminent existential threats, Israel faces noreal military opposition.


At this point I believe the Israeliexpansionist conservatives are served by the relatively harmlessrocket attacks. It gives them reason to not work out a deal with thePalestinian over land. It is interesting that a few years backNetanyahu said in an interview he thought Iran would be rational withnuclear weapons.


Netanyahu has stated explicitly Israelwill expand into Palestinian lands as it sees fit, primarily byhistorical right. Jerusalem is Israel's to have alone by right. Samerational by Putin over Crimea.


I imagine the greatest fear the Israeliconservatives have right now is a Palestinian state recognized by theUN and internationally. I would mean fixed borders and any violationsof sovereignty by Israel would have legal consequences. They could nolonger arbitrarily seize Palestinian land as is being done today.


Today expansionist Israel is as muchaggressor to the Palestinians as the extremists are to Israeli eyes.

 

[Jayjay]

Ithink it's ridiculous that Israel is feeling so insecure that it gets its panties in a bunch over Palestinians filing paperwork to join some minor UN organizations. Not even getting admitted, but simply trying to join. This is like me getting evicted by my land lord for subscribing to Reader's Digest or some other bullshit pretext.

A measured response from Israel would be to apply to join the same organizations itself, if it is not a member already. That'd show the Palestinians who's who!

 

[arkirk]

One of the agreements about the peace talks is that the Palestinians would not go making separate diplomatic actions during the talks. Thus what we are seeing is the Palestinians once again going directly against what they had just agreed to.

Why bother with peace talks when the other side doesn't abide by their agreements anyway?

Does Israel refrain from separate diplomatic actions while "negotiating peace" with Palestine? The Palestinians have so little left to negotiate with, they need allies. So while you condemn them for seeking statehood and dealing with other states, you are okay with Netanyahu doing whatever he wishes on the world stage. Your post smacks of duplicity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Does Israel refrain from separate diplomatic actions while "negotiating peace" with Palestine? The Palestinians have so little left to negotiate with, they need allies. So while you condemn them for seeking statehood and dealing with other states, you are okay with Netanyahu doing whatever he wishes on the world stage. Your post smacks of duplicity.

What you're missing is the fact that the Palestinians agreed not to. If they hadn't agreed to that they would have done nothing wrong in applying.

 

[arkirk]

What you're missing is the fact that the Palestinians agreed not to. If they hadn't agreed to that they would have done nothing wrong in applying.

Israel breaks its deal every day in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and periodically attacks Gaza. You cannot equate murder and robbery with diplomatic action. Israel is a bully that has to keep bullying to remain in existence as a pure Jewish state. Fair is fair. If Israel can engage in diplomacy, so Abbas should be able to do so. I am certain their agreement was pending actual negotiations between the parties occurring and not the building of new settlements. Again, your post smacks of duplicity. What exactly do you hope to accomplish with your smearing of Palestinians?

 

[Arctish]

The Palestinians agreed not to engage in separate diplomatic actions, but only for as long as the Israelis kept their promises, too.

These deals are not one-sided. Both sides make promises, and if someone balks the deal is off.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israel breaks its deal every day in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and periodically attacks Gaza. You cannot equate murder and robbery with diplomatic action. Israel is a bully that has to keep bullying to remain in existence as a pure Jewish state. Fair is fair. If Israel can engage in diplomacy, so Abbas should be able to do so. I am certain their agreement was pending actual negotiations between the parties occurring and not the building of new settlements. Again, your post smacks of duplicity. What exactly do you hope to accomplish with your smearing of Palestinians?

What have they broken in "East Jerusalem" (you're aware there's no such place? It's just the part of Jerusalem that the Arabs seized in 48.) And Israel isn't a pure Jewish state now--there are plenty of Muslims that didn't flee when the Arabs attacked--and they are still there, citizens of Israel. What Israel insists on is maintaining a Jewish majority so it's not handed over to those who wish to commit genocide.

The Palestinians agreed not to engage in separate diplomatic actions, but only for as long as the Israelis kept their promises, too.

These deals are not one-sided. Both sides make promises, and if someone balks the deal is off.

But the Israelis weren't the ones who broke the agreement. Once again the Palestinians couldn't agree to accept the existence of Israel.

 

[arkirk]

What have they broken in "East Jerusalem" (you're aware there's no such place? It's just the part of Jerusalem that the Arabs seized in 48.) And Israel isn't a pure Jewish state now--there are plenty of Muslims that didn't flee when the Arabs attacked--and they are still there, citizens of Israel. What Israel insists on is maintaining a Jewish majority so it's not handed over to those who wish to commit genocide.



But the Israelis weren't the ones who broke the agreement. Once again the Palestinians couldn't agree to accept the existence of Israel.

Israel is already in the hands of people willing to commit genocide.

 

[Arctish]

But the Israelis weren't the ones who broke the agreement. Once again the Palestinians couldn't agree to accept the existence of Israel.

What agreement are you talking about? I'm talking about this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%9314_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_peace_talks, the most recent American-led negotiations.

On 28th of March 2014, Israel failed to release the fourth tranche of 26 Palestinian prisoners, as scheduled, in what Palestinian sources say was a violation of the original terms for the peace talks,[47] which included a Palestinian undertaking not to sign up for international conventions. After Israel withheld the prisoners' release, Mahmoud Abbas went ahead and signed 15 conventions regarding adhesion to human and social rights. Israel then stated the prisoners' release depended on a Palestinian commitment to continuing peace talks after the end of April deadline

BTW the Palestinians publicly accepted Israel's right to exist back in 1988, and in 1993 went even further and affirmed Israel had the right to exist in peace and security. Your source of information on what the Palestinians will and will not accept is out of date.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What agreement are you talking about? I'm talking about this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%9314_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_peace_talks, the most recent American-led negotiations.

Wikipedia is not a credible source on Israel/Palestine matters.

Besides, this is just the usual biased reporting--pick Israel's action and blame what happened on that. Ignore the events that caused Israel's action.

BTW the Palestinians publicly accepted Israel's right to exist back in 1988, and in 1993 went even further and affirmed Israel had the right to exist in peace and security. Your source of information on what the Palestinians will and will not accept is out of date.

Israel's right to exist as Jewish state.

 

[steve_bnk]

Wikipedia is not a credible source on Israel/Palestine matters.

Besides, this is just the usual biased reporting--pick Israel's action and blame what happened on that. Ignore the events that caused Israel's action.



Israel's right to exist as Jewish state.

Israel has no more or less right to exist tan any her stet. Israel came into existence through military aggression and usurping other people's land.

As somebody said, if you legitimize the actions of the Jews, you can not delegitimatize the actions of Palestinians.

The initial causation of the troubles today was Jews unilaterally declaring a state taking Arab land in the process.

Despite tithe constant wailing by Jews of the loss o an ancient homeland,Palestine was never the exclusive residence of a monolithic group of Jews.

That is Jewish mythology not supported by facts.

It is the homeland to more than just Jews.

 

[Arctish]

Wikipedia is not a credible source on Israel/Palestine matters.

Besides, this is just the usual biased reporting--pick Israel's action and blame what happened on that. Ignore the events that caused Israel's action.

It is a fact the Palestinians resumed seeking diplomatic actions after the Israelis balked at fulfilling their part of the initial agreements, namely the release of 104 prisoners. These deals are not one-sided. If the Israelis refuse to carry out their commitments, the Palestinians are under no obligation to carry out theirs.

Israel's right to exist as Jewish state.

First, Israel has never gotten around to declaring itself a Jewish State, so you're asking the Palestinians to do something even the Israelis haven't done. How about we all just wait for Israel to make its status as a Jewish State official before we demand other people officially recognize it as such?

Second, it isn't Palestine's place to make that declaration, anyway. It would be like Canada declaring the United States a Christian nation, and that declaration being somehow meaningful. It's not.

Third, this latest variation in the "must recognize Israel as...." horseshit is nothing more than a delaying tactic produced by that horse's ass Netanyahu. The Palestinians don't have to recognize Israel as anything more than a sovereign nation in order to make peace with it, and everyone in the entire world knows it.

Fourth, as steve_bnk has pointed out, Israel came into existence through military aggression and usurping other people's land. If the Palestinians follow suit, and simply declare their state exists and establish their rule over it by force, the Israelis are the last people on Earth who have a right to complain about it. The fact the Palestinians are seeking a diplomatic solution rather than pursuing their goals through violence is a huge improvement over the way this fight has been carried out in the past.

You started this thread with the title: Israel will retaliate if the Palestinians take further unilateral steps in pursuit of statehood. That puts Israel in the same role as the Arab nations that retaliated when Zionists took unilateral steps in pursuit of Israeli statehood. So I have to ask, have you changed your mind about the rightness of unilateral steps in pursuit of statehood?

 

[steve_bnk]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26982166


'...In the latest development, Israeliofficials are quoted as saying that debt payments would be deductedfrom tax transfers routinely received by the PA.


Israel collects taxes on behalf of thePalestinians, and transfers about $100m (80m euros) per month,accounting for two-thirds of the authority's budget.


It is not yet clear how much money willbe withheld or for how long.


Israel has also said it would suspendits participation in a gas exploration off the coast of the GazaStrip.


Mr Erekat told AFP news agency it was"theft of the Palestinian people's money" and a "violationof international law and norms by Israel".


It follows Israel's decision onWednesday to limit its contacts with Palestinian officials inreaction to PA President Mahmoud Abbas's signing of ..'

They are being bastards who know they can be SOBs without any meaningful retaliation.

 

[Arctish]

Next comes the destruction of wells and power grids.