Palestinians under world pressure not to declare state unilaterally

of expanding its territory. Since the end of the 67 war Israel has given back 95% of the territory it won in that war. Put simply Israel has decreased in size by 50% since 67. What were you saying about expanding?

The Mandate was terminated when the Brits left Palestine, at which time the UN Partition Plan took effect, and the Arabs promptly tossed that aside and attacked Israel in defiance of the UN

They emphasized their negative attitude when the rejected the UN Partition Plan and attacked Israel instead They got what they wished for, all or none, they got none

Who is a notoriously biased Arab, who saw the Mandate as he wished to see it Mandate was terminated when Brits left Palestine, then the UN Partition Plan came into effect, which by the way, Arabs rejected when they attacked Israel Really, with all your enthusiasm, I'm surprised you're still in Australia and not helping at out the front

Covenant, calling for the destruction of Israel, and despite Arafats promise, that particular clause has yet to be remmoved from the PLO Charter Let's try and remember, that it was your lot that first attacked the New State of Israel in 1948, again in '56, once more in '67, and last but not least Yom Kippur War sneak attack

the problem is, you're relying on second hand information at the very best Just another guy in the bleachers, pretending he's a player on the field

If not, you're only repeating what you're told to believe by memri.

" C.J. Get over it, mandate is last weeks fish" Quite.. "Try livng in the world of the present, not of the long replaced Mandate" You're talking to the wrong person.. "You continue to yammer about a Mandate that no longer exists, it was replaced by the UN Partition Plan, which hasn`t been replaced by anything, as of yet" Quite...

"The Arab nations do not want the Pal to have a state. These people are being used as as political reason.Arab leaders cannot afford to have peace between the 2. Wake up and smell the oil" Uh? The Arab nations have been arguing for a Palestinian state since the 1920's Guaranteeing equal rights and freedom of religion AND democracy. This was even re-iterated in their Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine 15th May 1948. (Israel ceased to be a part of Palestine 15th May 1948) //Arab League Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine May 15, 1948 ....whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and [whereby] the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed.//

misconstruing what Rashidi was talking about. "So what does Rashidi say..." Quite. Note the word 'national'. "..everybody knew that the question was sovereigny.....Something wrong with this?" Yes. It's rubbish. //BALFOUR : ?The contradiction between the letters of the Covenant [of the League of Nations] and the policy of the Allies is even more flagrant in the case of the ?independent nation? of Palestine..// Mandate //Article 7 The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine. //

In order for what you need to believe, you must change the words. Neither the Mandate or the British White Papers mention a separate Jewish State. In Fact the White papers say a Palestinian state (at the time Jewish folk in the region were Palestinians too), under Palestinian Law even assistance to help them get PALESTINIAN citizenship. Why do you bother with you silly charade when the actual documents show you are WRONG?

or read the remarks of a Rabbi condoni---sorry calling for the death of Gentile Babies. Or have you read Yitzak Shamirs take on the greater Israel and how he called for the judaisation of the west bank and Gaza. It is your lot who have displayed zero tolerance for peace and optimum planning for conflict to enable the project "Greater Israel". Deny it all you want--it is a fact that the rest of the planet is slowly but surely copping on to. Here is the likud charter!!! On Palestinian self-rule it says: ?The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel?s existence, security and national needs?

I have posted this messsage many times but it has not been printed, The Arab nations do not want the Pal to have a state. These people are being used as as political reason.Arab leaders cannot afford to have peace between the 2. Wake up and smell the oil

132 seats in the Palestinian Parliament. Their Charter is a disgrace to civilisation but it was there for all to see when they were elected.Nothing has changed.Here is what they say now,on their OFFICIAL STATE CONTROLLED Al Aqsa TV http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/2080.htm April 3, 2009 Clip No. 2080 On Hamas TV Friday Sermon: Calls to Annihilate the Jews, Who Are Compared to Dogs Allah willing, the moment will come when their property will be destroyed and their sons annihilated, until not a single Jew or Zionist is left on the face of the Earth. [...] There used to be a dog that frightened the entire neighborhood with its barking. This dog begot a pup which was more wicked than its father. The Jews are always the same, brothers. Both dogs and pups bark and bite, and both are impure. That is the truth about the Jews. Hamas got the majority of seats all by themselves in a vote supervised through the Carter foundation,so no pretense please.

Palestinian's had a state, as provided for by the UN Partition Plan, they chose to throw it away when the attacked Israel in May 1948 Bone up on some history, maybe the facts will sink in

Try livng in the world of the present, not of the long replaced Mandate You continue to yammer about a Mandate that no longer exists, it was replaced by the UN Partition Plan, which hasn't been replaced by anything, as of yet

probably a few other nations as well http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Palestine-recognition-map.png

On one side, is a Western democracy genuinely desirous of peace; on the other is a dysfunctional, bifurcated entity still riven with Islamic and Arab-nationalist hatred of Israel and a sense of grievance at its very existence.

Israel will keep preasuring the US and the world not to recognize a Palestinian state so they can keep expanding their territories and take more posesion of land that DO NOT belong to them. Palestinias should be alolowed to have a counry. GO FOR IT

"unilateral for unilateral. hey israel, your continuous expansion of the settlements in the occupied territories is no less unilateral and detrimental to peace prospects." Yes, yes. We know. It's detrimental for Jews to live in Jerusalem and other areas where Jews lived (prior to being ethnically cleansed by Jordan and Egypt in 1948). Jews simply breathing air in the region is, "detrimental and unilateral."

hey israel, your continuous expansion of the settlements in the occupied territories is no less unilateral and detrimental to peace prospects

will not end well. Not for them or Israel.

So what does Rashidi says Well he says that ninety of the population who are Arabs "was effectively ignored as a national or political entity." So indeed they were ignored nationally By contrast the British and the League of Nations granted the Jewish Agency "quasi-official diplomatic status," which lent the Zionist movement "an international legitimacy" Namely: They were recognized nationally. Is that a problem? Depends: If you don't consider that the Jews will consider sovereignty then it would't be a problem. However, everybody knew that the question was sovereigny, therefore in addition, there was a demand to consider "other" groups rights in the Jewish national home. Other groups should have equal rights in the Jewish national home. Something wrong with this? Indeed the Israel state provides equal political rights to arabs, plus cultural rights. As it supposed to be.

" in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..." 1) Not in part of Palestine. 2) National home can be indeed without exercising sovereignty, but also without sovereignty. The prevision made to respect the rights of "others" shades more light into the intention. The Jewish national home should respect the political rights of other peoples. If they wouldnt have heed the possibility of sovereignty there was no neded to specify the rights of people that "should be protected" in case the Jews exercise sovereignty. They knew expressely what the Jews hinted and accepted it.

you say "the State of Israel is legally inside the borders it declared in 1948 on may 14th." let's address that?Jordan retained control of the hill country historically known as Judea and Samaria. This territory was renamed the "West Bank". ?Jordan controlled the Old City of Jerusalem. Nothing in here says Palistinian territory

A unilateral declaration of independence would be national suicide. There is no nation in the world that would come to their aid.

"it seems to me Palestine was supposed to be a Jewish homeland" Indeed. In Palestine as Palestinians under Palestinian Law, remembering of course, at that time Jews were also Palestinians in Palestine. Read the actual Mandate. Read the White Papers. What Balfour had to say http://talknic.wordpress.com/sovereignty-state-non-state-entity/ Learn instead of spouting propaganda.

"According to Columbia University historian Rashid Khalidi, the mandate ignored the political rights of the Arabs. Indeed the Arab leadership repeatedly demand the British to confer them national and political rights" You're misconstruing what Rashid Khalidi said. Note the word 'national' "The arabs say that the Mandate did not confer them equal rights. CJ says "it confered equal rights" Who can we believe?" The actual Mandate.

condemning the Arab States Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine. The reasons you give are nonsense.

"Australia, isn`t that a land your ancestors swiped from the Abo`s without their consent, by force of arms??" ben jabber America---isn,t that the land your ancestors swiped from the "Native Americans" without their consent by force of arms. Always making a fool of yourself ben jabber. Try talking sense--- for once

they've tried everything else (incl. a declaration of independence - in 1988), so maybe it's time to try something really new. they'd gain sympathy w/most of the world & w/many more israelis. & they'd disarm the israeli right, which is the proper way to do it, not handing them ever-additional cards & ammunition by resorting to violence. just a thought, on the 20 years anniversary of the czechoslovak velvet revolution in november -89, which was completely bloodless, spontaneous & unpredictable. (it's a national holiday in prague today.)

can you show me where in the 1922 Mandate is says anything is for the arabs? it seems to me Palestine was supposed to be a Jewish homeland. The preamble of the mandate declared: Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[3] http://mideastconflict.org/discussion/pnc/mandate_1922.shtml

Ok CJ You speak remarkable gibberish when you state that Jordan annexed "at the request of the Palestinians". Whose request? What did Jordan and Egypt do on behalf of the Palestinians between 1947-67? I am familiar with the site you pasted - hardly credible. Hey - want to say that the Nazi's only killed a small handful of Jews and even then it was justified. You can surely include a bunch of URL's for "fact" checking on that one as well. Bottom line is that the Palestinians remain the only group of displaced people from the 20th Century that has not been absorbed by any host country. No country in the region (other than Israel) has accepted Palestinians as part of its citizenry. Why is that? Israel has not treated its Arab citizens fairly - not trying to make that claim, but it hasn't been all rubber hoses and water boarding either. I freely acknowledge Israel's role in the unending mess that is the Pal/Israeli conflict. Can you admit the same?

CJ The LoN Mandate (British Mandate over Palestine) gave equal rights. According to Columbia University historian Rashid Khalidi, the mandate ignored the political rights of the Arabs. Indeed the Arab leadership repeatedly demand the British to confer them national and political rights. Were ignored R Khalidi says that The B Mandate favored the Jews. The Jews said also that it favored the Jews, although afterwards the British betrayed the Jews to appease arabs. The arabs say that the Mandate did not confer them equal rights. CJ says "it confered equal rights" Who can we believe?

The people of the US and the President of the US. Especially the President of the US who needs every vote in the US SENATE to pass his domestic policy,

"It wasn`t Israeli. As National powers in the region they had a right to invade in order to protect non-Israeli territory from Israeli aggression. Which is why there is no UNSC resolution against their action." The Jews of the Old Ciy were almost criminalized by the arabs mobs of the old city. Similarly to what happened to the Jews of Hebron who were slaughtered in 1929. Arab armies did not come to repele an agression. They were the agression in themselves. The Plan Daleth was the response of the Palmach and Haganah to the already declared intentions and deeds of the arabs to exterminate the Jews. Arabs wanted to exterminate jews not because they were antisemitic, but simply because they refuse to accept that Jews had legitimate rights to that land, non less that arabs. The Security Council did no condemn arab agression because they were defeated. Also it did not condemn Israel annexation. Nobody demands Israel withdrawal to 47 borders.

The people of the US and the President of the US. Especially the President of the US who needs every vote in the US to pass his domestic policy,

Israel's economy is in much better shape than the EU economy. Subsidies from the USA are only for military purposes and must be spent in the US. This provides the Us with a secure mid- East base at at a very cheap price. AN EU boycott would probably be met by a counter boycott by Israel's friends in other countries. Sales of Irish Whiskey, Peugot, Volkswagon, etc. would suffer.

It is normal for the palestinians to bring pressure upon themselves ! They always live on the negative side of all arguments. And their minds resist to learn. All their mistakes are triumphs and celebrated victories. Unilateral declaration of a state is the latest that the palestine never worked it out only with their imagination. It made them an object to be laughed upon by the community of nations ! Israel mistake, is to take the palestinians seriously !

"Borders are created by the victors in war." They're created by Declaration of Sovereignty and recognition by the majority of the International Community of States..OR..Legal annexation under a treaty. "The Palestinians (Muslims) lost all the wars." They're not all Muslims & have never declared war. "The Muslim nations expelled their Jewish populations;" AFTER Israel illegally acquired Palestinian territory. "Israel did not expel its Muslim population, they abandoned their property and emigrated." Propaganda. "The UN and the EU could fund the relocation of Muslims out of Israel.." Why? " Jordan (minus Gaza and the west bank) is Palestine" Jordan is Jordan. And "Recalling all of its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008), Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state"

Billions of conflicts are resolved every day.

"Losers of wars don`t define new borders, they accept the new borders imposed on them by the victors." It is illegal to acquire territory by war. "Why is the Russian and Polish occupation of German lands ok .." Treaties. "..but Israel has to give up land it won in a successful defensive war?" No treaties giving Israel a right to Palestinian territories.

"US-British treaty shows Polictcal rights to jews &none to arabs" The British White papers gave equal rights. The LoN Mandate (British Mandate over Palestine) gave equal rights. The Arab states Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine (May 15th 1948) even gave equal rights.

#39 C.J. 1948 Borders - Didn`t you say they didn`t exist .." No. "...and the Arabs invaced across borders that weren`t?" No. "You really should try making up your mind, you`re confusing yourself" See above "Israel defended an Arab invasion of the area delineated by the UN Partition Plan, causing Arabs to lose land of their own" Under Plan Dalet which began BEFORE Declaration, Jewish forces were already beyond the borders claimed by Israel's declaration of Sovereignty. "Israel didn`t define the new borders, Arab invaders did" Can you show when the territories acquired by Israel by 1949 were legally annexed to Israel? Can you show the UNSC resolution condemning the Arab States Invasion of Palestine. Go ahead......

"the Arabs shouldn`t have attacked Israel in defiance of the UN Partition Plan, which resulted in the Arabs losing a great deal of the land that was intended for their State" It was and still is illegal to acquire territory by war. "..Jerusalem.. was supposed to have been neutralized, which they Arabs rejected when they attacked and took possession of the Old City" It wasn't Israeli. As National powers in the region they had a right to invade in order to protect non-Israeli territory from Israeli aggression. Which is why there is no UNSC resolution against their action. "I know you like to pretend, you`ve never answer the questions.." Strange, I answer every question. "Australia, isn`t that a land your ancestors swiped from the Abo`s without their consent, by force of arms??" Strange I'm a German Jew by heritage. Only bigots use the word "Abo's". Nice to see what you are.

Negotiations start and issues are raised AT the negotiation table, not by megaphone. The Pals not Israel refuse to start. Pals can always refuse to CONTINUE if they are not going anywhere but they don't.They are hoping Israel will come on its knees with everything Arabs want up front.They feel empowered by comments from some quaters as Ereqat said recently.They are not in a rush.

"Forget it! Find the pathetic Palestinians some Arab country to move to. Put `em in Iraq or Afghanistan, bring all US troops home and call it a day." And you?

Regarding Nataniahu you might be right. Even you could add Barak. However, Palestinians themselves should be balmed for losing options when they were real. Of the things you mentioned as non negotiable there is one logical one. Refugees will never return to israel. Palestinians can grasp this demand as asssuming defeat. However, the other way around, is the same. Next, Jerusalem or part of it at the end of the day will be also the capital of the Palestinians, and the Mount of the Temple will also be shared. It will never be Palestinian alone. The question of the water is not a problem at all. So what happenes ? Israelies are totally accurate in the understanding that for palestinians the acceptance of any type of jewish soverignty in the region is "surrounder". So ....they should give up because they have no rights to demand something different. They believe they have rights, but they have not.

if they do try going it alone its all over. The peace process will not be stalled it will be dead. What peace process is that Zionist Forever? You mean the one where Bibi demands 10 things up front for Israel while refusing to stop settlement building or discuss the core issues of E J'sem and Right of Return? It may give a warm glow to the nationalist fringe back home, but 'peace process' it ain't. It is more like the Unconditional Terms of Surrender from a great victorious power. Though we all know really it's just another tricky gambit from the local bullyboys on the block, still trying to get something for nothing. There is no peace process. The Netanyahoos have killed it stone dead.

'For example, you will forgo the UN resolutions that state for example, the final status of Jersualem, Refugees and water resources that are to be distributed on the basis of negotiation.' Goodness, that is a severe threat.. Except that Netanyahu has said the first two are NON-negotiable. And the Joint Water Board, controlled by Israel, takes the lion's share of the water - three-quarters - and similarly refuses to negotiate. Faced with that level of intransigence and greed, there is no future at all in trying to negotiate with Israel. It would defeat the wisdom of Solomon and the patience of Job. The Pals have nothing to lose by declaring UDI, because Israel has nothing to offer other than threats.

If it is a myth that Palestinians want to have the West Bank and Israel proper too as Arab majorities then surely it should be no problem for Abbas,Fayyad, Haniyah and Meshal to openly and publicly and repeatedly declare to Arabs and Jews and for everyone else to hear that the Palestinians accept a Palestinian state and a Jewish state. Let's hear the Palestinian leaders AND their supporters dispel this Israeli myth.Netanyahu,Livni and Ehud Barak have all openly and publicly declared their support for a Palestinian state and a Jewish state.

MV: "O, good, maybe you can convince the Chinese to leave Tibet" China has had sovereignty over Tibet for at least the last 1,000 years. MV: "Russians to leave Kaliningrad" Treaty, Morris. Where's Israel's? MV: "Turks to leave Hatay" Treeeeeeaty. Where's Israel's? MV: "Moroccans to leave Western Sahara" Who recognizes that, Morris? Apart from yourself, that is? MV: "Indians/Pakistanis to leave Kashmir" T.R.E.A.T.Y. Where's Israel's. MV: "temper-tantrum at Jordan for occupying the West Bank for nearly 20 years, or Egypt for doing the same to Gaza." Huh? I'm talking "annexation", and Morris drapes "occupations" in front of me. Do you even understand that there is a difference between the two? MV: "You can`t claim illegal occupation and annexation of a state which never existed" Annexation of TERRITORY, Morris. TERRITORY can not be acquired via war, and that's what "annexation of occupied territory" **is**.

Being Democrats (or the Senator from Aetna in Lieberman's case) doesn't make you all powerful. The UN is not subject to US Senate votes. You only get to ratify the Ambassador's appointment. Only the Executive gets a choice. That was true when Bush was President and is still true with Obama as President. You may be up for election in 2010, but Fayyad's plan isn't for then, it's for 2011.

That must then be a pretty small world, indeed....:)

It is my strong belief and conviction that the best means to achieve the common goal of a contiguous and viable Palestine is to move away from the holy land as far as possible, one option is the Falklands,The British love Arabs and will gladly accept the Pals there.

Who cares about it, however, for the sake of reading The preamble of the mandate declared: Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed ,,,in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. ----------------- National home in Palestine??Indeed, Palestine is a jurusdiction which was to become the state of Israel. No more Palestine, but just the state of Israel that has rights over a jurisdiction of the mandate --------- That is why Arabs have been potesting since then: According to Columbia University historian Rashid Khalidi, the mandate ignored the political rights of the Arabs. Indeed the Arab leadership repeatedly demand the British to confer them national and political rights.

Only power keeping Fatah alive and preventing West Bank from turning into another Gaza under Hamas is Israeli army. West Bank Arabs face only 2 real options: (a) Hamas rule, or (b) Jordanian rule. Solutions: (a) Gaza: Under linkage to Egypt, turned into Dubai-like indl/comml hub on East Med; (b) West Bank: Parts federated with Jordan; safeguarding security & settlements for Israel, demographics for Arabs, holy sites for both. 2-State Plan doesn't make sense only if you think its aim is Peace; it makes a lot of sense if you realize its aim is furhter progress in the staged plan to destroy Israel.

why are you made about the move any way it is a honest true question if this is the goal then accept it and talk later

"Global ?adjective 1. pertaining to the whole world; worldwide; universal." As far as I can tell the "pressure" consists of the comments by two US senators visiting Israel. Not exactly that much to get excited about I should think. And Israel+USA does not mean Israel and the international community. I think that you usually need more than one entity to make a community... Is there any foundation for the title and the opening sentence in this article or is it just wishful thinking?

The complicit members in the US House & Senate are no friends of the Palestinian people with their lopsided support for Israel....

The Arab/Palestinian dream of an independent Palestinian state with no Israel. Time has come for a substantive shift in thinking to end the Arab/Palestinian dream of an independent Palestinian state with no Israel, as being part of a solution to the Israel-Palestinian/Arab conflict. Surely by now it should be evident to all that the Palestinians ability to bring an independent and self sufficient and self sustaining state into existence is utterly hopeless and there is no reasonable prospect that time will change that fact. A realistic analys of the Israelo-Arab conflict at : http://xrl.us/bjxav

just look at all the Zionist nutcakes foaming at the mouth over the Pals' threat to declare a state.... That's all the proof you need that it's a GREAT idea....go do it!

Israel can finish what the palestinians have by just Israel stop to cooperate ! A unilateral declaration of a state is the ultimate illusion ! This time it will be an 'intifatha' agaisnt everything the palestinians stands for & wanted. A road to no where. One must not blame Abbas for trying to resign or quit his PM job. What made him do that is the palestinians & not israel ! The palestinians want from him everything on a plate and no one can do that. Arafat, was easy & generous with slogans that feed no empty palestinians stomach. Abbas is trying to be a realist and that what made him fail among his own people. Palestine is the story that will never end !

contiguous borders.Refuse any border negotiations,that will show the Israelis,you will have more states than they have. Hamastan backed by Iran and Fatahland backed by infidel money and lots of words from their Arab brothers.

Why point guns at the media,there is no battle going on,"tough guys"?

pressure on the world. The international Jew has again got the world by the beiztem. Anti-Semites of the world: UNITE !

When you are told: "The land belongs to the Palestinians, you cannot steal and keep it because INTERNATIONAL LAW does not allow conquest", what part of it you do not understand?

Suddenly and never notice before by Israel - or anyone other - the wrold cares about Palestine. "On Monday evening, The United States on Monday reaffirmed its support for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiations, in its first official response to the Palestinian plan." - Haaretz How curious that Israel has never acknowledged the support of the world for the establishment of a Palestinian state until the threat of Israel exterminating all Palestinians because they declared independence. I understand that the Israeli right would welcome a Palestinian declaration of Independence. At that moment Israel would no longer be bound by the Fourth Geneva Convention or any moral bonds at all. It could deal with the Palestinians with total ruthlessness. The could crush the Palestinians and drive them from their homes. And they will if they can.

Israel should annex gaza and the west bank, give israeli citizenship to all inhabitants palestinian and israeli alike. Make the entire region part of a democratic israel with equal rights to all. The rockets would stop just like violence related to land and resources. That deal a la south africa is just too generous and fair for the israelis to accept, they prefer to blockade gaza, occupy west bank without properly annexing it. The oslo accord is blocked, Israel wants the status quo.

'The annexation of occupied territory is illegal ...' O, good, maybe you can convince the Chinese to leave Tibet, or the Russians to leave Kaliningrad, or the Turks to leave Hatay, or the Moroccans to leave Western Sahara, or the (pick one) Indians/Pakistanis to leave Kashmir. For good measure, throw a temper-tantrum at Jordan for occupying the West Bank for nearly 20 years, or Egypt for doing the same to Gaza. The fact is, JB, the West Bank and Gaza never were part of a Palestinian state. It never existed, except on paper at the UN, and then only until the Arabs rejected the Mandate partition plan. You can't claim illegal occupation and annexation of a state which never existed. MV

//"Annexing land not part of your country is an act of war. Any Israeli attempt to annex occupied territories will be an offensive act of war."// "Declaring a country on land that is not yours is an act of war." The annexation of E Jerusalem was declared illegal by numerous UNSC resolutions " Any Palestinian attempt to "annex" land by declaring statehood upon it will be an offensive act of war." Not if it isn't Israel's.

Once again, the smoke rises, and the cameras shift to Israel. Didn't Netanyahu win his election by campaigning to stop the threat of Iran? Whatever happened?

Good old hamas. Resistance will liberate the land. Fight spill blood, kill, maime. hamas knows only of nurning gunpowder and death. It can never be poart of any pali state because even radical palis are stating to bend towards the moderate.m They have all tasted hamas style of life and reject it. West bank palis like their freedom and their money they can make. Gazans on the other hand look forward to ..well....nothing. Negotiate.. no other way

Bloodyscot, Japan and Germany were the enemy. Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor and Germany declared war on us three days later, remember? I've got news for you. Muslims have hated America for generations, ever since we supported the foundation of Israel, but they love Yankee dollars. Read a Bloodyhistory book.

Borders are created by the victors in war. The Palestinians (Muslims) lost all the wars. The Muslim nations expelled their Jewish populations; Israel accepted those people. Israel did not expel its Muslim population, they abandoned their property and emigrated. The UN and the EU could fund the relocation of Muslims out of Israel and into the Palestinian state. Emigrants could be paid $10,000 each by the US. Jordan (minus Gaza and the west bank) is Palestine. Anybody know what a Hashemite is? Doesn't Haaretz mean "the Land?" To which land is the name of your paper referring?

"Palestinians are occupying Jewish land..." Which UNSC resolution? " Is that an act of war?" No. Occupation is the result of war. The UN doesn't care with Contracting Power occupies a non-state entity as long as they uphold the Geneva Conventions. Israel has not. Never the less, as the Palestinians are not a state, they cannot be a Contracting Power. (the Arab states were in the wars) The Palestinian attempt to sign to the GC's was rejected because they were occupied & therefore could not declare themselves a Sovereign State.

"After Israel`s foundation there was nothing left of the non-state entity of Palestine - the WB and Gaza were gobbled up by Jordan and Egypt respectively." Neither claimed Palestinian territory for themselves. Jordan annexed as a temporary TRUSTEE according to the UN notions of protecting a non-state entity (at the request of the Palestinians) Egypt occupied. It did not annex or claim Gaza for itself. http://tinyurl.com/y8ewves/myths-mis-conceptions-propaganda/#Gaza-part-of-Egypt-West-Bank-part-of-Jordan "Can you clarify exactly what you mean by "somewhat smaller"?" Exactly what I said.

"Israel declared independence after the UN voted in favor of its creation." It would've been be against the UN Charter re self determination. The best the UN could do was to vote on presenting a set of conditions whereby either or both of the two parties could, if they wished, declare Sovereignty. Israel did. "There is no way the UN Security Council will vote in favour of granting statehood if its not the result of a negotiated agreement with Israel." So which state did Israel negotiate an agreement with? Which state did East Timor negotiate an agreement with? "...they were given a League of Nations mandate to lay the groundwork for the creation of a jewish homeland & by 1947 they decided they wanted to leave" The British OCCUPIED Palestine under the Mandate. An entity must control all the territory it wishes to Declare Sovereignty over. They had to leave. "There are hundreds of thousands of jews living in land the arabs want.." Israel has never legally annexed ANY territory

why

Since when is going to the UN considered "unilateral action"? ...what a laughable distortion. I smell a talking point.

by freezing settlements. That he doesn't want to do so is because his government is not serious about a peace that would pull back most of the settlements. Bibi should freeze settlements for six months and then see how serious the PA is about peace.

that this time it is the Palestinians who want to declare their own state. One wonders what would have been the result had not the the U.S. and the rest of the world supported Israel's move? When it was Israel it was OK. Now, it's the Palestinians's term, but it ain't OK. How phoney can Israel be? No, don't answer that question because the anser is obvious.

"U.S: Best way to achieve a viable Palestine is talks". Isn't too much 'talks' made this conflict beyond being understood ? Ian't 'talks' invited the 'language of the gun' to this Israel-Palestinians problem ? Alas : Talking made this conflict to reach the stage where nothing viable can be created ;for the simple reason', because this conflict was turned into a question of RELIGION and mainly by the Islamic-Arab-Palestinians. No talking, appeasements (interfaith); can bring results to this conflict, just like all other religious problems through out ancient history. Those at the helm of this conflict, in the Palestinians side, are living over 1300 years ago & nothing can change that. Those who are following them, their minds are made up & talking is not the cure ! This conflict is sold up to the laws of the jungle to the time when the law will be the price for the modern man !

They spend more time in Israel than they do in their home states. And now they chime in with their 2 worthless cents on the plan of declaration of a Palestinian state. Ridiculous.

V: "The USA statements reaffirm the USA is in control." Or that the USA insists that it must continue to be in control. The Pals appear to have decided that it has had a gutfull of that, precisely because the USA has demonstrated once too often how much it is in Israel's pocket. The Pals have decided that they will show two fingers to the USA and take this to the UNSC instead. Super-high-risk, no doubt, but if they can box the USA into a corner where it can't use the veto then the Pals will win, and win Big Time. Everyone assumes that the USA veto is a forgone conclusion. I'm not certain that this is the case, ESPECIALLY when sober minds in the state dept will weigh up this equation: 1) IF the Pals insist on doing this 2) AND the USA uses its veto 3) THEN the Israelis will slaughter the Pals. That's a very powerful incentive for the USA **not** to veto this, because who needs to be seen as an accessory to a massacre?

zf: "If the palestinians try to go it alone without a negotiated agreement with Israel then this decleration of statehood will turn into a decleration of war with Israel." Indeed true IF the Palestinians are left with their arses dangling in the breeze. So look at it from the EU's point of view: IF the Pals insist on going through with this THEN doing nothing is the worst thing that the EU can do, because it guarantees that the Pals will get an almighty walloping from the IDF. So the most sensible strategy that the EU could follow is this: 1) Try to dissuade the Pals from making that declaration, but if that fails then 2) Swing your full support behind the Pals in the hope that this will dissuade Netanyahu from letting loose the Dogs of War. That's the ONLY strategy that maximizes the chance of avoiding a bloodbath, so that's the strategy I expect the EU to follow.

"best way to achieve [the borders of a] viable palestine is talks." and probably the best way to finalize an equitable agreement for those borders(as opposed to an indefinite period of cat and mouse delays prefered by israel in the past), is for the palestinian state to EXIST.

#1 It eliminates the Israeli myth that the Palestinians want their state to encompass the river to the sea. #2 There is a possibility that there will be a majority of UN Nations that accept the declaration. #3 Israel's pariah status becomes larger if it imposes sanctions and illegally annexes more Palestinian territory. #4 If Israel refuses the declaration and annexes more occupied territory, it is left with only two options: Eliminate all non-Jews from the river to the sea (by force, expulsions, exterminations etc), or accept one binational state from the river to the sea with all inhabitants entitled to equal rights for all regardless of national/religious orientation.

The 1967 borders are no more. The Muslims lost the opportunity for those borders when they attacked Israel and lost the 1967 war. Losers of wars don't define new borders, they accept the new borders imposed on them by the victors. I suggest all you Palestinian supporters work on Poland and Russia, they have occupied German land in East Prussia and Silesia. Why is the Russian and Polish occupation of German lands ok but Israel has to give up land it won in a successful defensive war?

The Palestinians murdered Israeli athletes at the Olympics in Munich. Did they Israelis do that? The Palestinians danced with glee when the Two Towers were blown up. Did the Israelis do that? The Palestinians love death and hate life; they send suicide bombers. Did the Israelis do that? You can't have rational dialogue with someone who wants to kill you and themselves. Check out the Palestinian websites. They scream hatred for and a desire to eliminate Israel. Does Israel proclaim hatred for Palestinians and Muslim states?

Its wasnt 700.000 pals, but something like 350.000 (almost half of the number you gave) and most part of them left Israel's boarder calling the call of the Arab league, to clean the way to the invasion and destruction of the newborn country. As everybody know's, the arabs lose the war, so why should Israel allow a ppl that if not openly worked with the enemy side during the war supported them, to retun inside its boarders? "Land grab" "violation of international law".....what about killing a whole nation and throwing their bodies into the sea? Thats acceptable to you in the case of Israel?

With the settlements growing and Israel in control of B and C areas which is 60% of W. Bank, why would Israel want to make any peace deal. Without a serious threat of war that Israel could lose or heavy pressure from US there will never be a peace deal and all the Palestinians will be deported or move to Gaza at some point. The American people are paying the price in soldiers and taxes but Jews lobby strong and few in Congress is willing to take it on.

...if and when the Palestinians declare a state, and it receives UN recognition, Israel's power over the Palestinians will be over. There will be no more land and resource grabs because that will be an act of war that will set the Middle East on fire. Much of the sane world has wanted for a long time to see a free an independent Palestine and some rightwing nuts are not going to be allowed to stop it, that includes US Senators who are clueless to anything but AIPAC dollars for reelection. Israel is deathly afraid because there truly is not a damn thing they can do about the Palestinians attaining their inalienable right to self-determination, you know, like the Jews did in 1948? Israel will not win this war. The writing has been on the wall for far too long and time's up.

The parties to the conflict will never make peace between one another. They`ve been trying that for 60 years and nothing has come if it. A settlement must be IMPOSED upon the parties by the entity that created the problem, namely the United Nations, which created Israel in 1948. It is indisputable that in the creation of Israel Arabs were displaced. It is unjust and unfair to take people`s property for no just compensation. The UN must establish a Middle East Compensation Commission to adjudicate claims from everybody, including Jews, who lost property as a result of the UN`s creation of Israel. Just compensation needs to be paid in exchange for a Release of Claims. If you lost your property and had to live in squalor you too would harbor resentment. It`s nonsense that Arabs left voluntarily. Leaving is not the same as abandoning and disclaiming rights to property, which in the western world is a sacrosanct right. We all leave our homes. When we get back they`re still ours.

The United States does not have a parliamentary system. Foreign policy is under the sole control of the executive. While the strong political power of Jewish American voters may have obscured this reality, it is more important today than ever. The Cast Lead operation, which was in many ways conceived and carried out with extreme prejudice towards American sensibilities ,has created somewhat of a sea change in American attitudes towards Israel. The scheduling of the operation during our government transition, the blockade against American reporters, the targeting of unarmed police cadets, and the harsh and insulting language and mannerism displayed by Israeli partisans in American media all seemed designed to insult Americans. The attacks against Obama and the mentioning of what we call Red State America by the Prime minister further marked an insulting intrusion into our domestic politics. These actions have diminished the soft powers that legislators often wield for Israel.

They have about the same standing in the world today as the Taliban do..... ...and who cares what the Taliban say..??? The Taliban and U.S. Congressmen/women, the ones are Muslim bigots and zealots, and the others are Christian bigots and zealots.... ....both exactly the same "riff-raff", I would say...:)

...well done!

please provide un resolution/ICJ case # or IHCJ case # or any legal document that substaniates your claim. "binny - Palestinians are occupying Jewish land... Is that an act of war?" ben

within the borders declared by Israel on may 14th 1948. The rest is occupied and not Israel,s as an occupier cannot be sovereign over the territory it occupies. If Israel trys to annex that land it will be an illegal annexation---just as is the annexation of East Jerusalem and the Syrian Heights---better known to you as the temporary name of Golan. you do know that not one state on this planet recognises those illegal annexations and neither will they recognise any further attempts by Israel to steal land. But keep up the bluster SDHD---it amuses us to watch you dodge and dart about the TB trying to defend the indefensible and change the laws of physics . Very humerous, indeed.

and killed 13, plus wounding another 38, Destroyed the Twin Towers, attacked the Pentagon? Hi-jacked flight 93 Seems to me it was our "friends" the Muslims With friends like that, why would the USA need enemies

were prior acts of war by the Arabs Arabs wouldn't have lost the land if they hadn't of attacked in the first place You have only yourself to blame, as usual, you're your own worst enemy

Political rights for arabs were given in Iraq,Syria&Lebonan(plus 19 other countries)

they didn't exist and the Arabs invaced across borders that weren't? You really should try making up your mind, you're confusing yourself Israel defended an Arab invasion of the area delineated by the UN Partition Plan, causing Arabs to lose land of their own Israel didn't define the new borders, Arab invaders did

sure, go ahead. declare statehood. you've got all the infrastructure, the civil, and the political...oh, wait, sorry. never mind. you've spent the last 42 years (and hundreds of billions in shekels and dollars from Israel and the world community) perfecting rockets, knitting suicide vests, and printing school books that teach your children "death to the Jews". yeah, you're totally ready to have a state. go for it, definitely.

How are your negotations with Iran & North Korea coming along? Neither one is giving an inch, so why should Israel

Since you're so all fired up about "Legalities", the Arabs shouldn't have attacked Israel in defiance of the UN Partition Plan, which resulted in the Arabs losing a great deal of the land that was intended for their State Since you brought Jerusalem into the conversation, that was supposed to have been neutralized, which they Arabs rejected when they attacked and took possession of the Old City I know you like to pretend, you've never answer the questions, when are you departing to gain first hand experience?? Australia, isn't that a land your ancestors swiped from the Abo's without their consent, by force of arms??

Forget it! Find the pathetic Palestinians some Arab country to move to. Put 'em in Iraq or Afghanistan, bring all US troops home and call it a day.

I hope that's a promise, 'cause it sure aint much of a threat. If we could rely on that promise it would certainly make annexation look even more attractive.

"Bottom line: Israel is here to stay. The past is not an excuse to continue abusing & terrorizing millions of Pals every day." What about thousands of rockets and dozens of suicide bombers? Is that a reason to defend one's self? You don't seem to have noticed that the Palestinians have made the most gains when they resorted to negotiations. Did Israel, "abuse and terrorize" the Palestinians by uprooting Jews from Gaza? Or did the Palestinians cause themselves harm by increasing rocket attacks against Israel after the pullout? THINK for a change.

legal. he should look at the un charter in 1945 which ratified all of the mandates of the league of nations !

Imaginary countries or territories of the past are not "Legal Settlements." Either war or negotiations will settle this issue. Negotiations are better, and the Palestinians deserve leaders who understand the benefits of peace and some degree of prosperity.

§204 of the Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States says: "Under the Constitution of the United States, the President has the exclusive authority to recognize or not to recognize a foreign state or government, and to maintain or not to maintain diplomatic relations with a foreign government." Since 1994 the USAID West Bank and Gaza budget for Democracy and Governance activities has totaled $337 million, i.e. The Quartet Plan calls for a Palestinian State, not a veto.

Hamas, even when it violently disagrees with Fatah, is no less Palestinian than Fatah. There are also Palestinians who are neither Fatah or Hamas... I have the feeling that they may even be more numerous than the true adherents of either. Hamas actually won the last election, although that has nothing to do with who is more Palestinian. There are Israeli Palestinians too. One or two even vote Likud, I understand.

"The UN divided Palestine into two parts in 1947 and the arabs understandably objected because it was their land being divided." The UN made a recommendation. The division was along ETHNIC lines -- a Jewish majority in one area, an Arab majority in the other. The Arabs tried to take the whole thing and failed. Where Jews came to rule, Arabs remained. Where Arabs came to rule, every single Jew was kicked out.

These Arabs are not sincerely interested in Peace. They think they can achieve their objectives through World Opinion and through terrorism. The U.N. has become a willing and abetting arm of World Terrorism. Palestinians will continue to appeal to the low lives in the U.N. for assistance. Peace for a Palestinian is narrowly defined within the context of elimination of the Jewish state. They teach their children that it is glorious to kill Jews and that God will reward them for doing so. For this reason they will continue on until there there will be none who call themselves 'Palestinians'. They have doomed themselves to extinction.

"Annexing land not part of your country is an act of war. Any Israeli attempt to annex occupied territories will be an offensive act of war." Declaring a country on land that is not yours is an act of war. Any Palestinian attempt to "annex" land by declaring statehood upon it will be an offensive act of war.

"SDHD - you mistake paranoia & obsession for reason. Israel is trying to take everything." Well, THERE is the paranoia. Israel isn't trying to take everything by any stretch of the imagination. Israel walked out of Gaza. Israel offered most of the territories to the Palestinians for a state. All you have are your anti-Israeli delusions.

So if the European Union recognises alestines unilateral declaration of independence and responds to Israel annexing huge swathes of this territory by tearing up all trade agreements between the EU and Israel. Israel will be completely unaffected?

The USA statements reaffirm the USA is in control. It will be the USA that determines whether the negotiations result in justice or a temporary reprieve until tensions rise again. If Palestinian statehood is compromised, it will be due to USA blind concurrence with Israel. The USA has historically supported the Israeli position. During Fiscal Year 2007, the U.S. gave more than $6.8 million per day to Israel and $0.3 million per day to Palestine. To date, the USA has skewed justice in favor of Israeli policies that have exploited the Palestinians' human rights. Coupled with USA government aid has been the outpouring of private USA Jewish contributions to expand settlements. The real issue is whether the USA can suddenly support human rights for Palestinians. It surely appears two-faced to critisize China and a host of other countries for human rights abuses and then remain silet about Israel. Palestine needs a super power advocate for its human rights.

the State of Israel is legally inside the borders it declared in 1948 on may 14th. Anything outside that is Palestinian land and Israel is not the sovereign of that territory --ergo can not offer or cede it to anyone. The Palestinians have been willing to give away half of what was theirs --sounds far more generous than anything Israel has offered. All Isreal has done is promise peace while it continues to steal the cake they are supposed to be negotiating over. Grasp reality --and hang on to it---it is important if you dont want to get hurt in a fall.

The UN divided Palestine into two parts in 1947 and the arabs understandably objected because it was their land being divided. Israel then unilaterally declared itself a state and simply took the land by force expelling about 700,000 arabs from their homes in the process and has ever since refused to allow them to return. Israel continued to occupy more arab land (including land of neighboring countries)--primarily after the '67 war and now settles that arab land with Israelis quite against international law. Is it any wonder that the Palestinians are frustrated and want to declare themselves a state?

You posted: "Israel declared independence after the UN voted in favor of its creation. There is no way the UN Security Council will vote in favour of granting statehood if its not the result of a negotiated agreement with Israel." How quickly you forget history. The UN also voted in favour of a Palestinian state at the same time. Therefor, in reality, the Palestinians do not really need any aproval by the UN or anyone else. The right for the Palestinians to create and have a state of their own is in the UN charter. The same charter that granted us the right to create the state of Israel. You posted: "They were only in Palestine because they were given a League of Nations mandate to lay the groundwork for the creation of a jewish homeland & by 1947 they decided they wanted to leave" The Palestinians did not decide to leave, they were forced by Begin and the rest of the Jewish terrorist groups to leave. You need to re-educate yourself regarding the history of those times.

The US wants a Palestinian state but accepts Israel as the Jewish state it is. The Palestinians seek every way to have a state and every way to avoid accepting Israel as is because after getting the West Bank they want to have the rest of Israel as a Palestinian Arab Muslim state too.The US does not buy into this and the Palestinians will have to turn to the Muslim states if they hope to have their way. The Muslim states are not up to it so the Palestinians will have the status quo.

of war?

You posted: "if the palestinians unilaterally declare a state, in territory which is disputed, then israel has every right to annex those territories which comprise the large blocs of israeli jewish settlements hugging her border." These territories are NOT disputed, these are leghally Palestinian territories. Even we Israelis regard them as "Ha'Shtaheem Ha'Kvoosheem", hebrew for occupied territories. So there is no dispute whatsoever. The Palestinians have every right to declare a state on these territories and a few more territories as well.

You advice is well taken. I have seen his nonsense before, but hadn't really noticed his incomprehensible focus on 1920's colonial "mandates" that never amounted to anything. How can anyone think San Remo or 1922 mandate have not been superceded (if they had ever had any effect)? I've never seen Israeli officials or Zionist book authors make these ridiculous claims. This is just so far out of left field, I had to comment. Oh well. I guess there's a place of sorts even for the flat earth society as long as they're not violent.

I love America! Sorry Nobama your party is on our side.

Israel is trying to take everything. Look at those who say Israel should just annex WB. Israel has committed to stopping settlments many times, but never slowed down. That's why PA has said "enough." Goldstone and everyone but IDF who's looked at Cast Lead found deliberate attacks on civilians. Most WB Pals killed have been civilians, far nore than the number of Israelis killed. I've been watching this history unfold since before 1967. I remember it well, pro-Israel at the time. The Pals tried to recover what they'd lost, including property stolen from refugees in violation of 20th century norm. Bottom line: Israel is here to stay. The past is not an excuse to continue abusing & terrorizing millions of Pals every day. Pals are now far more persecuted than Jews ever have been except for the holocaust. Where can Jews not travel among their own cities w/o soldiers threatening, abusing & interfering? Ive seen it, you haven't, have you? Time for the pity party to stop

Haha. Ya, Israel does not violate any agreement. Israel never violates any agreements, especially Oslo. Be realistic and fair!!! Now go have fun on Hof Hatzuk.

Any Israeli attempt to annex occupied territories will be an offensive act of war.

"The move, however, reflects growing Palestinian frustration with the deadlock in peace efforts". If so let the Arabs propose some concessions since they have not offered any in the 61 years of Israel's rebirth. The best that some of them have come up with is to stop their attacks for a 'period of time' up to 10 years. Reiterating ones demands is not negotiating in any sense of the word. Hamas spokesman talks about WB and Gaza being 20% of pal land....hmmm...maybe Jordan is next on the checklist...after they overpower the regions strongest military power.

"After Israel was carved off, what remained of the non-state entity of Palestine, somewhat smaller, still called Palestine." After Israel's foundation there was nothing left of the non-state entity of Palestine - the WB and Gaza were gobbled up by Jordan and Egypt respectively. Can you clarify exactly what you mean by "somewhat smaller"?

If the PA declare a state on 67 greenline it is inline with Saudi peace plan and would put US in a hard position, its goal seem to be very close to that. If the US sides with Israel on veto, it will push the Muslims away from US, while this is good for Israel it could harm the US in many ways. China could become the big winner in this if they play their cards right, with 3nd world countries key to US exports grown and US unemployment. Most American don't understand this and only see Muslims at the current enemy and Israel as a friend but the US needs Muslim support long term more than Israel's. In WWII Germany and Japan were seen as the enemy only to help build the US economy later.

did you forget them. "Israel has a 20% Muslim population. Palestinian areas have been wiped clean of Jews." sdhd waana talk about the jews only illegal settlements--or are you happy being just a tad better than Hamas. Better than the worst---but way behind the best. Hmmmm???.

they sign the reconciliation agreement with Fatah, which would signify that they accept the PLO signed agreements with Israel. I believe that President Abbas signed it and that they claimed that they'll sign it by the end of November. Otherwise, I don't really agree that they are operating for the benefit of Palestinians on the whole. In any case, Minister Benjamin Ben Eliezer is correct with the approach to continue negotiations now and that unilateral declarations are unhelpful since they don't resolve the conflict concerning the core issues which are to be negotiated according to all U.N. resolutions anyways.

If you can explain why Ecevit made a coalition government with Necmettin Erbakan in 1973 and more recently with a wider coalition that included MHP then you might have explained why Barak accepted to be in a coalition with Netanyahu. All politics eveywhere.

"Israels violation of the Road Map, Oslo. That is unilateral." The Road Map and Oslo agreements have requirements from both parties. The Palestinians haven't fulfilled theirs, therefore, Israel isn't obligated to fulfill theirs fully either. Israel held up more of its end of the Road Map than the Palestinians did of theirs.

"Hamas is as bad as Israel, greedy beyond reason and too stupid to realize the realities of the situation." Except, Israel isn't trying to take everything, Hamas is. Israel has a 20% Muslim population. Palestinian areas have been wiped clean of Jews. Hamas goes out of its way to attack civilians, only idiots believe that Israel does. Maybe you are too stupid to realize the reality of the situation. The Islamic countries surrounding Israel have tried to wipe it off the map and it has been under constant attack by Palestinian terrorists for quite some time. In fact, Jews have had to live under the shadow of Arab rampages against them since 1920.

Israel declared independence after the UN voted in favor of its creation. There is no way the UN Security Council will vote in favour of granting statehood if its not the result of a negotiated agreement with Israel. They were only in Palestine because they were given a League of Nations mandate to lay the groundwork for the creation of a jewish homeland & by 1947 they decided they wanted to leave There are hundreds of thousands of jews living in land the arabs want do you think Israel will abandon them if the UN says the arabs can have the land Israel also still controls all the borders of this state & they can't travel between the 2 parts of their country without Israeli permission because they have to go through Israel. Israel can destroy this state before its born if it wants to It would be like giving the palestinians a car without an engine. Chris Israels economy is fine we are out of recession, the economy is growing & the shekel is even traded on international exchanges.

Paul Harris from TA---Google the name and you will get 1922 references to 1921 and vice versa. He has been making this idiot claim for decades. You will soon get a taste of his venom--fortunately he is mostly harmless.

"If the Pals declare an independent state, there`s only two things Israel can do in reality." That's because you have a very small mind which is incapable of grasping any number of possibilities. In reality, Israel can sit on whichever land it chooses to -- whether there is a supposed recognized or unrecognized Palestinian self-declared state or not.

That is unilateral.

History is clear. Israel was legally created by... UN and world recognition of Israel, combined with res 242 and other UN resolutions tha are the only active, legitimate international law relating to Israel. Israel was not created by Balfour, San Remo or the so-called 1922 mandate. It was created by Zionist forces that conquered land and obtained recgnition by the US, UN and others. Israel in no way existed in 1920 or 1922. All these never-consummated, never really relevant "mandates" are absolutely irrelevant. What is your obsession with colonial mandates? They mean nothing. If Ben Gurion and company had stayed home, Israel would never have existed. Do you know of any other human being that buys this 1922 mandate foolishness? Can you even point out any references to it in real international law, passed by the UN or signed by all affected parties??? You shouldnt be calling anyone a buffoon. It is you that ignores real, enforceable international law

1) The Security Council will never endorse a palestinian state created without Israels agreement its the only way to avoid a full scale war. If the UN did vote in favor the US would be forced to use their veto to block the creation of a state that didn't come about through negotiation to avoid a war 2) The world might be willing to go to war with Saddam Hussain but the UN is never going to vote in favour of going to war with Israel Abbas is going to have to climb down of his high horse and agree to talk with Bibi even if he doesn't stop all settlement construction which he can't deliver if he wants to keep his coalition together. Negotiate he might get something no promises but if he wants to play high minded and refuse to talk he gets nothing. Its Obamas attempts to appease the arabs have caused all this. He has led the arabs to believe if they demand something from Israel they can have it. In this case even though Obama doesn't like Israel he cannot give Abbas what he wants.

Try as I may, I cant find any way or reason the 1922 mandate is even remotely relevant. It never was and never will be binding on anyone. Even if it had ever been in any way agreed, it was never implemented and has long been superseded by later developments. You just like to look around for dead non-agreements that were never implemented and give them legitimacy you deny actual resolutions and international law. Enjoy your fantasies, but dont mistake them for anything real. No one else does.

which is a quite big genie actually. If the European union recognise a self declared Palestinian State and Israel annexes it. How long will Israel be able to last before it collapses economically?

Israel became a nation after it unilaterally declared indipendence. So Palestinians can fallow example.

If the palestinians try to go it alone without a negotiated agreement with Israel then this decleration of statehood will turn into a decleration of war with Israel. Israel can't just abandon hundreds of thousands of jews in the land the arabs will declare as being their state and the result will be a full scale war and create regional instbility. Bibi has said today that if they declare unilateral statehood then Israel will annex settlements that means both sides will be fighting to defend their territory. The last thing that the EU wants is to do anything thats going to spark a war so if it comes to giving the palestinians the support for unilaterally declaring statehood then they will say no. We support a negotiated solution & will back that but if you go it alone we will vote against you. If the palestinians go to the Security Council they don't have a hope of getting support but if they do try going it alone its all over. The peace process will not be stalled it will be dead.

"Hamas to Palestinians: End occupation, then declare state" Hamas to Palestinians. Suddenly Hamas is no longer Palestinian? Interesting, the way language is used to mould reality. People are already starting to believe it. Sorry to disappoint y'all, but Hamas IS Palestinian. However much this government prefers to make you think it isn't, the intelligent among you will continue to bear that in mind as it will help you to interpret what will otherwise seem unintelligible. Haaretz, your help would be appreciated.

Hamas is as bad as Israel, greedy beyond reason and too stupid to realize the realities of the situation. Israel is not going away. I dont even think most Hamas leaders are stupid enough to believe oherwise. The PLO and PA have long recognized this. "It simply aims at escaping the benefits of resistance against the occupation," The benefits of resisting occupation? the immense suffering of your people, the lack of a homeland? What are these benefits? Now, the Pals are stateless orphans, not directly protected by the Geneva Conventions and unable to effectively resist occupation. What have your rockets gotten you? nothing! Declare a state, be recognized by major countries like Russia, sign the Geneva Conventions. Seek to join UN. All of a sudden, the Pals have rights. Israeli abuse and settlements become unlawful beyond question. Israel may try annexation, but the world will not recognize it and the UN will step in. Pals will have real defenses to Israeli abus

In 1988 arafat already declared palestinian state. Let them make these declarations into a weekly occurrence for all I care.

... required, to assist you. I.e. Israel is no longer required to share water that is in Israel proper, to share energy or other infrastructure. You will have NO AIRPORT, Your only Port on the sea would be Gaza, but you would not be able to move product from Gaza through Israel to " West Bank Palestine". Oh the amount of headaches you will bring upon yourself with such an action. For example, you will forgo the UN resolutions that state for example, the final status of Jersualem, Refugees and water resources that are to be distributed on the basis of negotiation. You will have in all effect ended the terms of the conflict without negotating the means of life for your peoples. But I guess the means of life for your peoples was never that big an imperative or we'd probably have stitched this rift up by now...

A Declaration of Statehood, in disputed lands where the peoples who plan to declare statehood, hold no or extremely limited legal and military sovereignty over the lands can be construed as an act of war. "Hamas spokesman Salah Bardweel said on Monday, "why not declare a Palestinian state from the sea [Mediterranean] to the river [of Jordan]" rather than in the West Bank and Gaza only." So, Palestinians, follow the Hamas dream and see where it leads you. The Yassir Arafat Dream of 1988 has been coming along well for you, 20 years and you've got less land now than you did then. And if you wait another 20 years, well, you will have Lebannon, Syria and Jordan as your home and sadly, most likely, not one among you whom you term Palestinian, will be born there. You will be Palestinian by title, a result of an unjust refugee statute, unjust because it applies to one persons and one persons alone, and is contrary to every other refugee on this earth.

what is a no state entity and what keeps other states from invading that land? can u enlighten me? whats illegal to go and take that land that people living on it dont want a state in that border? i have never heard of a non state entity not willing to be a state.. is that possible? so what is the status of this entity in the law? by the way jordan was carved from palestine but israel was not! cuz partition plan was to have 2 states from palestine(left after jordan) one wasnt called palestine at that time arab state of pal and jewish state of palestine so. israel is the part of palestine the other part refused their state and attacked the other choosing to be an entity failed miserably. jordan and egypt occupied a part of the pal they were the occupation israel liberated the other parts after again in a defensive. before isr pals had no autonomy in that land and slaughtered many time and once 10000 in a week! pals should than isr the real and legal part of pal to save them frm jordn

on which area the state of palestine shall be. so, how shall a one-sided declaration of an independent palestinian state work in practice?

With this stalemate - where does Israel see itself i the next fifty years? Between the Palestinians (Arabs), which population is growing the fastest? And how much would American politics have changed?

To show just how ridiculous your post is, change the nation from palestine to United States and the date to 1776.

"his center-left party would pull out of the government" Not a smart move by labor... Israels left is all but dead and a move like this would leave the Arab parties in Israel with more votes then labor... This would only go to strengthen the right wing parties in Israel. This would also give more power to Kadimah and who knows what they would do if the pals made such delarations...

1 - thru 10 are pointless. Israel didn't exist as a State until 1948. Didn't have a capital, President, currency or borders. Since the fall of the Ottoman Empire there has been a non-state entity called Palestine. After Jordan was carved off, what remained of the non-state entity of Palestine, was still called Palestine. After Israel was carved off, what remained of the non-state entity of Palestine, somewhat smaller, still called Palestine. Did you have a point other than to show your ignorance? 11) The Palestinians were not obliged to become a state, they're still not obliged to become a state. That doesn't give Israel the right to claim what there is left of the non-state entity of Palestine.

The State of 'palestine' quiz: 1.) When was the country 'palestine' founded and by whom? 2.) What were its borders? 3.) What was its capital? 4.) What were its major cities? 5.) Name at least 1 'palestinian leader' before Arafat 6.)What is the language of the 'Country of palestine'? 7.)What was the prevalent religion of the 'ancient country of palestine'? 8.) What was its currency? 9.) Take any date in history and say what the exchange rate for 'palestinian' unit is againt the dollar, yen, yuan, mark, or pound on that date. 10.) Since there is no 'palestine' today what caused its demise and when? 11.) Why did the 'palestinians' never try to become independent until after the devastating defeat of invading Arab states in the 1967 Six Day War

how bizarre "if the palestinians unilaterally declare a state, in territory which is disputed, then israel has every right to annex those territories which comprise the large blocs of israeli jewish settlements hugging her border." Legal annexation is by agreement. "under such circumstances, israel might be best served by defining her own borders on the east" Israel did, May 14th 1948

Isn't annexing another nation somewhat retro? Have we hit a timewarp and gone back to a 30's bizzaro world. where international law doesn't apply? The international community needs to hold Israel to the law - in terms of violation of international law, Israel is the world's premier rogue state.

The current Gov are really messing things up - internal and external relations. Can we have a healthy and wise Gov? May God help us!

A unilateral by the Palestinians won't work any better than an Israeli unilateral rejection of the Oslo agreements. Like or not a PA entity is a irreversible decision. The PA leadership can't decide to take their spoils and move on leaving the people of the PA without the minimal services they get now and Israel can't reestablish a military rule over PA cities. Furthermore both sides benefit from the economic cooperation that does exist. A PA declaration of statehood would be a de facto declaration of war. The minimal Israeli response of stopping the supply of electricity and water, not to mention closing of entry of PA workers would be a disaster. Perhaps Abbas thinks this makes Fatah look good compared to Hamas, but that is only because he is thinking short term.

Some will say Barak is just power-hungry, that's why he's in the coalition. But I would credit Labor with more commitment to its own policies, particularly regarding a 2-state solution. By being in the coalition, Labor counter-balances the far and religious right - UTJ, National Union, Jewish Home. In the same way that Yisrael Beitenu (secular, in favour of 2 states) balances out Shas. It means Bibi cannot abandon the 2-state solution without risking his coalition's survival.

"If one rocket is fired at Israel we will go in and destroy them" "If one rifle is used against Israel we will take them all back" Need I go on..

If the Pals declare an independent state, there's only two things Israel can do in reality. It cannot seize one dunam of land legally. Nor can it lawfully hold on to the areas it has supposedly 'annexed'. The Vic Hardman school of revisionist history is not recognised by any authority, including the Israeli High Court. All that further land seizures will do is [prompt the world community to act and the US will not be able to stop the runaway train. The alternative is to bluster and threaten, in order to scare the Pals off the lawn. That's unlikely to fly as they have a lot of international support and nobody wants Hamas to be elected. So which will Israel do? Well both of course, they've been getting away with bluster, threats and illegal land seizures for 42 years and it's become a way of life now, a fact that has shaped the nation's morality/lack of. I predict this will lead to the final reckoning.

if the palestinians unilaterally declare a state, in territory which is disputed, then israel has every right to annex those territories which comprise the large blocs of israeli jewish settlements hugging her border. it is becoming increasingly obvious that abbas is absolutely not interested in pursuing negotiations, only a dictate. under such circumstances, israel might be best served by defining her own borders on the east. this approach is not the best approach, but it might be the only one available to israel. israel should not worry too much about world opinion. indeed, there is no such thing as world opinion--only national interests.

Can someone who knows Israelis internal politics well tell me why such sane voices such as Ben eleizer and Barak are doing in coalition with a fanatic right wing government and intransigient Netanyahu? During cast lead Barak wanted to end the operation after 3 days but was overuled, Ben Eliezer now decries Netanyahus threats of annexation. Barak almost made a deal with Arafat in 2000.Contrary to Netanyahu, he does not hype up the Iranian nuclear issue and says that Iran is not an existential threat. After all it was the labour party that signed Oslo accords and produced 2 nobel peace winners and this party has also been on good terms with US presidents. someone pls tell why they are coalition partners.

for his judgement abilities.

"The moment Arabs forgo forever negotiations and seize disputed land all bets are off. This allows Israel permanently annex ALL disputed land the day of the Arab land grab."CBK The lands are no longer disputed ben kahan. They are occupied---so says the entire international community including the highest Court in Israel---If in doubt--google "held under belligerent Occupation by Isreal" But you know all this --dont you ---you know the lnd is stolen but need to look in the mirror so feed yourself fairy tales from the bible. I hope ypou do annex it---then you will have 4 million Palestinians to add to your population---bye bye illegal squatter---noo yoirk---is it.

It was Labor-led governments that established Gush Etzion, and if Bibi is talking about the Jordan Valley, it was Labor-led governments that established them as well. They have no place to complain. Besides, the government would exist just fine without Labor. It is Labor that is already an irrelevant party that is on its way to dissolving completely.

I am sure that this minister KNOWS that both the securityfence/wall and the withdrawal from Gaza were both VERY unilateral moves by Israel. So what's his message? We can but we won't let you?

"what the pa is proposing is to annex part of israel !!!!!!!!!!!!!" Which part? Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, May 15, 1948 ?MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o?clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.?

"try as i may i cannot discover any international treaty which gives any part of the 1922 mandate to arabs ??" The 1922 Mandate does.

If the palestinians unilaterally declare independence, it will be the violation of all previously agreements they've signed stating the will negotiate a peace settlement. And if they violate all of these contracts, israel will have no option but to make its own unilateral movements, including annexing all of area C, not to mention a host of other actions.

The original subject being: "try as i may i cannot discover any international treaty which gives any part of the 1922 mandate to arabs ??" When I pointed out just such a multinational treaty victor waved his hands about and said... vh:"also jb the population existing at 1917 was never documented or recorded!" That is a change of subject. vh: "arab immigration ran riot up to 1947 !" That is also a change of subject. vh: "the phrases are legally meaningless !" That is nonsensical gobbly-gook. Article 22 of the Covenant is quite specific about the purpose of Mandates i.e. they are to assist the inhabitants of certain former colonies to independent statehood. And the preamble to the Mandate for Palestine explicitely anchors its purpose in Article 22 of the Covenant. That rather does appear to close the circle on you, victor, and you do appear to be trapped inside it - no matter how much you wave your arms about and babble.

vh: "there are no 1967 borders !!" Indeed true: the Green Line does not become a national border until it is recognized as a national border. Currently it is not, tho it *is* recognized as 1) where Israeli sovereignty ends, and 2) the line where Israeli law ends. Israel recognizes that the above is true, victor. vh: "what the pa is proposing is to annex part of israel !!!!!!!!!!!!!" That is, of course, a leap that victor can not justify with any logic, and it is worth pointing out that even ISRAEL ITSELF does not make the claim that victor has just pronounced. Israel "disputes" the Palestinian claim to that territory, but it certainly does not claim that this territory is already a "part of Israel". Such a claim is quite incompatible with a claim of "disputed territory", victor, or is it the case that you have no problems holding two contradictory thoughts in your head? That's called "cognitive dissonance", isn't it?

Isreal has no interest in a peaceful solution. They want the land- god told them it was is thiers hahahah- and want to create ghettos for anyone who is not driven from it. Don't confuse yourself by creating a imaginary difference between Muslim Excrements i mean Extremists and Zionists. Religion is the enemy, it is what causes the most death, theft and fear. However, Isreal is the true thief in this case and, muslim or not, I certainly would not want my HOME and neighborhood stolen from me.

Peace in the Middle East is just a dream when there are statements and intentions like this.

If Israel had thought that it could get away with a unilateral annexation of the settlements then it would have done so long ago. Heck, it actually has a much better claim to East Jerusalem than it does to any other part of the West Bank, and it is still no closer to getting its "annexation" recognized now than it was 42 years ago. Israel can "annex" Area C tomorrow, and there is a very good reason why it doesn't do so. And that reason has NOTHING to do with Israeli "reasonableness" or any zionist concept of "fair play" and EVERYTHING to do with a recognition that it would be an exercise in pointlessness as well as being a self-inflicted wound.

also jb the population existing at 1917 was never documented or recorded! arab immigration ran riot up to 1947 ! the phrases are legally meaningless !

CBK: "The moment Arabs forgo forever negotiations and seize disputed land all bets are off. This allows Israel permanently annex ALL disputed land the day of the Arab land grab." *cough* *cough* East Jerusalem *cough* It's been 42 years now, Chaim, so how *is* that little project going? Any closer to having the world community recognize Israel's "right" to annex that half of the city? Whaaaaat?!?!? Still not recognized by anyone? Chaim, How Can That Beeeeeeeeeeeee???????????

It would be nice if Israel would simply annex the West Bank and give the Palestinians living there citizenship or the option of it like East Jerusalemites. Beyond what I believe is an irrational fear of many Israelis that it will undermine the Jewish aspect of Israel, will it really solve all the issues at hand? What about Gaza? Could it survive as a state on its own or would it have to be added as well? What about Palestinian refugees abroad? I highly doubt Israel has the physical resources to accommodate that many people, much less the political ones. Lastly would the world accept it? Would the world be happy with Israel annexing that territory even if it gives rights to its inhabitants? Many questions? so few answers.

READ CAREFULLY THE 1949 ARMISTICE AGREEMENT ! there are no 1967 borders !! what the pa is proposing is to annex part of israel !!!!!!!!!!!!!

vh: " 'jb try as i may i cannot discover any international treaty which gives any part of the 1922 mandate to arabs ??" Then perhaps you might like to start with Article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant, victor. And then you might care to peruse the Mandate for Palestine, and see which of these two is explicitely stated in the preamble of that document as being the primary purpose of that Mandate: 1) Article 22 of the LoN Covenant, or 2) The Balfour Declaration I know the answer, and I'm also quite confident that you do not.....

and it's SURE to feel the repercussions in the form of unsc invoked sanctions. the declaration of a palestinian state within the 1967 borders, and its recognition by the united nations, does NOT preclude the necessity of negotiations to define which portions of territory will be ceded to israel in land exchanges. any unilateral attempt to declare the annexation of land segments within the territory of that state would reveal what israel's intentions have always been...and would be extremely detrimental to israel in the long run. not even the united states would be able turn a blind eye to something as blatant as this.

I realize that Israel is a Western asset, for Europe in terms of preventing invasion and for the US in terms of keeping oil-production going without major disturbances. But in all reality, Palestine is doing the same thing the US did when it declared its independence from Great Britain. I've met so many friendly Israelis from Tel-Aviv and what-not here, but I've also met many friendly Palestinians and I've heard their side of the issue as well. This is truly a mess.

The moment Arabs forgo forever negotiations and seize disputed land all bets are off. This allows Israel permanently annex ALL disputed land the day of the Arab land grab.

So the original intent was to hand them over???

the only international laws in respect of israel are san remo 1920 mandate 1922 anglo- american convention 1924 it it chnging these goal posts that has caused the present impasse . your concepts of international law are those of acomplete buffoon !!

jb try as i may i cannot discover any international treaty which gives any part of the 1922 mandate to arabs ?? what politics demand as law is in this world of "alice through the looking glass "STILL NOT BINDING LAW !!

Why not annex all the way to the Euphrates? After all, that's what God promised Joshua.

Things are beginning to move fast ,like the end of the eighties ,beginning of the nineties in South Africa ----can one man, one vote between the river and the sea be far off ?

"We must be clear and tell them that, if that's the route they choose to take, any unilateral declaration on their part will be countered by declaring our sovereignty on all 'C' Areas," And that will change things.... how? Nobody - absolutely NOBODY - would recognize that annexation, and all those "annexed" areas will simply take on the same status as East Jerusalem. Remind me again how many countries recognize Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem? "referring to those which, according to the Oslo Accord, are in full Israeli civilian and military control." Yeah, that's O.C.C.U.P.A.T.I.O.N. The annexation of occupied territory is illegal, and if a Palestinian declaration of independence is recognized by the UN then Israel will be attempting to annex the sovereign territory OF A SOVEREIGN STATE. Saddam Hussein tried that stunt in 1991, and if I remember correctly it ended rather badly for him.....

Israel should do that if Palestinians declare statehood. Actually, they should annex all west bank.

Let's take care of the whole issue in one move. Annex the whole west bank of Israel.

...in any case. The United Nations would declare Israel's annexation illegal just like East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Ho hum. Israel can no more unilaterally change international law than can the United States.