• Israel orders expansion of Jewish settlements in the west bank..
    39 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the construction of 300 new homes at the Jewish settlement of Beit El in the West Bank. The announcement came hours after Israel's parliament rejected a bill to legalise settlement outposts. Mr Netanyahu, who opposed the bill, said he would honour a Supreme Court order to demolish homes on private Palestinian land at the Ulpana outpost. The issue has been a source of tension between settlers and the government. All settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this. The settler outposts are also illegal under Israeli law and the government agreed to remove them under the 2003 Road Map peace plan. Reacting to Mr Netanyahu's announcement, a US spokesman said that "continued Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank undermines peace efforts and contradicts Israeli commitments and obligations". "Our position on settlements remains unchanged. We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said. Last year, the Israeli government committed to remove all or part of six illegal outposts following a Supreme Court ruling. Five buildings which are home to 30 families at Ulpana, also known as Jabal Artis or Pisgat Yaakov, were built entirely on private Palestinian land, the court found. Before Wednesday's vote in the Knesset, Mr Netanyahu had warned that he would sack anyone in his government who supported the bill to bypass the court ruling and, in effect, legalise the buildings at Ulpana, because it would have prompted international criticism. Ahead of the vote, hundreds of settlers marched on the Knesset, insisting on their right to live on what they said was historically Jewish land. Ulpana is part of the bigger settlement of Beit El, which is built on land captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war. Palestinians say it should be part of their future state. Hours after the legalisation of outposts was rejected, Mr Netanyahu sought to placate settlers and right-wing critics in his own Likud party by ordering the transfer of the buildings at Ulpana to a nearby former army base in another part of Beit El and the construction next to them of 300 new housing units, reports the BBC Wyre Davies in Jerusalem. "Israel is a democracy that observes the law, and as prime minister I am obligated to preserve the law and preserve the settlements, and I say here that there is no contradiction between the two," Mr Netanyahu said. "This formula strengthens settlements," he added. "The court ruled what it did, and we respect its decision. In parallel, Beit El will be expanded." Mr Netanyahu's decision will infuriate Palestinians and pro-peace groups who say the Israeli government is expanding the settlements at the expense of a peace deal with the Palestinians, our correspondent adds. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18344116"]Yay[/URL]
"The announcement came hours after Israel's parliament rejected a bill to legalise settlement outposts." So he ordered it done even after it was rejected in parliament?
Nice government they have there. Sounds like it could use a bit of checks and balances. Like the US system.
What. the fuck.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36229032]"The announcement came hours after Israel's parliament rejected a bill to legalise settlement outposts." So he ordered it done even after it was rejected in parliament?[/QUOTE] Why haven't Israeli's revolted yet?
[QUOTE=Chernarus;36229743]Why haven't Israeli's revolted yet?[/QUOTE] Because Hamas and Hezbollah would most likely jump into the chaos to stir the pot more.
[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;36229088]Nice government they have there. Sounds like it could use a bit of checks and balances. Like the US system.[/QUOTE] Native americans?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36229032]"The announcement came hours after Israel's parliament rejected a bill to legalise settlement outposts." So he ordered it done even after it was rejected in parliament?[/QUOTE] The Supreme Court ordered that some of the current settlements were illegal and had to be removed. In the Knesset, they put forward a bill to bypass this and legitimise them. Netanyahu realised this would cause a massive shitstorm and said he would sack anyone who voted for it, and it didn't pass. Unfortunately, hundreds of the right-wing settlers and some of those in government were pretty pissed off, so he had to do something to placate them, this is the result. [QUOTE=Chernarus;36229743]Why haven't Israeli's revolted yet?[/QUOTE] Because it is a democratic government and they are doing the same political dealings as anywhere else in the west, only on a knife's edge due to a good part of the population being more right-wing than the Westboro Baptist Church. They are protesting because they wanted it to pass, and this is the effort to keepthem happy, did you even read the article?
Israel is an illegally-established state that has terrorist practices, why the fuck aren't we imposing sanctions onto them? infact, why isn't the Israeli populance rebelling?
[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;36229088]Nice government they have there. Sounds like it could use a bit of checks and balances. Like the US system.[/QUOTE] The people who decided a proportional unicameral system was a good idea need to be shot. [QUOTE=Ownederd;36229861]Israel is an illegally-established state that has terrorist practices, why the fuck aren't we imposing sanctions onto them?[/QUOTE] And this is why we keep the majority of decisions in the hands of people who know what they're talking about rather than in the masses.
Plot twist?
[QUOTE=Devodiere;36229893] And this is why we keep the majority of decisions in the hands of people who know what they're talking about rather than in the masses.[/QUOTE] And then it's called 'democracy' by the same few.
[QUOTE=Conscript;36229945]And then it's called 'democracy' by the same few.[/QUOTE] It is a compromise between Democracy and Oligarchy, to give accountability to the public and the skills of those knowledgeable. Idealism doesn't translate well when the public cannot make the informed decisions required.
I just don't respect zionism.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;36229893] And this is why we keep the majority of decisions in the hands of people who know what they're talking about rather than in the masses.[/QUOTE] wow, good condescending retort. i guess the concept of democracy goes out the window when you don't give people who live in one place a choice and kick them out because the torah says that's where supposedly eretz israel used to be. are you actually defending that or are you just being ruthlessly cruel because you're playing the devils advocate?
[QUOTE=thisispain;36230844]wow, good condescending retort. i guess the concept of democracy goes out the window when you don't give people who live in one place a choice and kick them out because the torah says that's where supposedly eretz israel used to be. are you actually defending that or are you just being ruthlessly cruel because you're playing the devils advocate?[/QUOTE] No, I think it's a stupid move. I was more alluding to the completely irrelevant response pieced together with snippets of information. We could go into a pages long discussion about Israel's creation, the use of and definition of terrorist tactics, and come out hours later not having moved an inch. Would you prefer that over a condescending retort?
[QUOTE=Ownederd;36229861]Israel is an illegally-established state that has terrorist practices, why the fuck aren't we imposing sanctions onto them? infact, why isn't the Israeli populance rebelling?[/QUOTE] The fuck are you talking about. Israel was established on May 14th, 1948 by the United Nations. That's about as legal as legal can get.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;36231048]No, I think it's a stupid move. I was more alluding to the completely irrelevant response pieced together with snippets of information. We could go into a pages long discussion about Israel's creation, the use of and definition of terrorist tactics, and come out hours later not having moved an inch. Would you prefer that over a condescending retort?[/QUOTE] yes i would prefer that over a condescending retort that plants you firmly into an intellectual corner.
Israel stop illegally settling and Hamas stop targeting Israel. [video=youtube;WJTBPdVpdMc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJTBPdVpdMc[/video]
[QUOTE=thisispain;36231272]yes i would prefer that over a condescending retort that plants you firmly into an intellectual corner.[/QUOTE] Well feel free to start the discussion yourself. It may be a more intellectually respectful option not to discard anything, but practically there's not a lot of point in it.
I could not bother to even comprehend half the posts in this thread because most of them are complete garbage.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36229032]"The announcement came hours after Israel's parliament rejected a bill to legalise settlement outposts." So he ordered it done even after it was rejected in parliament?[/QUOTE] There were settlements built on privately owned Palestinian land, who some members of parliament wanted to legalize, but it failed in parliament (mainly because Netanyahu himself said he will fire anyone in his government that votes for it). Then he ordered an expansion of other settlements. I think he realized that legalizing stuff that was built on private land would go way to far, so he rejected it, but in order to not lose support from his right wing voters, he legalized some more. Also, this isn't news
We voted for this guy?!
Why the fuck would israelis revolt? They are getting the land, not losing out. The palestinians are. Fuck these assholes charge people when they blue up their house. They have basically set up the largest concentration camps in the world restricting them to the west bank and gaza. For a country that is mainly jewish you would think they would recognize cruelty by now.
Personally, I think this whole deal is bullshit. I mean, it's even kind of discriminatory- If I, a citizen in the state of Israel, were to build my house on land owned by some rich guy, would anyone from my government jump to my defense immediately? No. Nobody would give a shit. But suddenly, when it's owned by some Palestinian guy in the west bank, the settlers are immediately defended by parliament members. It's ludicrous to say the least, and should have ended when the supreme court decided to kick them out. I mean, this case took weeks of effort from members of the parliament actually debating this shit, and they actually offered to make a law that was designed to protect a bunch of cocksuckers who built their houses on [b] privately owned land[/b] after the supreme court of Israel itself told them to fuck right off. This pisses me right off, because I know [b]nobody[/b] would jump to my defense if I did it over here, and it would probably not even make local headlines.
[QUOTE=DiCiSpitfire;36231983]We voted for this guy?![/QUOTE] Who's [I]we[/I]?
[QUOTE=Chernarus;36228987][URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18344116"]Yay[/URL][/QUOTE] Why would you want this. It is NOT their land.
The contents are really good… [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Bot" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Devodiere;36229893] And this is why we keep the majority of decisions in the hands of people who know what they're talking about rather than in the masses.[/QUOTE] Uuuuuuuuuh....... [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=ewitwins;36231202]The fuck are you talking about. Israel was established on May 14th, 1948 by the United Nations. That's about as legal as legal can get.[/QUOTE] Not to the people who weren't asked, subsequently stripped of all their property and kicked out lmao
Just to clarify; Israel are building settlements and absorbing land in the west bank to they can have defensible borders in case of another attack by one or more of the many nations that have attacked them before. They are doing this because they had to remove all military presence in the West Bank as a result of the Oslo accord. Now, I do not agree with this. I do not agree with the settlements at all, personally I think if Israel has 1967 borders except with control of the Philadelphi corridor and the Jordan valley, alongside military presence in the Judaen mountains they can defend themselves just fine. Nonetheless, even if I think this breaks international law, and constitutes breaking the fourth Geneva convention §4 I still think a lot of Facepunchers are bandwagoning on the Israel hate with little understanding of the actual conflict, nor its details outside the most basic of basicness, and what modern developments such as the Gaza war.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.