Israel votes to authorise illegal settler homes on Palestinian land - Polidicks

[URL="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/05/israel-votes-to-authorise-illegal-settler-homes-in-palestine"]Source.[/URL] [QUOTE]Israel’s parliament has voted to retroactively legalise thousands of illegitimate settler homes in outposts built on private Palestinian land, in a highly controversial move described by critics as a “land grab”. The measure, which passed in a stormy Knesset session late on Monday, has been met with international condemnation, and has already strained relations within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing rightwing coalition. It comes in sharp defiance of a call on Sunday by the US secretary of state, John Kerry, who urged Israel again to rein in the construction of settlements on West Bank land. The bill passed its first reading by 60 votes to 49, and still has to pass a further three votes before becoming law. During the debate, the opposition leader, Isaac Herzog, fiercely denounced the law by equating its adoption to “national suicide”. While the bill seems likely to have support to pass its further readings, it appears inevitable that it will be challenged in court. Israeli critics and Palestinians have described the legislation as a land grab that would further distance prospects for a two-state solution to end the long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Some high-profile political supporters, echoing that view, celebrated the vote by saying it opened the way to annexation of the West Bank and the end of any prospect of a Palestinian state. According to estimates by opponents – including the prominent anti-occupation group Peace Now – the new law, if finally approved, would effectively annex 55 illegal outposts and approximately 4,000 housing units in settlements and illegal outposts. The vote follows weeks of fierce debate. Netanyahu warned at one point that the legislation could put Israel’s political leaders in the dock of the International Criminal Court in the Hague.[/QUOTE] Keep on grabbing that Lebensraum.

It still has to pass three further votes though and it sounds like the opposition in Israel bitter opposes it.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51485063]It still has to pass three further votes though and it sounds like the opposition in Israel bitter opposes it.[/QUOTE] They'll probably have no problem pushing the law through because the right has the majority in the Knesset. However it will very likely be challenged by the Supreme Court. There's a good chance Netanyahu himself will do his best to delay or otherwise make this go away because he's very aware of how bad it will be internationally. The law is being pushed by the more radical right wing elements in the Knesset against Netanyahu's will, with many "center" right politicians tagging along because they're afraid to look not patriotic enough. Fuckheads.

So the article is written like its law, but it is not. Noice. Controversial laws often get passed in the first reading debates, only so they can be debated further. That doesn't mean it will be passed. Although I do have to wonder, what on earth do Israelis think they're doing by voting in these religious nut jobs into the Knesset. They serve no purpose.

[QUOTE=ScumBunny;51485082]They'll probably have no problem pushing the law through because the right has the majority in the Knesset. However it will very likely be challenged by the Supreme Court. There's a good chance Netanyahu himself will do his best to delay or otherwise make this go away because he's very aware of how bad it will be internationally. The law is being pushed by the more radical right wing elements in the Knesset against Netanyahu's will, with many "center" right politicians tagging along because they're afraid to look not patriotic enough. Fuckheads.[/QUOTE] Would a much saner solution not to move those illegal settlements back into Israel and give them the land to?

[QUOTE=GordonZombie;51485042]Keep on grabbing that Lebensraum.[/QUOTE] Also I just saw this - you're a wanker. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Novangel))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51485098]Also I just saw this - you're a wanker.[/QUOTE] Why though? if this passes and is put in actuality thats exactly what is happening... civil annexation and spreading influence by spreading colonies.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51485098]Also I just saw this - you're a wanker.[/QUOTE] Say what you will about me, but I can't help but find some similarities between this and the expansionist policies of the Third Reich. Granted, they're not committing wholesale slaughter and destruction of culture but what is this if not acquiring Lebensraum? Settlers (well, a significant portion of them anyways) have a track record of [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33729281"]behaving like asshats[/URL], which in turn is perpetuating violence against settlers and other Israelis from extremists, like that [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_attack"]particularly appalling case[/URL] where a family of settlers (including three of their children) were brutally murdered.

law will probably be delayed until trump is president, then passed It's land that we conquered from Jordan after they attacked us, what's wrong with settling in it?

[QUOTE=GordonZombie;51485173]Say what you will about me, but I can't help but find some similarities between this and the expansionist policies of the Third Reich. Granted, settlers aren't committing wholesale slaughter but what is this if not acquiring Lebensraum?[/QUOTE] just a coincidence that you're comparing israel to the third reich other than any other colonizing force right? It's not comparable at all, the Nazis wanted more land and did it through a military invasion where they committed genocide. Israel was completely fine with the borders up until 1967 when we were attacked and we managed to fight back and capture enemy territory. Israel was not the aggressor looking to expand in these wars, they were the defender who were able to push back on enemy territory and decided to keep it. The people already living there had the chance to become integrated into Israeli society but refused.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51485207]just a coincidence that you're comparing israel to the third reich other than any other colonizing force right? It's not comparable at all, the Nazis wanted more land and did it through a military invasion where they committed genocide. Israel was completely fine with the borders up until 1967 when we were attacked and we managed to fight back and capture enemy territory. Israel was not the aggressor looking to expand in these wars, they were the defender who were able to push back on enemy territory and decided to keep it. The people already living there had the chance to become integrated into Israeli society but refused.[/QUOTE] So taking land by force is ok as long as you're the defender?

[QUOTE=Cructo;51485202]it's not your rightful land[/QUOTE] So we should return the land to Jordan and allow for a friendly enemy to be right next to us?

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51485182]law will probably be delayed until trump is president, then passed It's land that we conquered from Jordan after they attacked us, what's wrong with settling in it?[/QUOTE] Because it's privately owned land that isn't theirs to use. If they want to settle on it then they should buy/pay off the original owners or otherwise leave it.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51485211]So we should return the land to Jordan and allow for a friendly enemy to be right next to us?[/QUOTE] But they're right next to you anyways? Or does geography warp as long as Israel holds this specific area?

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485210]So taking land by force is ok as long as you're the defender?[/QUOTE] Sure, why not? You need to occupy the land to make sure that such a war never happens again. [editline]6th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=GordonZombie;51485215]Because it's privately owned land that isn't theirs to use. If they want to settle on it then they should buy/pay off the original owners or otherwise leave it.[/QUOTE] They did pay off, the Israeli settlers buy the land off of Palestinian land owners.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51485218]Sure, why not? You need to occupy the land to make sure that such a war never happens again.[/QUOTE] Except you don't? Last I checked it's been 70 years since we were at war with Japan and we aren't exactly occupying them anymore.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485228]Except you don't? Last I checked it's been 70 years since we were at war with Japan and we aren't exactly occupying them anymore.[/QUOTE] Right, because the Palestinians, who are government by Hamas or Fatah (who both constantly preach war and terror) are so much like the current Japanese.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485216]But they're right next to you anyways? Or does geography warp as long as Israel holds this specific area?[/QUOTE] The West Bank includes East Jerusalem which is in the Israeli capital of Jerusalem. When the Jordanians held East Jerusalem, they were able to take shots at Israelis who were trying to pray at the western wall. Israel doesn't want that to happen again. giving the west bank, especially East Jerusalem to the Jordanians or Palestinians like having an enemy that's seemingly friendly to you but can stab you in the heart at any time with very little effort.

Woops, missed this so I'll respond to it now. [QUOTE=Svinnik;51485207]just a coincidence that you're comparing israel to the third reich other than any other colonizing force right? It's not comparable at all, the Nazis wanted more land and did it through a military invasion where they committed genocide. Israel was completely fine with the borders up until 1967 when we were attacked and we managed to fight back and capture enemy territory. Israel was not the aggressor looking to expand in these wars, they were the defender who were able to push back on enemy territory and decided to keep it. The people already living there had the chance to become integrated into Israeli society but refused.[/QUOTE] I find it an ironic comparison because Israel was largely built by those who had been subject to some of the Third Reich's policies which saw assets (properties among them) seized through abusive legislation. I'm not denying that there's been attempts to integrate and I'm not blaming Israel as the sole participant in this shit flinging contest either - Hamas and the other Palestinian extremist groups are worse on merit of manipulating and using the people who they supposedly protect as human shieds - but christ it hasn't helped its own case the past two decades. Settlers more than anything have been the worst with the antagonistic behaviour towards Palestinians.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485228]Except you don't? Last I checked it's been 70 years since we were at war with Japan and we aren't exactly occupying them anymore.[/QUOTE] except you are, you hold Guam and other territories captured from the Japanese.

[QUOTE=GordonZombie;51485241]Woops, missed this so I'll respond to it now. I find it an ironic comparison because Israel was largely built by those who had been subject to some of the Third Reich's policies which saw assets (properties among them) seized through abusive legislation. I'm not denying that there's been attempts to integrate and I'm not blaming Israel as the sole participant in this shit flinging contest either, but christ it hasn't helped its own case the past two decades.[/QUOTE] There is a difference between seizing land and purchasing it. The settlers mostly purchase it from the Palestinian land owners.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51485231]Right, because the Palestinians, who are government by Hamas or Fatah (who both constantly preach war and terror) are so much like the current Japanese.[/QUOTE] Fatah formed as a terrorist group in response to the Six Day war and the Hamas didn't form until the 80's, so tell me exactly how the occupation has prevented either of these.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51485248]Guam wasnt captured from the japanese.[/QUOTE] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_occupation_of_Guam[/url] [editline]6th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Anderan;51485253]Fatah formed as a response to the Six Day war and the Hamas didn't form until the 80's, so tell me exactly how the occupation has prevented either of these.[/QUOTE] I didn't say it prevented either of those, how did you come to that conclusion? I implied there is some justification in occupying the land because of that.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51485248]Guam wasnt captured from the japanese. A few islands were though, some ex-German islands. But USA reformed Japan as they completely occupied it. Has Israel done that? Then your prevention argument falls.[/QUOTE] There was never a Palestinian nation to reform. Japan was a concrete nation whose leaders had bowed to the US, Palestine was a loose group of Islamist/Arab nationalists up until very recently.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51485254]I didn't say it prevented either of those, how did you come to that conclusion? I implied there is some justification in occupying the land because of that.[/QUOTE] Because I was responding to Svinnik's claim that occupying the land is the only way to prevent another war. There's no justification in occupying the land because of them when they exist only because of the occupation. It's like trying to argue you were justified in pointing a gun at someone after they responded to you pointing a gun at them with their own gun. My point was he claimed occupation is the only way to prevent another war, and yet we stopped occupying Japan after 7 years. We haven't had a war with Japan since, where as Israel is constantly dealing with conflict in the area. Granted it's more complicated than just that but "occupation is the only way to prevent a war" is still bunk.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485270]Because I was responding to Svinnik's claim that occupying the land is the only way to prevent another war. There's no justification in occupying the land because of them when they exist only because of the occupation. It's like trying to argue you were justified in pointing a gun at someone after they responded to you pointing a gun at them with their own gun.[/QUOTE] They may only exist because of the situation, but they have every opportunity to change their tune - but it seems to be in their nature to be violent and promote terrorism.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485270]Because I was responding to Svinnik's claim that occupying the land is the only way to prevent another war. There's no justification in occupying the land because of them when they exist only because of the occupation. It's like trying to argue you were justified in pointing a gun at someone after they responded to you pointing a gun at them with their own gun.[/QUOTE] Right now, occupying this land makes sure that there is no enemy presence close to Israel's capital and to eliminate any that might exist. It's much easier to raid enemy organizations like the terrorists that the PLO funds when you control the land that they live on. Also, it guarantees that Israel cannot be attacked by any sort of organized force from the east which is a very useful advantage. We gave the Palestinians Gaza and it went from a nice strip of resorts to a hell hole with a theocratic government that swears to kill Jews. We cannot afford that with the West Bank

[QUOTE=DogGunn;51485274]They may only exist because of the situation, but they have every opportunity to change their tune - but it seems to be in their nature to be violent and promote terrorism.[/QUOTE] This thread is literally about Israel legalizing colonizing the area, what reason do they have to change when the people occupying them aren't acting much better? And you still seem to be ignoring the entire point of my post, which is to point out that the claim "occupation is the only way to prevent a war" is bunk. [editline]6th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Svinnik;51485283]Right now, occupying this land makes sure that there is no enemy presence close to Israel's capital and to eliminate any that might exist. It's much easier to raid enemy organizations like the terrorists that the PLO funds when you control the land that they live on. Also, it guarantees that Israel cannot be attacked by any sort of organized force from the east which is a very useful advantage. We gave the Palestinians Gaza and it went from a nice strip of resorts to a hell hole with a theocratic government that swears to kill Jews. We cannot afford that with the West Bank[/QUOTE] If it's about having a strategic advantage then come out and say that instead of pushing some bullshit line about how it's the only way to prevent a war.

[QUOTE=Anderan;51485289]This thread is literally about Israel legalizing colonizing the area, what reason do they have to change when the people occupying them aren't acting much better?[/quote] Well the fact that they seem to be powerless to stop it... you'd think it would be time to try something different, but no, its more of the same, over and over again. [QUOTE=Anderan;51485289]And you still seem to be ignoring the entire point of my post, which is to point out that the claim "occupation is the only way to prevent a war" is bunk.[/QUOTE] Well, it's strategically important when you have an enemy on your border, so it is a great way to prevent a war.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51485251]There is a difference between seizing land and purchasing it. The settlers mostly purchase it from the Palestinian land owners.[/QUOTE] Even so, quite a few settlers still have a track record for antagonistic behaviour to the point that the IDF(? correct me if I'm wrong) have had to step in and designate separate pathways because both sides will tear into each other if allowed too close.