Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    08 Sep '09 03:25
    Anger at Israeli settlement plan
    Israel approves the building of 455 homes in the occupied West Bank, prompting strong reaction from the Palestinians.

    Israel has officially approved the construction of more than 450 new homes in the occupied West Bank, the Israeli defence ministry has announced.

    This is the first new government-approved construction project in the West Bank since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to power in March.

    It comes despite US pressure to halt settlement building.

    A senior Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said the move "nullified" the effect of any future building freeze.

    Palestinians have ruled out resumption of peace talks with Israel until there is a complete halt to settlement construction.

    Mr Erekat said Israel's decision further undermined its credibility as a partner for peace.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/middle_east/8241247.stm

    Is Saeb Erekat right? Or are the Occupied Territories now a done deal part of Greater Isreal?
  2. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    08 Sep '09 07:53
    Originally posted by FMF

    Is Saeb Erekat right? Or are the Occupied Territories now a done deal part of Greater Isreal?
    The Palestinians are understandably upset, the hardcore Israeli settlers are moaning that it is a smokescreen in advance of their being sold out. More pain on the way, I dare say.
  3. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Sep '09 13:43
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Kill em all, eh Shav?
  4. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Sep '09 13:46
    Originally posted by FMF
    Or are the Occupied Territories now a done deal part of Greater Isreal?
    That's a little dramatic. 455 homes is a drop in the bucket. It's a few extra blocks being built on land that is now empty.

    After a 6 month freeze, they're allowing a small new construction. These construction projects are undertaken to alleviate severe housing shortages that occur naturally. Cities naturally expand, especially since the birthrate is higher in the settlement areas than in most other places. They are not done to accommodate new settlers nor are new settlement communities being established.

    As the communities grow, the options are to force the younger people to move away from the city because there is no housing or to allow the construction of new units. How long do you expect the government to force the former when they get nothing in return and as the Palestinians plan for a unilateral state declaration (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,542920,00.html)?
  5. 08 Sep '09 13:48
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    How is it possible that you could think that the building of houses makes you a Nazi? I hope everyone sees you as the ignorant racist that you are. Certainly the world would be a better place without your ignorance.
  6. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    08 Sep '09 13:58 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    That's a little dramatic. 455 homes is a drop in the bucket. It's a few extra blocks being built on land that is now empty.

    After a 6 month freeze, they're allowing a small new construction. These construction projects are undertaken to alleviate severe housing shortages that occur naturally. Cities naturally expand, especially since the birthrate is higher ...[text shortened]... plan for a unilateral state declaration (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,542920,00.html)?
    In all seriousness:

    You seem to be a likable guy. You really do. On top of that you also seem to be a smart guy... Yet that double-standard of yours keeps popping up time and time again. Most of the times I read you I just roll my eyes and think: "How can a guy like that be so blind? Be so biased? Is that a conscious choice? Is it a case of not knowing better?"

    "It's a few extra blocks being built on land that is now empty."
    Why is the land now empty? Forced removal perhaps?!

    "Cities naturally expand, especially since the birthrate is higher in the settlement areas than in most other places. They are not done to accommodate new settlers nor are new settlement communities being established."
    What a gigantic piece of double-standard crap. Are the palestinians allowed the same rights. Do they get to occupate new lands as their numbers increase? You can't possibly be defending that line of reasoning (now I shall chastise myself for calling that a reasoning )

    And quoting foxnews isn't really helping your cause you know? In what way is that different from the attitude of Netanyahu's earlier "proposal"?
  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Sep '09 14:10
    Originally posted by adam warlock
    In all seriousness:

    You seem to be a likable guy. You really do. On top of that you also seem to be a smart guy... Yet that double-standard of yours keeps popping up time and time again. Most of the times I read you I just roll my eyes and think: "How can a guy like be so blind? Be so biased? Is that a conscious choice? Is it a case of not knowing be ...[text shortened]... ? In what way is that different from the attitude of Netanyahu's earlier "proposal"?
    Well, thanks for leading off with the compliment anyway.

    ===Why is the land now empty? Forced removal perhaps?!===

    No. By and large, settlements are on lands that were empty before they were settled. I do not believe any settlements were built on land from which others were forcibly removed.

    ===Are the palestinians allowed the same rights. ===

    Of course they are. If Palestinian city inhabitants want to expand their city by building new housing units, who would want to stop them?

    I was quoting a foxnews news story, not an opinion piece or blog entry. The fact that Palestinian officials are planning a unilateral state declaration at some point is almost common knowledge, and hardly even needs a citation. I just picked the first one that showed up on a Google search. If you want other citations to the same fact, I'm sure I can find you a dozen.

    ===In what way is that different from the attitude of Netanyahu's earlier "proposal"?===

    This has nothing to do with a proposal. This has to do with accommodation of natural expansion of existing cities. If the cities in question are to be held by Israel under a final status agreement, then a few extra meters in a given direction are not going to make much difference. And, if the cities are to be abandoned, then obviously, the building is irrelevant.


    Let me ask you something, as an aside: Are you under the impression that the settlements were once Palestinian cities and that Israeli authorities expelled the Palestinians so that settlers could move in? If so (and it appears so from your comment), that could not be further from the truth. The settlements were empty lands before they were built. Sort of like Phoenix and Santa Fe and Salt Lake City.
  8. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    08 Sep '09 14:32
    Originally posted by sh76
    Well, thanks for leading off with the compliment anyway.

    ===Why is the land now empty? Forced removal perhaps?!===

    No. By and large, settlements are on lands that were empty before they were settled. I do not believe any settlements were built on land from which others were forcibly removed.

    ===Are the palestinians allowed the same rights. ===

    Of ...[text shortened]... re empty lands before they were built. Sort of like Phoenix and Santa Fe and Salt Lake City.
    "Of course they are. If Palestinian city inhabitants want to expand their city by building new housing units, who would want to stop them?"
    Most of the israeli people and virtually all of the israeli government.

    "Are you under the impression that the settlements were once Palestinian cities and that Israeli authorities expelled the Palestinians so that settlers could move in?"
    More or less that. I'm partially refering to the six days war and other not so commendable attitudes done by the israeli government in recent times.
  9. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Sep '09 14:38
    Originally posted by adam warlock
    "Of course they are. If Palestinian city inhabitants want to expand their city by building new housing units, who would want to stop them?"
    Most of the israeli people and virtually all of the israeli government.

    "Are you under the impression that the settlements were once Palestinian cities and that Israeli authorities expelled the Palestinians so t ...[text shortened]... war and other not so commendable attitudes done by the israeli government in recent times.
    ==="Of course they are. If Palestinian city inhabitants want to expand their city by building new housing units, who would want to stop them?"
    Most of the israeli people and virtually all of the israeli government.===

    I don't think the Israeli government would try to stop Palestinian expansion of existing Palestinian cities. Needless to say, if they would do so, it would be wrong.

    ====More or less that. I'm partially refering to the six days war and other not so commendable attitudes done by the israeli government in recent times.====

    I'm not saying Israeli conduct has been perfect. Both sides have been wrong on certain issues. But I do not blame Israel for the Six Day war. We've gone over this on this forum a million times, but the Six Day war was forced on Israel by Nasser and the UAR. Maybe it didn't have to happen exactly on the date that it did, but between the expulsion of the peacekeepers, the formation of the UAR, the movement of the Egyptian army into the Sinai desert, the blockading of Israeli shipping and the other related steps made eventual war more or less inevitable.
  10. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Sep '09 15:38
    I think you're ruining the narrative sh76. Don't you know the Israeli's were supposed to lay down and die during the six day war? And don't you know that Israeli cities are supposed to stop growing, because Israelis are supposed to stop breeding?

    It is the Israeli's stubborn insistence on continuing to live and thrive that causes all the trouble, and your failure to see that is a double standard.
  11. 08 Sep '09 15:43
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I think you're ruining the narrative sh76. Don't you know the Israeli's were supposed to lay down and die during the six day war? And don't you know that Israeli cities are supposed to stop growing, because Israelis are supposed to stop breeding?

    It is the Israeli's stubborn insistence on continuing to live and thrive that causes all the trouble, and your failure to see that is a double standard.
    I am not even sure that these racists believe that Israel has the right to lay down and die.
  12. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    08 Sep '09 15:50
    Originally posted by sh76
    After a 6 month freeze, they're allowing a small new construction. These construction projects are undertaken to alleviate severe housing shortages that occur naturally. Cities naturally expand, especially since the birthrate is higher in the settlement areas than in most other places. They are not done to accommodate new settlers nor are new settlement communities being established.
    Why don't they build these 455 houses in Israel? Why build them in the Occupied Territories?
  13. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Sep '09 15:57
    Originally posted by FMF
    Why don't they build these 455 houses in Israel? Why build them in the Occupied Territories?
    Because..

    A) As the article you linked indicates.."The homes will be built in six settlements - all of which are included in the settlement blocs that Israel wants to keep under any peace agreement"

    And

    B) As sh76 already said in his post.."As the communities grow, the options are to force the younger people to move away from the city because there is no housing or to allow the construction of new units."
  14. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    08 Sep '09 16:09
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    Because..

    A) As the article you linked indicates.."The homes will be built in six settlements - [b]all of which are included in the settlement blocs that Israel wants to keep under any peace agreement
    "

    And

    B) As sh76 already said in his post.."As the communities grow, the options are to force the younger people to move away from the city because there is no housing or to allow the construction of new units."[/b]
    Yes. But why not let these people build and live in houses (that everyone concedes they need) in Israel? The two reasons you gave are meaningless in answer to the question I posed.
  15. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    08 Sep '09 16:11
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    younger people [...] move away from the city because there is no housing or to allow the construction of new units."[/b]
    Do you live on Planet Earth?

    This situation is common in some part of virtually every country on earth.

    Young people moving to another place in order to find a place to live?

    Do you think this is some kind of West Bank-Only phenomenon?