What's new

The US tells the UN to go to hell when questioned about lands it conquered during wartime

If I take your words then there is no problem. Then why EU and US is angry ? .....isn't Isreali behavior in the region is providing fertile ground for terrorism and hate in that particular region.
I think some elements in the E.U. and U.S. believe their concern for the "Palestinians" is genuine but I have yet to meet them. Rather, they see Israel's primary function as a firewall and scapegoat and Palestinians as useful irritants and psychological tools.

We can t call whole world is crazy and disobediant ....
Why not???
 
I think some elements in the E.U. and U.S. believe their concern for the "Palestinians" is genuine but I have yet to meet them. Rather, they see Israel's primary function as a firewall and scapegoat and Palestinians as useful irritants and psychological tools.

Why not???
Also its not just Palastinian issue , countries like Lebanon and Syria has also has occupied land issues. Which seems a never ending story.
 
Also its not just Palastinian issue , countries like Lebanon and Syria has also has occupied land issues. Which seems a never ending story.
Now you're starting to get it: Israel is important to antisemites because it's a distraction from their own moral and legal failures.
 
Now you're starting to get it: Israel is important to antisemites because it's a distraction from their own moral and legal failures.
Don't think these issues has anything to do with religion. These issues are ground reality. Israel still exist and how many countries came forward to destroy or broke war with Israel ??....non , so it means its regional issue , but the implications of these issue has huge impact on regional peace and security. Non country in the world will provide long distance security to Israel. Media is free now. Anything happen in next few minutes all on media without any censor. Age of controlled media is over and public opinion has weight and its show the impact in govt policies.
 
Don't think these issues has anything to do with religion. These issues are ground reality. Israel still exist and how many countries came forward to destroy or broke war with Israel ??....non , so it means its regional issue , but the implications of these issue has huge impact on regional peace and security.
Don't see the need to bring religion into the discussion. The "huge impact on regional peace and security" has been from the refusal of Israel's enemies to accept Israel; in refusing, truth has been turned upside down, logic distorted, and injustice promoted, for there is no other way to maintain the non-acceptance of Israel otherwise. Flip it around and there will be room for human minds to return to sane functioning. That's why the sooner Pakistan engages in open and friendly relations with Israel the better. Not for Israel's needs but for Pakistan's own.

Non country in the world will provide long distance security to Israel.
That's been true for over 2,500 years. But that doesn't mean distant neighbors have to support Israel's enemies or that it's morally correct - even by their own professed standards - for them to do so.

Media is free now. Anything happen in next few minutes all on media without any censor. Age of controlled media is over and public opinion has weight and its show the impact in govt policies.
Where are the Pakistanis willing to stand between the Salman Taseers and their bodyguard-assassins? Until then - until there are brave men and women willing to die for truth and justice rather than the pretense of it - Pakistan's media cannot truly be free, can it?
 
Don't see the need to bring religion into the discussion. The "huge impact on regional peace and security" has been from the refusal of Israel's enemies to accept Israel; in refusing, truth has been turned upside down, logic distorted, and injustice promoted, for there is no other way to maintain the non-acceptance of Israel otherwise. Flip it around and there will be room for human minds to return to sane functioning. That's why the sooner Pakistan engages in open and friendly relations with Israel the better. Not for Israel's needs but for Pakistan's own.

That's been true for over 2,500 years. But that doesn't mean distant neighbors have to support Israel's enemies or that it's morally correct - even by their own professed standards - for them to do so.

Where are the Pakistanis willing to stand between the Salman Taseers and their bodyguard-assassins? Until then - until there are brave men and women willing to die for truth and justice rather than the pretense of it - Pakistan's media cannot truly be free, can it?
I agree we have some what biased media . But, it got freedom 10 years ago. It is acting like unleash dog. But it is greatly helping to built public opinion, where public use to be silence .
 
At least the OP has the courage to finally come out in the open and say what many (or most?) Israelis really trying to do all along: Duplicate the land grabs done by others from the examples from decades/centuries ago in 21st century. As if anyone needed to doubt that the plans were always to grab as much land as possible while publicly saying the BS likes 'we gave up Gaza and look' or 'we believe in a two state solution' or 'no partner for peace'.
 
I agree we have some what biased media . But, it got freedom 10 years ago. It is acting like unleash dog. But it is greatly helping to built public opinion, where public use to be silence .
Has even one English-language Pakistani webpaper supported Israel over the Palestinians openly? So presenting Israel's case is nearly as forbidden to them as it is to students in Pakistani schools and madrassas. It will take someone very brave to break such strictures and even if they do, who would be willing to listen, rather than answer with bombs or bullets?
 
The Brits were a trustee. Trusteeships don't end when the trustee pulls out.

"There has to be a decision"? Where does that come from? More on Article 80 here: link.
-–
Article 77
1 The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;

b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and

c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.

2 It will be a matter for subsequent agreement as to which territories in the foregoing categories will be brought under the trusteeship system and upon what terms.


No agreement was made to bring the British Mandate under the trusteeship system,
so there was a Mandate, and Great Britain unilaterally terminated the Mandate May 14, 1948.
The US proposed that Palestine was to be brought under the trusteeship, but nothing happened.
 
Has even one English-language Pakistani webpaper supported Israel over the Palestinians openly? So presenting Israel's case is nearly as forbidden to them as it is to students in Pakistani schools and madrassas. It will take someone very brave to break such strictures and even if they do, who would be willing to listen, rather than answer with bombs or bullets?
Our media extremely rarely give coverage to this issue. May be 5 percent of population is aware some what deep detail.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom