Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should Ireland recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel?

Options
13567

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    pitifulgod
    Registered Users Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭pitifulgod


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    So did the UN slap Guatemala for saying they would move their embassy to Jerusalem, or is that a US only thing?

    The US is a substantial power that has influence when it makes a substantial decision. Guatemala, not so much. Exact same would happen if the UK, Germany or France decided to make such a decision on its own. The fact that the US is engaging in bufoonery on international stage is something that should very much so be called out.


  • Options
    #63
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Doltanian wrote: »
    Its called having an opinion, you can call it lies, propaganda or whatever you like but that reflects badly on you and not me.

    "palestine is a terror state" is an opinion? Maybe. Based on fact and objective observable reality? I don't think so


  • Options
    #64
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Snickers Man wrote: »
    In fact the very existence of Israel as an independent state is thanks to a United Nations resolution. (Google UN General Assembly Resolution 181 for details)

    I think Israel and its supporters should as a matter of course give thanks to the UN as their progenitor every time they mention them. A bit of Kow Towing and humility would do them a power of good, in my humble opinion.
    You are overestimating the importance of that one event. If Israelis had lost subsequent wars against the Arabs, Israel would not exist. If the area had not been their ancient homeland, and Jerusalem their ancient capital, then that UN resolution would never have been made.
    Israel exists because the Israelis made it exist.


  • Options
    #65
    mulbot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,821 ✭✭✭mulbot


    recedite wrote: »
    You are overestimating the importance of that one event. If Israelis had lost subsequent wars against the Arabs, Israel would not exist. If the area had not been their ancient homeland, and Jerusalem their ancient capital, then that UN resolution would never have been made.
    Israel exists because the Israelis made it exist.

    Did they not steal the land from the Jebusite peoples?


  • Options
    #66
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    mulbot wrote: »
    Did they not steal the land from the Jebusite peoples?
    Maybe. The Jebusites may take their case to the UN, and if they get a UN resolution to set up their state, they can fight the Israelis. And if they win that, they will have their country back.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    recedite wrote: »
    Maybe. The Jebusites may take their case to the UN, and if they get a UN resolution to set up their state, they can fight the Israelis. And if they win that, they will have their country back.

    Were they a real people with a case they would find themselves subject to the US veto the same as the palestinians, therefore your scenario is impossible.


  • Options
    #68
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,068 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    No Jerusalem should not be recognised as the captial of Israel, for very obvious reasons but since they are apparently not obvious to everyone -
    After the Second World War, the State of Israel was established and gradually recognized ‘de jure’ — or lawfully — by most of the world’s countries. However, although the U.N. recognized the state of Israel in 1948, allowing it to become a member state, it placed the whole city of Jerusalem under international control (a ‘corpus separatum’) on Dec. 13 1949. Despite this, most governmental offices moved to the city.

    But in 1967, during the Six-Day War, Israel captured the eastern section of Jerusalem, which Jordan presided over, and declared Israeli law, jurisdiction and administration would be applied to the whole city. Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem has been considered illegal under international law and was condemned by the U.N., as well as other states.

    In 1980, the Knesset declared that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel,” but this law was declared null by the U.N., which called for the removal of the remaining embassies in the city. A statement from Israel’s Foreign Ministry called the resolution “unjust” and “additional proof that the U.N. organization has been converted into an instrument in the hands of Israel’s enemies in their war against her existence and independence.”

    Countries continued to locate their foreign embassies in Tel Aviv, Israel’s second largest city, situated on the Mediterranean coast, and the refusal to recognize Jerusalem as Israeli territory has become a near-universal policy among Western nations.

    The U.N. still maintains its position on Jerusalem. In October 2009, the U.N.’s Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that Jerusalem must be the capital of both Israel and Palestine—living side-by-side in peace and security, with arrangements for the holy sites acceptable to all—for peace in the Middle East to be achieved. “This is the road to the fulfilment of both the vision of [U.N.] Security Council resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative, and the yearning for peace of people from all over the world,” he said.


    Pretty clear

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #69
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Odhinn wrote: »
    Were they a real people with a case they would find themselves subject to the US veto the same as the palestinians, therefore your scenario is impossible.
    Maybe, but I'm not the one harping on about the importance of UN resolutions.
    The British evacuated Palestine in 1948 and left jews and arabs to fight it out for territory. In much as the same way as they evacuated India and left the hindus and muslims to fight it out. Current borders in all these places are a result of who won that and subsequent fighting, not because of the UN.


  • Options
    #70
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    recedite wrote: »
    You are overestimating the importance of that one event. If Israelis had lost subsequent wars against the Arabs, Israel would not exist. If the area had not been their ancient homeland, and Jerusalem their ancient capital, then that UN resolution would never have been made.
    Israel exists because the Israelis made it exist.

    The legal basis for Israel's existence is the Partition of Palestine as decided by the United Nation's General Assembly in 1948. That built on a previous statement called the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which the Israelis always claim was a legal promise by one great power of the time, Britain, that the Jewish people could have a national homeland in "Palestine".

    Even given the dubious morality of Britain being able to make a gift of somebody else's territory to a third party, the Balfour Declaration never delimited the area of the Jewish state. In fact its rider that Israel/Jewish National Homeland could only exist provided that NOTHING be done to affect the rights of "pre-existing non Jewish communities" in the region implies that a Palestinian state has an equal right to exist alongside a Jewish one.

    I am not so naive as to believe that all the affairs of the world are settled by United Nations votes but if, as you say, Israel's existence is based solely on its ability to win wars then the corollary is that somebody else has a similar right if they win the next war. You are merely condemning Israel and its neighbours to a permanent war of attrition with no hope of resolution at all.

    Some friend.


  • Options
    #71
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Snickers Man wrote: »
    if, as you say, Israel's existence is based solely on its ability to win wars
    Yes, that is the fact of the matter.
    Snickers Man wrote: »
    ...then the corollary is that somebody else has a similar right if they win the next war. You are merely condemning Israel and its neighbours to a permanent war of attrition with no hope of resolution at all.
    If the last few decades had panned out differently, the arab states and Iran could have joined forces to defeat Israel instead of fighting each other. But I'm not saying that would be their "right". Facts on the ground are one thing, theoretical rights are another.

    IMO Jordan should now reclaim its west bank territories (by agreement) but they would have to forget about east Jerusalem.
    Gaza should be incorporated into Israel and its people offered the choice of Israeli, Jordanian or Egyptian passports.
    UN could help in a practical way by offering to administer the holy sites within Israel.
    Remove the reasons for permanent war, and it will end.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    At this stage there is no chance of a two state anything. Israel is here to stay and they are not budging in fact they will take more land.


  • Options
    #73
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    StringerBell wrote: »
    No Jerusalem should not be recognised as the captial of Israel, for very obvious reasons but since they are apparently not obvious to everyone -




    Pretty clear
    I see the opposite. Fair enough it was decided Jerusalem was dual rule however if I captured a city during a war it's now my city.


  • Options
    #74
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    if I captured a city during a war it's now my city.
    Especially when Jordan, which half owned the city, was the aggressor. They attacked Israel and not the other way round.
    If the arabs had won, there would be no more Israel, and no talk of dividing up Jerusalem into two parts.


  • Options
    #75
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    recedite wrote: »

    IMO Jordan should now reclaim its west bank territories (by agreement) but they would have to forget about east Jerusalem.
    Gaza should be incorporated into Israel and its people offered the choice of Israeli, Jordanian or Egyptian passports.
    UN could help in a practical way by offering to administer the holy sites within Israel.
    Remove the reasons for permanent war, and it will end.

    Jordan have ceded all rights to the territories to the Palestinians. Gaza is of no interest to Israel as its population proved too expensive to control. Regardless of that population would never be offered Israeli passports because every major Israeli party has as part of its platform that it will nothing to 'threaten the majority' ie annex land and the palestinian population on it.

    The reasons for permanent war are primarily the illegal settlements/colonies and israeli occupation. It's a one sided affair for the most part.


  • Options
    #76
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    recedite wrote: »
    Especially when Jordan, which half owned the city, was the aggressor. They attacked Israel and not the other way round.
    If the arabs had won, there would be no more Israel, and no talk of dividing up Jerusalem into two parts.

    So essentially Israel don't have do anything. They are in charge and it looks naive to suggest they will offer a multi cultural multi passport society in the future. I would envision Israel getting even tougher in the future and expanding.


  • Options
    #77
    myshirt
    Registered Users Posts: 5,245 ✭✭✭myshirt


    No, absolutely not.

    We wouldn't even recognise Israel at all if right was right. Practising target shooting on fleeing Palestinian children while the world watches on, it's truly shameful of us all. I wouldn't even contemplate giving Israel legitimacy, never mind recognising Jerusalem as the capital.


  • Options
    #78
    BuilderPlumber
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    recedite wrote: »
    Yes, that is the fact of the matter.
    If the last few decades had panned out differently, the arab states and Iran could have joined forces to defeat Israel instead of fighting each other

    I'd say MOSSAD are the most powerful secret service in the Middle East and have had Arab and Iranian politicians working for them many at the VERY HIGHEST level to STOP just that. I'd say the whole Saudi royals, most of Egypt and Jordan, Khomeini/Khamenei/Rafsanjani/Ahmadinejad were all Mossad.


  • Options
    #79
    BuilderPlumber
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    Mohammed Reza Pahlavi was the ONLY Iranian leader to speak out against Israel by not quoting Saddam Hussein or Nasser. All the post-1979 ones were just repeating Nasser or Saddam stuff. Why would any Iranian quote their main foe or an irrelevant North African leader? Mossad. Ahmadinejad and the others were told to quote Saddam and did so. Ahmadinejad failed in his career because he was found out as an agent. Pahlavi spoke out intelligently about negative Israeli policy without name calling and he was gone in a few years. Not the same happened to other name callers of Israel like Ahmadinejad, Nasser or the Saudis.


  • Options
    #80
    BalcombeSt4
    Registered Users Posts: 1,792 ✭✭✭BalcombeSt4


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Jerusalem is the historic Capital of Israel and should Ireland therefore recognize this fact and it`s present day reality just like the USA. After all, Israel`s parliament, the Knesset and other main government offices are in the city. Lest we forget, God gave Israel to the Jews so should this not be acknowledged by respecting the right of the Israeli people to choose their own capital?

    How would the Dubs like it if every country in the world were to recognize Cork`s rightful status as the real Capital of Ireland?

    The Palestinian desire for a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem could perhaps be entertained by the State of Israel if the international community were to recognize Jerusalem as Israel`s capital.

    My own view is that the world in general and Ireland in particular should recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel but the Palestinians really ought to refrain from the appalling behavior they displayed following President Trump`s decision on the matter. These things need to be talked out and there is no excuse for burning flags and rioting because of it.

    No 1. I think we should respect international law and help enforce the UN resolutions which want Israel to withdrawl from the occupied parts of Palestine & end their brutal blockade of Gaza. Until then we shouldn't even recognize one iota of an Israeli state.

    No.2 As a Dub I couldn't care were the Irish capital is.

    No.3. The Palestinians should have been given a state 70 years ago not sometime in the future & resting on fixed pre-conditions. We should send arms to Palestinian guerrillas to protect themselves from Israeli fascist aggression.


  • Options
    #81
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    So essentially Israel don't have do anything. They are in charge and it looks naive to suggest they will offer a multi cultural multi passport society in the future. I would envision Israel getting even tougher in the future and expanding.

    As time passes, it will more and more resemble apartheid era south africa.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Odhinn wrote: »
    Jordan have ceded all rights to the territories to the Palestinians.
    Very convenient. But the key to understanding any ultimate solution is to realise that Jordan is Palestine, or what is left of it after it was split up between jews and arabs. The king of Jordan has a nice little gig going there on the east bank of the Jordan river, having abandoned the west bank. Time to consolidate all the people again, even if it makes the east bank Palestinians/Jordanians poorer.
    Odhinn wrote: »
    Gaza is of no interest to Israel as its population proved too expensive to control. Regardless of that population would never be offered Israeli passports because every major Israeli party has as part of its platform that it will nothing to 'threaten the majority' ie annex land and the palestinian population on it.
    Gaza strip is a tiny area of major security interest to Israel because of its location. Israelis cannot allow it to be part of a hostile power, because of the way it juts into Israel. On the other hand the population are hostile.
    The long term solution is to incorporate the territory into Israel proper.
    The population would be harder to incorporate, but it should be possible. Especially if the hard core element opted to sell up their land and take up Egyptian or Jordanian citizenship. The remainder would improve Israeli society by balancing against the ultra orthodox jews.
    Ultra orthodox jews might not like it, but IMO most Israelis would choose the influx of arabs for the sake of peace.
    Odhinn wrote: »
    The reasons for permanent war are primarily the illegal settlements/colonies and israeli occupation. It's a one sided affair for the most part.
    Israelis have no choice but to keep consolidating territory for security, until they have a reasonably compact geographic area, enclosed with defensible borders. For that they also need settlers.

    Arabs living inside Israel proper tend to be very prosperous compared to those in the occupied territories. If you can't beat them, join them.


  • Options
    #83
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    recedite wrote: »
    Very convenient. But the key to understanding any ultimate solution is to realise that Jordan is Palestine, or what is left of it after it was split up between jews and arabs. The king of Jordan has a nice little gig going there on the east bank of the Jordan river, having abandoned the west bank. Time to consolidate all the people again, even if it makes the east bank Palestinians/Jordanians poorer..

    You seem to view "Arabs" as some amorphous mass. This is not the case, and Palestinian and Jordanians are two seperate peoples.
    recedite wrote: »
    Gaza strip is a tiny area of major security interest to Israel because of its location. Israelis cannot allow it to be part of a hostile power, because of the way it juts into Israel. On the other hand the population are hostile.
    The long term solution is to incorporate the territory into Israel proper.
    The population would be harder to incorporate, but it should be possible. Especially if the hard core element opted to sell up their land and take up Egyptian or Jordanian citizenship. The remainder would improve Israeli society by balancing against the ultra orthodox jews.
    Ultra orthodox jews might not like it, but IMO most Israelis would choose the influx of arabs for the sake of peace.

    You seem to have no thought or consideration to anything, save the whims of the Israeli state. You also seem to have no idea of the political splits in the israeli population. "ultra orthodox jews" are a minority and the hardliners are from both religous and secular camps.

    recedite wrote: »
    Israelis have no choice but to keep consolidating territory for security, until they have a reasonably compact geographic area, enclosed with defensible borders. For that they also need settlers..

    Exchanging "israelis" in that paragraph for Germans, Russians etc gives it the proper perspective. Again, you take the line that Israel needs, does, and is justified. It's a non sequitur.
    recedite wrote: »
    Arabs living inside Israel proper tend to be very prosperous compared to those in the occupied territories. If you can't beat them, join them.

    Palestinians. They are treated abysmally, though not as bad as their occupied fellows.
    https://imeu.org/article/discrimination-against-palestinian-citizens-of-israel


  • Options
    #84
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Ash.J.Williams wrote: »
    ...if I captured a city during a war it's now my city.

    What you've just described is explicitly a war crime.


  • Options
    #85
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Odhinn wrote: »
    You seem to view "Arabs" as some amorphous mass. This is not the case, and Palestinian and Jordanians are two seperate peoples.
    Most arab kingdoms are based on tribal identities, but there is also the pan arab nationalist identity as espoused by Baathists. This led Syria to voluntarily merge with Eqypt at one point, and the same mentality led Saddam Hussein to think it would be OK to merge Iraq with Kuwait, which played out badly for him. Borders are more fluid in that part of the world than we in the west are accustomed to thinking. Borders that exist now are based mostly on arbitrary lines in the sand drawn by British and French administrators.
    ISIL considered their state in "the Levant" to include the Sunni tribal areas spanning parts of both Syria and Iraq. That is in fact a logical area for "a country".

    As for "Palestine", the historical area included the habitable area each side of the Jordan river, bounded by the sea in the west and the arabian deserts in the east.
    Currently Israel takes up the western part of this area, then there are the occupied west bank territories. The east bank territories have been incorporated into Jordan along with some of the arabian deserts.
    If there is such thing as "the jordanian people" then it is a modern construct, and the borders have been as fluid as Israel's.
    Odhinn wrote: »
    Exchanging "israelis" in that paragraph for Germans, Russians etc gives it the proper perspective. Again, you take the line that Israel needs, does, and is justified. It's a non sequitur.
    What is the alternative, should they just lie down and die? Several times they were invaded by armies from neighbouring countries trying to annihilate them.
    Iran is constantly threatening to "wipe Israel off the map". In the face of such open hostility they have no choice; be tough or die.[/QUOTE]


  • Options
    #86
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    What you've just described is explicitly a war crime.
    Plenty of cities like that. Cologne/Koln regularly switched from being French to German and back again. I don't think either side ever tried to operate it as a divided city though.


  • Options
    #87
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    recedite wrote: »
    If there is such thing as "the jordanian people" then it is a modern construct, and the borders have been as fluid as Israel's.

    Again, the dismissive amorphous mass concept. Israel as now constituted is a modern construct.
    recedite wrote: »
    What is the alternative, should they just lie down and die? Several times they were invaded by armies from neighbouring countries trying to annihilate them.
    Iran is constantly threatening to........

    By which lights we allow Germany to be dissolved by France, Belgium etc. Russia to be dissolved by the baltic states, poland and whoever and so on.

    Certainly by that argument Lebanon should be allowed large swathes of Israel.

    Nothing excuses colonialism. Absolutely nothing. It's not acceptable in this day and age, shouldn't have been in any other and "Israel is"/"Israel wants"/"Israel needs" is not an argument.


  • Options
    #88
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Odhinn wrote: »
    Again, the dismissive amorphous mass concept. Israel as now constituted is a modern construct.
    Of course modern Israel is a modern construct.
    I thought I had gone into enough detail about the complexities of "the arabs" to dissuade you from continuing with this "amorphous mass" nonsense, but obviously not.
    Odhinn wrote: »
    By which lights we allow Germany to be dissolved by France, Belgium etc.
    You missed the point; its not what "we allow" at all. Its what a nation does to defend itself, and how successful that effort is that counts. IMO Israel will consolidate itself into a defensible territory, and will cease to expand at that point.
    If the arabs had left them alone in 1948, they would still be within their original borders. It was a smaller land area then, with a long convoluted border, and no buffer zones.
    And as it turned out, not at all practical for a nation under a constant external threat.


  • Options
    #89
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,040 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    recedite wrote: »
    You missed the point; its not what "we allow" at all. Its what a nation does to defend itself, and how successful that effort is that counts. IMO Israel will consolidate itself into a defensible territory, and will cease to expand at that point.

    "Israel will..." again. You seem to grant the state some god given right to do as it will. Israels "success" is predicated on US support. Apartheid South Africa lasted a few decades longer than it could otherwise have for much the same reason.
    recedite wrote: »
    If the arabs had left them alone in 1948, they would still be within their original borders. It was a smaller land area then, with a long convoluted border, and no buffer zones.
    And as it turned out, not at all practical for a nation under a constant external threat.

    Yet the period of greatest settlement expansion has been in the last two to three decades.


  • Options
    #90
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    recedite wrote: »
    Plenty of cities like that. Cologne/Koln regularly switched from being French to German and back again.

    How many times has that happened since the Geneva Conventions were adopted?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    buzzerxx
    Registered Users Posts: 910 ✭✭✭buzzerxx


    In international law, East Jerusalem is occupied territory, as are the parts of the West Bank that Israel unilaterally annexed to its district of Jerusalem. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Hague Regulations of 1907 forbid occupying powers to alter the lifeways of civilians who are occupied, and forbid the settling of people from the occupiers’ country in the occupied territory. Israel’s expulsion of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem, its usurpation of Palestinian property there, and its settling of Israelis on Palestinian land are all gross violations of international law.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement