Why won't they stop?

I point to the fact that the West Bank already looks like this politically:

 

Actual political map of West Bank

Spoiler

 

I actually visited Israel and the West Bank earlier this month. We took a tour that took us across the checkpoint into the West Bank, saw the Israeli and Palestinian settlements in East Jerusalem, and saw the wall, etc.

I'll have to post pictures later. It was quite shocking, to say the least.

 

Just a couple points...

They are not expanding illegally. The US does not own Israel nor does the UN or any other country, so we have no right to determine what is illegal. Whether we should support or agree with the actions is a different argument.

You don't understand hate. The majority of us are taught not to hate. Its the complete opposite over there. Its ingrained from birth. Take your feelings towards child molesters and rapists, and then you will begin to understand how they feel about each other.

This crap happens all over the globe. Its gets old hearing about the middle eastern countries being singled out.

 

Really, occupied nations are the norm? I had the feeling they were in the minority...and seeing as how everyone and their mom always makes noise about, for example, Tibet and China, I think this is fair.

 

Do you really believe that the United States belongs to European/African/Asian decent? Occupied nation is a feel good term to feel sorry for those who were conquered. Its been happening since the beginning of time and i will never stop. You either adapt, move or die.

 

So in other words there is no such thing as rule of law just might makes right.

 

Uh, in case you've forgotten the last 50 years, occupation has become somewhat taboo. Given the fact that the British and French empires both disappeared, I would've thought that it was obvious.

But what are you even saying? That the Palestinians don't have a legitimate case because America was founded on stolen soil 300-odd years ago and thus every nation that has been conquered since has no right to demand autonomy?

 

In international politics? The fact is, the main effective purpose of international law is to codify that which is already there under customary international law, which is fully capable of being broken anytime by any country (it doesn't occur out of the fact that it's the accepted custom, but it's still a generally weak binding). In the field of international relations, might and skillful diplomacy more or less makes right. Besides, it's not like the Palestinians are innocent either - both countries will continue to fight wit each other, on and on and on.

 

It's a little more than that. Olives are the Palestinians only cash crop. Entire villages rely on those olive trees.

 

actual political map of the west bank

Spoiler

 

The Israeli government has long been held hostage by the far-right fundamentalists, who's agenda is total expulsion of Palestinians from Israel and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). This is partially due to the Kinesset's electoral process, which grants representation to any party that gets 2% of the vote. Smaller parties, often with a xenophobic bent, end up wielding disproportionate power in the coalition-building process. But even the larger parties have moved to the right in the climate of fear and perpetual war.

The flip side is that radical Palestinians are simultaneously empowered by the rhetoric and actions of the Israeli far-right and by the poverty and desperation of the people they purport to represent. Moderates on both sides are seen as unwitting agents of the enemy, and the radicals take full advantage of this perception.

 

I messed up there, as those two points aren't directly related. The first part was related as to the aspect as to determining the relevance of international law in modern geopolitics, which judoka cried out for - and while there have been considerable efforts to strengthen and lay out the details of conventional international law, customary international law is still more powerful and is better adhered to, and the former form of international law will always be subservient to geopolitical realties. Really the most successful forms of conventional international rules have been the development of economic organizations such as NAFTA and CAFTA and EU and so on, and to a lesser degree environmental things such as the Kyoto Protocol - which are substantially different from nuclear weapons or Israel or blah blah.
The second point was just myself commenting on the Israeli thing and you talking about the bad things the Israelis have done, to which I argued that neither side are angels, and I really don't see any ways as to which peace is possible between those two.

As for nuclear weapons - under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, nuclear weapons should generally be under the control of the five permanent members of the security Council. Note that India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea are not signatories due to controversy regarding their nuclear programs. Of course, it is international law, so it's a bit of a problem.

 

Just what that region needs: fewer trees.

 

Here are a few of the pictures I took in the West Bank earlier this month --

Typical Palestinian housing, reminded me of a favela in Brazil:


"The Wall":


Checkpoint going from Jerusalem into the West Bank:


Sign at the checkpoint:

 

Same here, I really want to see the Middle East. (I've seen Dubai but that honestly doesnt even count)