Is that some sort of mantra of the Pro-Palestinians/Anti-Israels?
Depends where it's being built, Are people being displaced due to this new settlement, Is it nessecary, What are the Benefits, How or Will the Palestinians in the West Bank be affected etc. I'll comment again when I look at the article.

Reply 5

JJ1

This discussion should really just go in the generic Israel/Palestine thread since it has been debated to death.

Personally i oppose the majority of settlement construction, other than construction outside the green line, but inside what will be the future border after territorial adjustment has taken place in accordance with UN resolution 242.

I believe it is rather simplistic to simply generalise it as illegal and therefore wrong. I am no expert on international law, so far be it from me to say that the view held by the majority of experts is incorrect: that said the issue remains contentious. Even if it were not contentious, the "law" sometimes doesn't make much pragmatic sense in specific situations, which is why judges have always applied a degree of discretion and interpretation to verdicts - in my view such pragmatism is usually pushed aside when it comes to Israel.

The reality is that there are certain areas which are technicaly part of the occupied territories, but which will, rightly or wrongly, remain part of israel in any eventual settlement. The bulk of the settlers are located in these areas and it would be logistically impossible to move them, the areas are contiguous with Israel (and are often of strategic importance in accordance with resolution 242), and represent only a small part of the west bank. To demand that these areas become part of the new palestine would in my view be unrealistic, probably unreasonable, and would do more harm than good to the palestinians.

The new appartments that have been approved will largely be built in these areas which are inevitably going to remain part of israel (Har Gilo, Modi'in Ilit and Ariel primarily). This represents little or no geographical expansion, merely a tiny expansion of a population who are staying put anyway, on land which, rightly or wrongly, will remain part of Israel in an eventual agreement anyway.

That's why I don't have a problem with it particularly. I could, however, understand why one would have a problem with it. So to answer your question: yes, it can be justified, although obviously not everyone will accept the justification.

I presume that was a rhetorical question though right - that probably explains why you made a seperate thread. Whatever happens, one must not pas up a chance to attack israel.

Reply 6

R£SP£CT

I'm not surprised that this has occured. I'm afraid this is reality. Israel will not stop the settlements. No matter how much America 'push' them to reconsider, its just going to continue.

Reply 7

maths-enthusiast

Maybe a few hundred Shahab-3s will make them reconsider their decisions.

Reply 8

Diaz89

This is what causes international terrorism and the sooner people get acquainted with this the more peaceful of a world we can have.

Reply 9

likasombodie

don't worry, Israel will get away with it like they always do. The consequence - more terrorism and hatred in the world. Most wars are created are due to Israel. But the world will never forgive. The world will never forget. BRUP.

Reply 10

Axes

I've written a reply in an identical thread, so Ill simply copy it:

People here misunderstand the Israeli governments move. First of all, you need to separate between two forms of settlement: The Big settlement blocks ajacent to the 1967 line, which are actually large cities, who will most certainly be swapped to Israel in a future agreement in return for other lands. The second kind is the problematic kind, in the heart of Palestinian land.

Those 450 units are being built in those big settlement blocks, and do not include any "enlargement" of those towns lands, but simply building more houses in them for their growing population. Netanyahu did this just prior to a huge concession to the US (freezing all settlement building), in order to quiet down the settler lobby with a tiny gesture for them, and it is, indeed, tiny.

Reply 11

borismor

In Gaza Israel has built way more than 450 homes - where are they today?

Reply 12

manwithaplan

likasombodie

Please back up your point with evidence or don't make it at all. I fail to see how most wars are created due to Israel, a breif overview of world conflicts and wars since the end of World War 2 will show you that a very small minority of these either directly or indirectly involve Israel.
Wars such as those between different political ideologies (Korean War, Vietnam War, Communist Insurgency in many countries including Malaysia and the Phillipines etc.) Civil War (Chad, El Salvador, Liberia as well as dozens if not, hundreds of other examples) Territorial Conflicts and wars (The Troubles, India-Pakistan, Falklands etc.) as well as the war on Terror which Israel is as accountable for as the United States, United Kingdom etc.
Looking objectively at these three lists http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1945%E2%80%931989, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1990%E2%80%932002, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_2003%E2%80%93current
It clearly shows that a very small minority of wars have actually involved Israel so please give evidence or don't make stupid claims.

Sorry for derailing this thread slightly but, it should be in the larger Israel-Palestine Conflict thread

Reply 13

JJ1

I love these retarded Israel threads, where someone points out an unimportant news story because they hate Israel and care about that more than anything else, and then a few people make some intelligent and balanced points about the actual significance of the story, and address the issues of right and wrong involved, absolving Israel of much the guilt implied by the wild accusation, and then a bunch of people respond with still wilder accusations.

"Israel's settlements are terrible"

"They aren't great no, but here are a few things you should consider about this particular change"

"Yeah, well... Israel is responsible for all war!!!!"

Reply 14

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

This is unjustifiable and if Israel keeps acting like this it will be punished.

The invasion in Gaza was a complete disaster, they've been threatening to destroy Iran's "peaceful" nuclear programme and now they're building settlements in Palestine's land.

Apart from Merkel I haven't heard any of the big politicians say anything on this, except perhaps Obama.

Reply 15

Folderol

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

This is unjustifiable and if Israel keeps acting like this it will be punished.

Realistically, you know it wont.

The invasion in Gaza was a complete disaster,

There has been a decrease in rockets. Didn't get its aim of stopping all, but I wouldn't call it "complete disaster."

they've been threatening to destroy Iran's "peaceful" nuclear programme and now they're building settlements in Palestine's land.

Just a semantic point: They've been doing it since 1967

Apart from Merkel I haven't heard any of the big politicians say anything on this, except perhaps Obama.

If you're talking about settlements in general.. You mentioned Obama and Merkel. There was also Brown, Sarkozy, Berlusconi. As if the leaders of Britain, Italy, France, Germany and the US weren't enough so has Russia, the EU.

Oh and also ""Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay, Zambia". And also the UNSC (meaning China).

Reply 16

pasargad

They will acheive nothing by doing this and will instead create an obstacle to acheiving peace.

Reply 17

Pocket Calculator

if they want to build new towns, why not do it in the Negev? no one lives there so they ain't gonna **** no one else off. they could make an israeli Vegas.

Reply 18

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

Folderol

Realistically, you know it wont.

In one way or another it will eventually be punished.

There has been a decrease in rockets. Didn't get its aim of stopping all, but I wouldn't call it "complete disaster."

"Between 1,166 and 1,417 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed. More than 400,000 Gazans were left without running water, 4,000 homes were destroyed or badly damaged, leaving tens of thousands of people homeless; 80 government buildings were hit"

You can hardly call it a complete victory on the other hand can you now?

Merkel and Obama are the only people I've heard speak about it :s-smilie:

Reply 19

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

Pocket Calculator

if they want to build new towns, why not do it in the Negev? no one lives there so they ain't gonna **** no one else off. they could make an israeli Vegas.