Palestinian state is recognised by 3 S.American countries

Do you think that the UK should recognise Palestinian state?

  • Great Britain must do it immediately

    Votes: 15 16.1%
  • It would be a right step

    Votes: 25 26.9%
  • Rather support

    Votes: 3 3.2%
  • It would be better to postpone the decision

    Votes: 12 12.9%
  • I strongly doubt that it is right

    Votes: 2 2.2%
  • I'm against it

    Votes: 22 23.7%
  • Such a stupid, senseless, anti-Semitic proposition!

    Votes: 14 15.1%

  • Total voters
    93
#1
Israel is disappointed (softly speaking).

Argentina, Uruguay to recognize Palestine - Yahoo! News

Argentina and Uruguay said Monday they were joining Brazil in recognizing an independent Palestinian state, earning an immediate sharp rebuke from Israel and causing unease in the United States.

Israel called the announcement by Buenos Aires "regrettable" and said it went against an Israeli-Palestinian agreement that such a state should only be recognized with Israeli approval.
Do you think that the UK should recognise Palestinian state?
 
#2
#4

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
If there was a reasonable chance of it making a difference, help usher in peace in the middle east and thus cut a major chunk of ground out from under AQ and the like then yes. As I don't believe ANY of those things will be accelerated by the UK recognising the State of Palestine I think we should wait and see...
 
#7
I don't suggest that British government should recognise Palestinian state immideately. It would be wise not to spoil relations with Israel (and with the USA).

However, such a step would demonstrate that British government is indeed independent and is not directed from Washington or Jerusalem.

Soon Palestinian state will be recognised by most of countries in the World. In this situation it is better to be among the first.
 
#8
However, such a step would demonstrate that British government is indeed independent and is not directed from Washington or Jerusalem.
Or perhaps we dont give a toss about the Palestianians? If we did support the state would you accuse the UK of being directed by Iran?
 
P

pp0470

Guest
#9
As the UN considers Israel to be illegally occupying Palestinian land, by recognizing a Palestinian State the UK would be supporting international law.

When 1st elected Hamas made a statement recognizing the state of Israel and cessed military actions. Israel responded with the blockade of Gaza which continues to this day, making Gaza an effective prison.

International ruling (UN resolution 242) is long overdue. Until it is implimented there will be conflict.
 
#10
As the UN considers Israel to be illegally occupying Palestinian land, by recognizing a Palestinian State the UK would be supporting international law.

When 1st elected Hamas made a statement recognizing the state of Israel and cessed military actions. Israel responded with the blockade of Gaza which continues to this day, making Gaza an effective prison.

International ruling (UN resolution 242) is long overdue. Until it is implimented there will be conflict.
But that doesnt really benefit the UK in any way.
 
#11
As the UN considers Israel to be illegally occupying Palestinian land, by recognizing a Palestinian State the UK would be supporting international law.

When 1st elected Hamas made a statement recognizing the state of Israel and cessed military actions. Israel responded with the blockade of Gaza which continues to this day, making Gaza an effective prison.

International ruling (UN resolution 242) is long overdue. Until it is implimented there will be conflict.
Just out of idle interest. If Israel is blockading Gaza on those bits that border Israel, what's Egypt doing on the border that Egypt has with Gaza....?
 
#14
I think we should recognise Palestine because it sends a message to Muslims that the UK is not a "Zionist" state, and undermines support for AQ, for example here in the UK, and maybe makes it a tiny bit harder for the Talib to recruit their foreign fighters. Think of it as a bit of the "hearts and minds" capaign.
 
#15
I think we should recognise Palestine because it sends a message to Muslims that the UK is not a "Zionist" state, and undermines support for AQ, for example here in the UK, and maybe makes it a tiny bit harder for the Talib to recruit their foreign fighters. Think of it as a bit of the "hearts and minds" capaign.
They would not take a blind bit of notice. The UK was one of the main players to protect Muslims from being slaughtered in the Balkans. Not the slightest acknowledgment from Islamic radicals in the UK.
 
#16
As the UN considers Israel to be illegally occupying Palestinian land, by recognizing a Palestinian State the UK would be supporting international law.

When 1st elected Hamas made a statement recognizing the state of Israel and cessed military actions. Israel responded with the blockade of Gaza which continues to this day, making Gaza an effective prison.

International ruling (UN resolution 242) is long overdue. Until it is implimented there will be conflict.
Has Hamas changed its constitution then?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm


Incidentally, I didn't vote because the State of Palestine has not yet come into being.
 
#17
As the UN considers Israel to be illegally occupying Palestinian land, by recognizing a Palestinian State the UK would be supporting international law.

When 1st elected Hamas made a statement recognizing the state of Israel and cessed military actions. Israel responded with the blockade of Gaza which continues to this day, making Gaza an effective prison.

International ruling (UN resolution 242) is long overdue. Until it is implimented there will be conflict.
For a start, nobody sensible really believes that there is any such thing as 'international law'- Law would make it binding and enforceable in some way, it would mean every state being governed by these laws. In reality what we have is a system where various countries are signed up to various treaties the contents of which they agree to uphold. Not all countries are signed up to all treaties and not every country defines what they have signed up to in the same way. A resolution is not law.

The UN doesn't consider Israel's 'occupation' (if indeed it can be described as such) to be illegal. The word may be bandied around a lot in particular by the human rights commission which is essentially a tool used by despotic regimes to avoid criticism of their countries own practices by focusing on Israel, but this is not the same as the opinion of the UN.

As far as I'm aware the only place 'occupation' is defined or dealt with in any binding treaty way is in the Geneva and Hague conventions. It is as a consequence of this that only the security council can define an occupation as 'illegal'. In the case of Israel this has not happened.

Hamas did not recognize Israel in 2006, this is a myth brought about by Hamas signing an agreement with Fatah on the issue of power sharing. It mentioned a two state solution but deliberately avoided the idea of one of those states being Israel. Hamas ministers were very explicit in saying that they didn't recognise Israel nor would they. Nor did they change the Hamas charter.

After the election Khaled Meshaal offered Israel a ten year truce but said that this would not be the end of 'armed operations'. Essentially meaning a ten year build up of arms. Israel of course declined.
The 'ceasefire' you refer to was in name only. Hamas engaged in sporadic rocket attacks and other engagements over it's course including a September 24th incident in which 5 Israelis were injured by a barrage of around 30 rockets fired by the group.
The sole reason for the 'ceasefire' was to build up arms stockpiles.

The sole reasons for the Blockade are the the physical act of rocket attacks and Hamas' will and unending dedication to destroying Israel and murdering Jews.

Your characterization of the events can best be described as wilful ignorance or better yet, a complete lie.

Furthermore UNSCR 242 was written in the wake of the six day war. It simply calls for all parties to negotiate an end to the conflict. One of the methods offered as a solution was 'land for peace' whereby Israel would negotiate a withdrawal from land to defensible borders in return for peace treaties with it's Arab enemies.
It did not require Israel to leave ALL the land despite Arab nations and the Soviet union pushing for the inclusion of these words.
Lord Carradon, one of the draftees said, "It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were undesirable and artificial."

This is further compounded by the fact that the claimants for the land have changed since 242 was passed. Neither Jordan nor Egypt claim the respective territories.

The idea that giving over land will result in a sudden breakout of peace is deeply flawed. Israel has handed over territories several times and only received war and terror attacks in return. Anybody unable to see that is either blind, stupid or both.
 
#18
I think we should recognise Palestine because it sends a message to Muslims that the UK is not a "Zionist" state, and undermines support for AQ, for example here in the UK, and maybe makes it a tiny bit harder for the Talib to recruit their foreign fighters. Think of it as a bit of the "hearts and minds" capaign.
Is this serious? The sort of people who support these groups don't hate us because we have diplomatic ties with Israel. As things stand between the UK and Israel, relations couldn't be frostier. They simply hate us because we are us, their belief system owes a lot to the quranic interpretations that came out of the Islamic backlash during the 60's and 70's as a response to increasing westernisation of the muslim world. In particular the idealogical works of Sayyid Qutb.

The fact that westernisation is so much less overt and prevalent as it was back then and that these groups have only gotten stronger is really a case in point.

Also 'Hearts and minds' is a nice idea but counts for crap in the muslim world. As Osama Bin Laden said, the Arabs only respect the 'strong horse'. If you beat the other guy or just land a heavy blow people there are more inclined to follow you. The best way of deterring people from joining their ranks is by making it as unpalatable as possible.
 
#19
I think we should recognise Palestine because it sends a message to Muslims that the UK is not a "Zionist" state, and undermines support for AQ, for example here in the UK, and maybe makes it a tiny bit harder for the Talib to recruit their foreign fighters. Think of it as a bit of the "hearts and minds" capaign.
If the Muslims need a message to the effect that UK is not a Zionist state, they can pick one up with their dole cheque.
 
#20
The only time we should recognise a palestinian state is after it has been drenched in instant sunshine. palestinians, scum of the earth every last one of them.
 

Latest Threads

Top