U.S. Will Withhold Funds For U.N. Agency After Vote to Grant Membership to Palestinia

[Bob Riebe]

And you live in the state of Denial.

Which is better than Never Land you live in.

[Eki]

Unadulterated BS. Any group which actively supports and conducts bombing, etc. directed at civilian targets is, by definition, a terrorist organization. Please note that that is as opposed to collateral damage to civilians where the intended targets are military or terrorists.

You mean like governments who drop atom bombs on Japanese cities or carpet bomb German cities? Or are you saying they just aimed military targets?

[Eki]

As you know, that condition is a declared state of war between nations. Not the same thing at all.

Very convenient. The US tries to stop Palestine from becoming a nation, so that they can keep calling them "terrorists". Palestine can't in your eyes declare a war against Israel as long as it isn't a nation, so they must continue as "terrorists". That's a leak proof plan, I must say.

[schmenke]

Eki, no one is calling Palestinians terrorists, and no one is trying to block an independent state for Palestine. Just the opposite, in fact.

However, I can't speak for the U.S. but the government of Canada has a difficult time justifying recognition of an independent state whose leadership is, or actively supports, a known terrorist organization.

Also, Palestine is not at war with Israel, although their current leaders actively support unprovoked hostilities .

[Knock-on]

^^ Excellent. 100% agree ^^

[BDunnell]

I wouldn't say that activities against Israel are unprovoked. There is plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

I am no supporter of Israel. While at one time they were the victims of aggression by their neighbors, they have become an occupying force, aggressively taking and annexing land that does not belong to them. I cut them no slack what so ever. Further, I encourage my representatives in the US Congress to de fund all aid to Israel. The point I made in my original post was that the US is constrained by our law to act the way it did. That does not mean that the law cannot be changed.

All of that, I agree with very much indeed.

Eki, as usual, doesn't have a clue as to what he is talking about. He just throws post bombs around to provoke controversy and start arguments. Either the US government acts illegally, as he suggests in many threads, or it doesn't. In this case, I pointed out the the US position was fully within the existing law. Now he seems to want us to act outside that law. Make up your mind Eki, your vehement anti US bias is showing here. Should the US act legally or illegally? Or is it just that no matter what we ever do it's wrong in your eyes?

As for this, I suppose it depends on whether you feel the US is acting consistently in deciding to remain within the letter of international law on this occasion. On that there are differing perspectives.

[anthonyvop]

As for this, I suppose it depends on whether you feel the US is acting consistently in deciding to remain within the letter of international law on this occasion. On that there are differing perspectives.

International Law only applies when it serves a nations own self interests. Bar that they aren't worth the paper they are written on!
Did Gaddafi follow international law? Mubarak? Saddam? Hitler? Stalin? Mao? Castro? Pol Pot?..........The list is endless.

[yodasarmpit]

Further to my earlier post, I'd like to apologise for the tone of the comments.
It does , however, dishearten me to observe that at each turn there appears to be attempts to make difficult the transition from state to fully fledged country.
Rather than impeding their, legitimate, right to self governance and entry into the International community - we should be be doing everything possible to ensure a seamless transition.
Yes, things have been difficult in the past, and are still to some degree in Gaza, however sticking with the status quo mentality won't allow for progression.

It is time for a different way of thinking.

[BDunnell]

Did Gaddafi follow international law? Mubarak? Saddam? Hitler? Stalin? Mao? Castro? Pol Pot?..........The list is endless.

By that reasoning, not following international law means one lines oneself up with all of those individuals.

[BDunnell]

Not even PLO was a terrorist organization, it was a liberation organization, just like the name said. Fatah and Hamas are political parties.

So you believed the German Democratic Republic to be truly democratic, did you?

I find your reasoning here charmingly simplistic.