English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If not, tell me more. Cheers.

2007-03-15 02:34:41 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

17 answers

no it's not. they were given that illegally

2007-03-19 17:04:20 · answer #1 · answered by sydb1967 6 · 1 3

In my opinion, Israel has the legal ownership of the West Bank.

Israel gained control of the West Bank in 1967 after the Arabs attacked them. Since, at the time, Israel, at certain points, was only 9 miles wide, the nation chose to take possession of a buffer zone whose previous ownership was controversial. The turning over of this land was a direct result of the Arab attacks, so the takeover was justified.

Now let's get into issues relating specifically to the Palestinians. When the Oslo Accords were made the Israelis and Palestinians both agreed that each side would make concessions. Israel followed all of the provisions except for one. The one it disobeyed was the concession of the West Bank. Israel did turn over a majority of the West Bank, but it did not fully concede the land. However, the Palestinians did not follow any parts of the deal. In fact, Hamas is still around and terrorist attacks have increased post-Oslo. Therefore, the Palestinians did not fulfill their end of the bargain. In my opinion, since the Israelis were in the process of giving land for peace, but the Palestinians made no effort to provide peace in exchange for the land, the Palestinians have voided the deal in which Israel agreed to give up the West Bank. As a result, the West Bank legally belongs to its owners before the Oslo Accords, the Israelis.

(I am not an expert in international law and I am relatively certain that a country's legal ownership of land isn't as straightforward as one would think.)

2007-03-16 01:53:14 · answer #2 · answered by x 5 · 4 3

I personally believe the Dalai Lama, and is well ahead of his time with his concept of international neutral zones (Peace Zones). The theory is this- that some places are so charged with religious, spiritual, and cultural history; it is not right for anyone to own them. They should be protected by the world community as intrinsically valuable for what they stand for, not for whose politics are in control. There will never be a cease fire in the West Bank unless neither side is not fighting to wrestle ownership from the other.

Land ownership is an interesting concept. If we truly beleive that God gave this land to the Jewish, then why don't we honor other people's genocide victims equally? Why doesn't America give back spiritual centers to the Sioux and Apache, who beleive that the lands were the birthplace of their Creator? Why doesn't the world community give land back to the Armenians?

I am not saying that the Jews should not have a place to call home, and be a people, free from persecution. Far from it- I believe that all people deserve this disticntion. What I do believe, though, is that as long as the West Bank has so much religious history for so many people, it might be in the best interests of its inhabitants to have the place declared neutral, unowned territory; free for people to live there, but not actually "own". It probably will not happen in my lifetime, but one can hope.

http://jainsamaj.org/literature/zones-110804.htm

2007-03-22 23:39:37 · answer #3 · answered by Hauntedfox 5 · 0 0

Historically, every nation has encroached on the land of others and some land was stolen through conquest, and maybe, in some distant future, the world will become one overall country run by the people of the world.

If the West Bank does not belong to Israel, why not?

2007-03-21 14:33:38 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Been there 4 · 3 0

After the Israeli war for independence (1949), the division line between Israel proper and Jordanian controlled Judea/Samaria (aka the West Bank) became the ceasefire line (often called the Green Line).

(Although it was constantly violated by Jordanian irregulars)

In 1967, Jordan (along with Syria and Egypt) attacked Israel and lost. Through this, Israel gained control of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) from Jordan.

However, Israel never officially incorporated Judea/Samaria (the West Bank) as part of Israel.

It was never officially part of Jordan either.

Politically and legally, It's a no-mans land.

It was divided into spheres of control at the Oslo Accords in 1993 (which has proved to be a deadly failure for Israel).

(and it's the heart of the Jewish homeland with the famous biblical cities of Hebron, Shechem, Bethlehem, etc. there).

So you have about 2 million Arabs living there (who have been called "the Palestinians" since the 1970s, and about a quarter million Jews (who the media call "the settlers")

2007-03-18 20:26:06 · answer #5 · answered by mo mosh 6 · 2 2

No, it doesn't belong legally to Israel. Even Israel is an illegal state that was established on the Palestinian land which was occupied in 1948. And now Israel is recognized by the whole world. It's just the media which convinced the world and changed the facts.

2007-03-17 04:28:01 · answer #6 · answered by MagicWand 3 · 2 4

Yes. It's the spoils of war.

All of Syria, Egypt and Jordan could be part of Israel too if Nixon hadn't convinced them to call off the dogs during the 1973 war.

2007-03-15 03:21:20 · answer #7 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 4 1

In current world scenario, anything and everything belongs to the mighty. What they do with their belongings is nobody's business. Like Iraq belongs to US. A priori, West Bank belongs to Israel.

2007-03-15 03:06:58 · answer #8 · answered by ramshi 4 · 2 2

No,not legally...According to international law the occupation of West Bank and Gaza from 1967 are totally illegal and Israel should end this occupation...There are many UN resolution asking for this,but of course as usual Israel ignores them...
And when Gaza and West Bank were occupied,it was not the Arab countries who attacked Israel,but the other way around...

2007-03-15 23:59:13 · answer #9 · answered by Tinkerbell05 6 · 2 5

The bible asserting it belongs to Israel is the only written record proving who it relatively belongs to plus the Palistines are stupid to purpose to attack Israel get their butts beat undesirable then lose extra land and declare it continues to be theirs

2016-11-25 21:33:24 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Israel has full moral claim to Judea and Samaria, regardless of what "world opinion" says.

For those who claim otherwise, please cite another case in which territory seized from an aggressor enemy in wartime has been returned to said aggressor after the war. Who owns Alsace-Lorraine these days? How about the Sudetenland? Gdansk?

Why do all the rules change when the topic is Israel?

2007-03-15 02:42:12 · answer #11 · answered by Rick N 5 · 5 2

fedest.com, questions and answers