UN General Assembly passes resolution calling for Jerusalem Old City to be Jew-free (in one year)

[GeoffH]

9 hours ago, Jack Peterson said:

 Yes an islamic State that can't accept anything but Their views.  Typical

There are ways to retaliate against terrorist attacks that don't breach treaties they are signatory to.

And had that been done then the voting would almost certainly have been very different.

Australia, as just one example of the sorts of protections needed (but currently lacking) will be sponsoring a bill to increase protection of aid workers (some 450 have been killed just this year alone).

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-23/australia-international-push-protect-aid-workers-zomi-frankcom/104385792?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other

 

 

 

Edited September 23 by GeoffH

[earthdome]

7 hours ago, Jack Peterson said:

 Next thing will be The JEWS were responsible for 9/11 and we Know who was responsible for that, let them Look at those that did do it, I am of the Jewish Faith and take great offence at this  Xenophobic intrusion by NATO, I wonder if the General Secretary is named HITLER   

My "they" in my comment was referring to both Palestinians and the government of Israel.

Perhaps this is another topic which can not be discussed on this forum.

[Old55]

1 hour ago, earthdome said:

My "they" in my comment was referring to both Palestinians and the government of Israel.

Perhaps this is another topic which can not be discussed on this forum.

We can have an adult conversation about this within the rules. I started typing a reply early on to this topic and thought better of it. 

Or this could be moved to chatterbox to allow a more wide range of opinions. 

[Mike J]

1 hour ago, Old55 said:

We can have an adult conversation about this within the rules. I started typing a reply early on to this topic and thought better of it. 

Or this could be moved to chatterbox to allow a more wide range of opinions. 

I think that the posts to this point have been within forum guidelines and there is currently no need for moderation.  As long as the posts do not veer into xenophobic rants we should be okay.   I am going to do a bit of research to see if I can determine the wording of the resolution.  The overwhelming votes approving the resolution and the abstentions have me thinking there is something I am missing? 

[BrettGC]

A harsh look at the history of Palestine/Israel/Canaan/The Levant.  I don't think this is going to be solved anytime soon.

 

[Mike J]

An attempt to answer @Lee question "why hatred".  The hatred (between some Jews and some Arab citizens) goes back well over two thousand years.  It is not going to go away for generations, if ever, in my opinion.  I do not have an answer as to why some of those feelings have spilled out into other countries and remains until today and smacks of antisemitism.  Prejudice seems to be a generational thing where parents pass it along to their children just because that is what they learned growing up.  I expect part of the answer is that some people want to blame their own failures on other ethnic/racial groups.   And in some cases it seems to be "that haters just got to hate".  As mentioned in an earlier post this is a "lose lose" fight.  There will be no winners if and when this ends.  Just losers, anger, hatred, frustration, and more fighting somewhere in the future.  The ongoing civilian deaths and that certain future is perhaps the saddest part of this whole mess. 

Back to the article.  It would seem the resolution references a ruling by the International Court of Justice <snip>The resolution, which passed by a 124-14 margin with 43 abstentions, is meant to give force to a July advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which declared Israeli presence to be illegal in any area over the 1949 armistice line.<end snip>

I think the whole world wants this fighting to stop and maybe this was an attempt to find "something legal" to grab onto in an effort to end the fighting.   

Here is the ruling by the International Court of Justice

<snip>The landmark ruling of 19 July 2024 declared that Israel's occupation of the Gaza strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful, along with the associated settlement regime, annexation and use of natural resources.<end snip>  Source https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/07/experts-hail-icj-declaration-illegality-israels-presence-occupied#:~:text=The landmark ruling of 19,and use of natural resources.

Here is a map of those areas and armistice lines declared in 1949.  Source https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-54116567

The resolution, which passed by a 124-14 margin with 43 abstentions, is meant to give force to a July advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which declared Israeli presence to be illegal in any area over the 1949 armistice line.  Below is a map of those areas.

Then came the "Six Day" war in 1967 which resulted in Israel capturing and occupying Gaza, West Bank, and the Golan Heights.  Finally came the peace treaty with Egypt in 1982 which resulted in new "armistice" lines.  

The huge sticking point in all this is that armistice lines are NOT boundaries either geophysical or political.   And parties to the treaty and those against it ALL AGREED they are not boundaries.  

[scott h]

19 hours ago, Lee said:

Would anyone like to offer an opinion that helps explain the vast hatred of Jews?

I do not think we are offered enough characters in the response block to really answer that question .