It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saudi Arabia threatens split with US if Obama vetos Palestinian statehood bid

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   
News like this only do one think, bring bickering over issues in the middle east and the self righteous American and make speculators have a feast with oil prices while Americas debate and bicker we will pay for this at the oil pump as usual.


A nice reminder to all that whenever Saudi Arabia farts in the middle east we get higher prices on oil, even when we are after all an oil producing country.




posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Funny that, KSA threatening the USA.

But if we look at the other events like Turkey's sudden found love of Palestine, it sure appears these Western agents in the Muslim world know some shift in the Western stance and are being allowed to take credit for it.

Recognising the Palestine state will give an excuse for the Western states to change their stand on Israel-Palestine. It is nothing new for countries that considered themselves as the West's allies to find themselves being declared as tyrants/oppressors that need to be taught a lesson. I guess it is Israel's time. One false move and Israel is toast.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 




Hasn't the US position for some time now been in support of a separate Palestinian state as part of trying to bring peace to the region?

If so, why would the US veto it? Is it because certain preconditions have not been met? I don't recall US support for a separate Palestinian state being tied to whether or not Hamas was in power but maybe I'm mistaken. (BTW - I am no supporter of Hamas or any other terrorist organization but they were supposedly democratically elected so it would be hard to say they are not "legitimate" in that sense.)

If anything, I think any preconditions would have to do with land and borders...

Looks like I have to read up on what's current regarding this issue.

This region has been a mess for over 50 years. Because of that, I'm not optimistic it's going to get much better any time soon.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Saudi king are much like home cats for US.

They may bite the hand that feeds them , but still , they are home cats.


To the other members > You may think that Hamas fighters are terrorists. but let me tell you that , they are brave freedom & justice fighters for Palestinians.

A little bit of history :


Early in 1948, the United Kingdom announced its firm intention to terminate its mandate in Palestine on May 14. In response, U.S. President Harry S. Truman made a statement on March 25 proposing UN trusteeship rather than partition, stating that "unfortunately, it has become clear that the partition plan cannot be carried out at this time by peaceful means. ... unless emergency action is taken, there will be no public authority in Palestine on that date capable of preserving law and order. Violence and bloodshed will descend upon the Holy Land. Large-scale fighting among the people of that country will be the inevitable result." On 14 May 1948, the day the Mandate officially ended and the day before the bulk of the remaining British troops departed, Israel declared its independence and sovereignty, though without specifying borders. The next day, the Arab League reiterated officially their opposition to the "two-state solution" in a letter to the UN. That day, the armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq invaded the territory partitioned for the Arab state, marking the beginning of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The nascent Israeli Defense Force repulsed the Arab League nations from part of the occupied territories, thus extending its borders beyond the original UNSCOP partition.[27] By December 1948, Israel controlled most of the portion of Mandate Palestine west of the Jordan River. The remainder of the Mandate consisted of Jordan, the area that came to be called the West Bank (controlled by Jordan), and the Gaza Strip (controlled by Egypt). Prior to and during this conflict, 713,000[28] Palestinian Arabs fled their original lands to become Palestinian refugees, in part, due to an alleged promise from Arab leaders that they would be able to return when the war had been won. Many Palestinians fled from the areas that are now present-day Israel as a response to alleged massacres of Arab towns by militant Jewish organizations like the Irgun and the Stern Gang (See Deir Yassin massacre). The War came to an end with the signing of the 1949 Armistice Agreements between Israel and each of its Arab neighbors.


Arab–Israeli conflict


To me the whole story is like :

UK wanted to give gift to Israelis . But like other games in politics , they did it like a plan. they told Israeli side to slap UK side on the face , then the UK side will give up the candy (Palestine land) that had stolen from the Israeli side. (Much like US independence)

The big lie in the story is , the candy wasn't Israelis. The thing that they took by force was not for them.

I like the slogan that Palestinians use ,

NO justice , No peace.



Other questions in my mind :

Q: Did UK put it on a referendum for Palestinians to let Israelis come to their land ?

A : No

Q : Then where is the democracy?

A : Democracy is just a tool . It can be ignored whenever they want.
edit on 13/9/11 by hmdphantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by IsraeliGuy
 


Yeah who controls Hamas??

I have my opinion on it, what's yours?



oh!! oh!!

let me guess!!



the zionist controlled usa!!

right? gimme the money!

what did you guess?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Riffrafter
 





Hasn't the US position for some time now been in support of a separate Palestinian state as part of trying to bring peace to the region?


Yes, but only when both sides come to the table and are willing to talk. Israel put the breaks on that a while ago, though some advancements towards a two state solution.

Israel does not want to give up any land, including the ILLEGAL settlements (oldcorp you can keep your racist crap to yourself, they are illegal, Israel admits as much when they tear them down, and the entire international community including the Us has condemned these ILLEGAL settlements.). but beyond that, they want "defensible borders". the problem is, since it's inception, Israel has of yet has not defined their borders, google it, Israel has no official borders.

Anyways, the US position in public has been to work towards a peaceful 2 state solution, but their actions through vetos has been to actually prolong the issue instead of working towards a settlement.

As far as I know the current idea is a two state solution with MUTUALLY AGREED land swaps. Mutually specifically meaning Israel gets a say (unlike how Israel was formed, through the exact methods people are whining about now as the Palestinians make an attempt.). no one, in the right mind, would expect Israel to dissolve or leave themselves with undefended borders.

But for Israel there's a few hitches. Firstly, the illegal settlements must stop, and some agreement must be made for the "right of return" for some of those displaced people. Again, this is how Israel was formed, so don't even begin to call it a conspiracy against the jews.

As well, and I think this plays a key role in their decisions as of late, IF the UN does recognize a Palestinian state, the government officials and high ranking members of the IDF could very well end up in court, possibly international, to face numerous charges.

Now shotgun bob up there will have you believe that the first act those Palestinians will do once they get a country, it attack Israel. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, 99% of the strife and tribulations in that region are directly related to Israel and it's actions.

Why is syria pissed? Gaza
Why is saudi arabia pissed? Gaza
Why is turkey pissed? Gaza
Why is lebanon pissed? (beside the several attacks on their country, Gaza)
What fuels most of the terrorism in that region, and the world? Gaza

So right now, Israel has it's boot on the throat of Gaza and everyone around them hates them for it. So what happens when they decide to actually BE the most moral army in the world, agree to a two state solution, and work towards peace?

The entire reason for hating Israel (outside of pure antisemitism) disappears. no justifications for attacks against them would exist, no support for attacks against them would exist, the boycotts and sanctions could be lifted.

But no, shotgun bob believes in a two state solution, but can't trust those dirty arabs as far as he can throw them because each and every one of them, including the kids, are merely on this earth to murder jews because they are jews and it has nothing to do with the oppression.

Now about here I was going to go on the old tirade about how the Jews were persecuted, rounded up and forced into ghettos and eventually work and death camps. I was going to mention how they suffered state instituted racism and yadda yadda.

Then I realized, I'd actually be proving shotgunbob right. Let me explain.

In the years before ww2 jews were persecuted all over, including back here in north america (canada and the Us really didn't want to take any jewish refugees), forced into ghettos, not allowed to work jobs held over for "aryans" not allowed to live in "aryan" houses, you get the picture.

Now, what happened when the world united, freed them from oppression, and created a country for them to live in?

The turned around, and immediately started to ethnically cleanse the region. don't even start bob, it's all documented fact, so shut it.

So yeah, maybe he is right, if ISrael is the example, then giving the Palestinians a state of their own would surely mean they immediately try to ethnically cleanse the region, setup ghettos for the undesirables, and start training 15 year old girls on how to operate stealth drones and mounted machine gun nests from miles away in an airconditioned office.

I find it funny that shotgun bob can disparage an entire race of people showing outright hostility towards them because of their race or religion, but I'm the racist because it's antisemitic to hate what Israel is doing to those people.

YEs, yes, Hamas sends rockets over whenever Israel needs them to. But it's antisemitic for you to know that the death toll speaks for itself.

Israel is occupying Gaza. It is NOT a crime to fight against your occupiers in a state of war,

Ohh but I forgot, they have an Olympic sized swimming pool in Gaza. Yup, as they did in some of the death camps in Poland.



edit on 13-9-2011 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 





Peace Prize receipient my butt-can the man is a joke & likely favors himself as a cool Sammy Davis Jr personality edit on 13-9-2011 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



he wishes he was.


sammy had it all over him.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


you made made me do again!



comm'on biby, protect your peoples.


they will get shot in the hand or the face.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   
This matter is indeed of great significance and of great importance to determining what our allies think of us around the world.

This matter effects Israel significantly and as for Obama, this veto vote has placed Obama in a "Catch 22" position with Israel on one hand and the Saudi's on the other. While the Saudi hand also has ties to the rest of the middle east, I can see this dilemma being of some great concern to Obama in view of his 24/7 reelection campaigning that he seems to always be doing.

Anything and I do mean anything that would prevent or distract from the Palestinian vote would be a benefit to Obama and Israel.

This is why it would be foolish to ignore and or acknowledge that such a political dilemma would be negated or undermined if some type of significant false flag event or perhaps some major disaster that prevents the vote and saves Obama from his political sensitivities to being a loser in the next election while also providing Israel with more time to avoid the Palestinian vote altogether.

The only thing that I can see that can prevent the Palestinian vote is an event of some type and I for one think it is coming on or about Sept. 15 through the 20th when the vote is scheduled for.

By beginning an event or disaster on or about Sept. 15th, it allows for "the event" to become front page news while the media dogs go into full propaganda mode.

Saudi Arabia and others have valid political reasons for concern, but what concerns me most is what Obama and Israel will covertly do that will negate or cancel the vote altogether, while blaming that cancelled vote on some disaster or national emergency of sorts that was created to justify the cancellation of the Palestinian vote from ever occurring.

This is what I wanted to add to this thread. Thanks again for considering these thoughts on the thread at hand. It may be somewhat conspiratorial to mention such things, but it is also logical, so I don't feel like I am being overly paranoid.

Thanks for the thread.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by IsraeliGuy
 


ya, these guys are trolling without any bait.

it's laughable.

the sovereign nation of palistine would stand for as long as my anthem for them.

about 3min 45sec.

and what can they do about it?


nothing.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I think Saudi isn't really gonna do anything..but i hope US does not veto



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


give them the GD state and see what happens.

going from occupied to sovereign is a big step.



don't matter who is in charge, let's see who is the aggressor and ends up on the short end of the stick.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
reply to post by OldCorp
 


There are elements of Hamas which are disgusting in their behavior, that is without doubt. I do not back strikes on civilians by either side.

However, to state that the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights for that matter are spoils of war 'it's not stealing when annexed in war' for Israel to amuse itself with is incorrect.

Resolution 242 from the security council, issued after the 1967 pre-emptive strike by Israel on Egypt & Syria preceded by Egyptian grandstanding and rhetoric directed towards Israel.


"Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles: (i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;


daccess-dds-ny.un.org...

The resolution is quite clear and legally binding.


Why did you not include ALL of that paragraph? Here, allow me:


Operative Paragraph One "Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

*OldCorp Note: Here's an interesting ditty:

On 1 May 1968, Israeli ambassador to the UN expressed Israel's position to the Security Council: "My government has indicated its acceptance of the Security Council resolution for the promotion of agreement on the establishment of a just and lasting peace. I am also authorized to reaffirm that we are willing to seek agreement with each Arab State on all matters included in that resolution."

In a statement to the General Assembly on 15 October 1968, the PLO rejected Resolution 242, saying "the implementation of said resolution will lead to the loss of every hope for the establishment of peace and security in Palestine and the Middle East region." In September 1993, the PLO agreed that Resolutions 242 and 338 should be the basis for negotiations with Israel when it signed the Declaration of Principles.SOURCE


The Israelis accepted 242 right away and withdrew from the Sinai, but it took the Palestinians nearly 25 years to do the same (they said they accepted it, but with Taquiyyeh so prevalent you just never know
) now when will the Jews be left to live in peace as subset ii sets out?

I reply to the rest of your post in my next one; running out of space.
edit on 9/13/2011 by OldCorp because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/13/2011 by OldCorp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
the problems of the world could be solved so simply.

if Saudi Arabia wants to tango, I say we tango.

Here's my take on the global issues and how to solve them.

If you are a friend (by friend I mean you are a trading partner, a supporter in times of need, a battle field ally, not a nation who kisses our cheek whilst slipping our aid money to terrorists, warlords and others who wish to harm us) you get treated as such. Everyone else is a foe.

Friends get aid in times of need.
Friends get protection when needed.
Friends get deals when it comes to trade and commerce.
We buy from friends.
We sell to friends.

If you are a foe, you no longer get aid from us, we will not protect you from harm, we will not advise your governments, we will not give you preferential treatment in trade or commerce etc.

Of course, to do this, we will have to annoy the environmentalists because it will require us to tap our own oil reserves and drill for it here but, in an effort to make that easier to swallow, consider the following:
By no longer giving any aid whatsoever to the nations who no longer qualify for it, we will free up a ton of cash. This will alleviate our budget concerns and we can allocate a large percentage of the money we would have spent on oil and aid to fund real research into alternative fuel sources. We will use that money to find ways to reduce or remove our dependancy on oil.

Within 10 years the sultans and kings in the middle east will be as poor as the people they were supposed to be taking care of and they will now be willing to deal with us in the manner in which we will let them.

This doesn't just go for the oil producing nations. If Israel scorns us, same deal. China, same deal. Japan, France, England etc. Except Canada. They are now and will always be our foot stool to the north


yes, Canadians, I'm kidding.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Your reading of what happened in 1948 is quite different to mine. Around 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from Palestinian villiages and towns within and without the mandated state of Israel as set down by the UN. This was a pre planned operation initated by Ben-Gurion.

Thousands were murdered and the rest forced in to a destitute future in Jordanian, Syrian & Lebanese refugee camps.


In a letter that David Ben-Gurion sent to the commanders of the Haganah brigades he stated, ‘the cleansing of Palestine remained the prime objective of Plan Dalet.’


Pappe, I, ''The Ethnic Clensing of Palestine'', P 128.

There is much debate over 'Plan Dalet', but for me at its heart was the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians within the mandated state of Israel. As this was carried out successfully, large parts of mandated Palestine became included in this as Ben-Gurion and his commanders hubris grew.


Are you serious? Please pay special attention to the second paragraph.


Plan Dalet, or Plan D, (Hebrew: תוכנית ד'‎, Tokhnit dalet) was a plan worked out by the Haganah, a Jewish paramilitary group and the forerunner of the Israel Defense Forces, in Palestine in autumn 1947 to spring 1948. Its purpose is much debated. The plan was a set of guidelines[1] the stated purpose of which was to take control of the territory of the Jewish State and to defend its borders and people, including the Jewish population outside of the borders, in expectation of an invasion by regular Arab armies.[2]

"Plan Dalet" called for the conquest and securing of Arab towns and villages inside the area alloted to the Jewish state and along its borders. In case of resistance, the population of conquered villages was to be expelled outside the borders of the Jewish state. If no resistance was met, the residents could stay put, under military rule. According to the academics Walid Khalidi and Ilan Pappe, its purpose was to conquer as much of Palestine and to expel as many Palestinians as possible.


You're blaming the Israelis plan to defend themselves from an Arab invasion, holding ONLY the territory given to them by the UN, for the Palestinian problem? Lets take a look at highlights of the actual plan, and not your interpretation of it:


The introduction of the plan states:

a) The objective of this plan is to gain control of the areas of the Hebrew state and defend its borders. It also aims at gaining control of the areas of Jewish settlements and concentrations which are located outside the borders (of the Hebrew state) against regular, semi-regular, and small forces operating from bases outside or inside the state.

Later on the plan states:

f) Generally, the aim of this plan is not an operation of occupation outside the borders of the Hebrew state. However, concerning enemy bases lying directly close to the borders which may be used as springboards for infiltration into the territory of the state, these must be temporarily occupied and searched for hostiles according to the above guidelines, and they must then be incorporated into our defensive system until operations cease.

Military historian David Tal writes that "the plan did provide the conditions for the destruction of Palestinian villages and the deportation of the dwellers; this was not the reason for the plan’s composition", and that "its aim was to ensure full control over the territory assigned to the Jews by the partition resolution, thus placing the Haganah in the best possible strategic position to face an Arab invasion" SOURCE


There is no government in its right mind that would allow hostile forces within its territory. Please note in the above examples, that Palestinians would have been allowed to "stay put" in their homes had they not been aggressive. Those who did "stay put" are now Arab citizens of Israel accounting for 20% of the population, who enjoy full rights of citizenship and live in peace with the Jews. Seems like a win/win to me.

I didn't answer the part of your post about Jordan during the 1948 war because it has no bearing on this discussion, but I would be happy to go over it elsewhere (and I'm also running out of space again.)


History aside I hope for a permanent, just peace between the two sides as I am sure you do as well.


Amen.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Ehhh its time to add an imgur to this thread

imgur.com...

Ponder on that you patriotic zealots.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 


According to the academics Walid Khalidi and Ilan Pappe, its purpose was to conquer as much of Palestine and to expel as many Palestinians as possible.


Get serious Corp.

NO ONE asked the Palestinians (or whoever they were) if they'd be OK with giving up their homes for the Jews..
Of course they were not happy about it and fought back.

Wouldn't you??
I bet your guns would be running hot..




top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join