Sweden plans to advance UN resolution condemning Israeli settlements, FM says

[Easo]

So its right to do wrong becuse others are worse?

No, it's wrong to use UN as a political tool, because that's what most of resolutions against Israel are.
Very simple explanation and history insight - USA and USSR supported creation of Israel, both wanting to have it chose their side. Well, surprise surprise, Israel chose the West. And thus you have the islamic block (duh...), the countries dependant on the oil said block provided and still provides, plus USSR with it's satellites and influenced 3rd world nations = tens of resolutions against a single country. A democratic country, even.
Obviously not a lot changed after the fall of USSR.

[Mehrunes]

Have you checked how much territory changed hands in the treaties ending WWII - and therefore, by definition, after WWII? They don't appear delegalized to me. Especially as no one is disputing those acquisitions (except that Japan is still trying to get the southern Kuril Islands back).

Except most of land changing happened in the west while Asian front of WWII was still ongoing. And, imagine that, international law changes don't pop out of nothing and need time to be drafted. Still happened prior to creation of Israel, let alone its land grabbing. But after WWII and its border changes (a lot of which was reverting to pre-war borders). Damn, chronology of events and linearity of time are super fucking hard concepts.

[Flarelaine]

Except most of land changing happened in the west while Asian front of WWII was still ongoing. And, imagine that, international law changes don't pop out of nothing and need time to be drafted. Still happened prior to creation of Israel, let alone its land grabbing. But after WWII and its border changes (a lot of which was reverting to pre-war borders). Damn, chronology of events and linearity of time are super fucking hard concepts.

The treaties I am speaking about were signed in 1947, well after the end of hostilities, both in Europe and Asia. The creation of Israel happened a year later. So what happened in that year that suddenly made border changes a no-no? What makes one okay and the other not?

As for reverting to pre-war borders, please take a look at the Baltic states. Oh, you can't find them on a post-war map? Well, look at Poland then, who just shifted a few hundred miles west. Finland or Romania could also comment on "pre-war borders".

- - - Updated - - -

Give some examples after ww2 for then A acquisitions a piece of B and A was not condemned for its action?

That A disintegrates into B, C, D is not acquisitions.

North Vietnam conquering the South.

[Deleted]

North Vietnam conquering the South.

That was a civil war....

[Flarelaine]

That was a civil war....

"The Republic of Vietnam was proclaimed on 26 October 1955 with Ngô Đình Diệm as its first president. Its sovereignty was recognized by the United States and by some eighty-seven other nations. It had membership in several special committees of the United Nations, and would have been a member of the United Nations itself had it not been for a Soviet veto in 1957."

Since both North and South Vietnam were internationally recognised sovereign states, the conquest of one by the other is... well, conquest.

[Deleted]

Since both North and South Vietnam were internationally recognised sovereign states, the conquest of one by the other is... well, conquest.

But they also was recognized as one state, after independence declaration from France, hence civil war.....

[Machismo]

It is entirely possible to oppose terrorist organizations, and oppose the actions of the Israeli government. I don't support the oppression enacted by many Muslim nations, nor do I support the apartheid-like behavior of the Israeli government.

[Independent voter]

No, it's wrong to use UN as a political tool, because that's what most of resolutions against Israel are.
Very simple explanation and history insight - USA and USSR supported creation of Israel, both wanting to have it chose their side. Well, surprise surprise, Israel chose the West. And thus you have the islamic block (duh...), the countries dependant on the oil said block provided and still provides, plus USSR with it's satellites and influenced 3rd world nations = tens of resolutions against a single country. A democratic country, even.
Obviously not a lot changed after the fall of USSR.

Britain started allowing Jews to immigrate to Palestine after WWI, there were about 300,000 of these European Jews living in Palestine by WWII.

Europe drove millions of European Jews out of Europe during WWII, these went to Palestine.

They created a country called Israel.

Israel is a hugely destabilizing force in the Middle East.

Thanks Europe.

[Varitok]

It is entirely possible to oppose terrorist organizations, and oppose the actions of the Israeli government. I don't support the oppression enacted by many Muslim nations, nor do I support the apartheid-like behavior of the Israeli government.

This right here.

[Flarelaine]

But they also was recognized as one state, after independence declaration from France, hence civil war.....

Yes, they were one country after independence from France. And they became two countries a year later. And they remained two separate countries for twenty years until one conquered the other.

[Deleted]

The very peace treaties ending the war brought sweeping border changes, not to mention forced displacement of people, well beyond the scope of Palestine. Everyone accepted those. But suddenly the Jews end up capturing territory and it's wrong.

Why do you think everyone accepted those when it came to the creation of the Israeli state? A massive guilt trip.

[Tabrotar]

didn't commit suicide bombings or stub local citizens with knives shouting something like "Jehovah Great!" out of hatred for their different beliefs.

This is the main difference here.

There are about 8-9 million Jews still living outside of Israel in many countries of the world today. Somehow none of these people are or were involved in terrorism over the last 60-70 years (only as victims, of course, or a counter-terrorist forces).

Are you really sure about that? I mean really really shure?
Because i know several attacks/bombings which the jews did against the british as they wouldn´t give them their own state.So stop acting all high and mighty.
And good to know that killing a UN mediator (Count Folke Bernadotte who was killed by members of Lehi) will make you an prime minister as they did with Yitzhak Shamir.
So calling yourself a civiliced nation is pure shit.

[Tijuana]

I stand with Sweden against Israel who I understand to be committing crimes against humanity and genocide against the innocent Palestinian people.

Genocide? Are....are you serious?? WOW! This forum...

[Deleted]

Yes, they were one country after independence from France. And they became two countries a year later. And they remained two separate countries for twenty years until one conquered the other.

But both insist they was the real Vietnam, hence civil war. butwe will talk in circles so let leave Vietnam, other examples? Not you presented it as a conquest was a normal accepted phenomenon after ww2.

[Flarelaine]

There are about 8-9 million Jews still living outside of Israel in many countries of the world today. Somehow none of these people are or were involved in terrorism over the last 60-70 years (only as victims, of course, or a counter-terrorist forces).

Are you really sure about that? I mean really really shure?
Because i know several attacks/bombings which the jews did against the british as they wouldn´t give them their own state.So stop acting all high and mighty.
And good to know that killing a UN mediator (Count Folke Bernadotte who was killed by members of Lehi) will make you an prime minister as they did with Yitzhak Shamir.
So calling yourself a civiliced nation is pure shit.

Have you actually read the comment you replied to? I quoted both for contrast. Added highlights to the older post.

[Slybak]

Nobaly like terrorists, but what have that to do with Israelis bulding of settlements on occupied land? By oppressing people, they become less radical?

Dead Palestinians aren't radical and Palestinans who have been driven out of their land by Israeli "settlers" can't rebel. The Israeli right doesn't want to rule these people; they want them dead or somewhere else.

[Deleted]

Dead Palestinians aren't radical and Palestinans who have been driven out of their land by Israeli "settlers" can't rebel. The Israeli right doesn't want to rule these people; they want them dead or somewhere else.

Fair enough.

[Tabrotar]

Have you actually read the comment you replied to? I quoted both for contrast. Added highlights to the older post.

Sorry but that didn´t clear them of what they also did and that was the whole point of my post. But shure the jews bever did anything wrong.

[Deleted]

Oh shit, Sweden is on the case now watch out Israel.

Power is not only how many tanks and guns you got.

[Deleted]

Power is not only how many tanks and guns you got.

Sweden has no power of any kind, unless you mean Ikea will stop doing business with Israel.