Comments on: How the Falklands analogy falls flat http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/ The Marketplace of Ideas Sat, 25 May 2013 00:56:45 +0300 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Michael Dar http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-94298 Michael Dar Sun, 03 Feb 2013 15:06:21 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-94298 I also think it is in all a rather stupid analogy for both situations are different in many ways. If this is all he (Minister of Education) could have come up with we are in deep trouble. We have so many historical, moral, spiritual and indeed legal arguments in our favour which for some obscure reason are never trown on the table. The only and vague excuse Mr. Saar could eventually have for his "analogy" is that the whole approach of our various successive "leaderships" to the conflict and its unlikely solution is likewise ridiculous, self defeting and devastating..

]]> By: Itzy Sabo http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89466 Itzy Sabo Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:43:42 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89466 N. Ireland is probably a better comparison.

]]> By: Jonathan Ross http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89270 Jonathan Ross Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:21:47 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89270 So actually what you are saying is that Britain shouldn't leave the Occupied Malvinas, British citizens should not complain about the financial burden of protecting the settlers there or of continued expenses maintaining and providing infrastructure and that the Argentine military response in the last war between Britain and Argentina was akin to a terrorist action? Hmm so in fact there is some foundation for comparison, just the other way round.. that and both places have lots of sheep. Actually the British Illegal Settlement hypocrisy stems back to the eviction of radicals from English soil and their exploitation by the Crown to settle on native lands in America. Something for which the US and UK have never apologized nor attempted to provide recompense for all the damage they caused and land they continue to occupy. Britain may maintain a stance of "these radicals rebelled and left the Crown and the UK after continued evasion of taxes" however this too is disingenuous. This, the Occupied Malvinas, Australia and other examples all provide a pattern of pathology that cannot nor should not be ignored.

]]> By: Jonathan Ross http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89272 Jonathan Ross Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:21:47 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89272 So actually what you are saying is that Britain shouldn't leave the Occupied Malvinas, British citizens should not complain about the financial burden of protecting the settlers there or of continued expenses maintaining and providing infrastructure and that the Argentine military response in the last war between Britain and Argentina was akin to a terrorist action? Hmm so in fact there is some foundation for comparison, just the other way round.. that and both places have lots of sheep. Actually the British Illegal Settlement hypocrisy stems back to the eviction of radicals from English soil and their exploitation by the Crown to settle on native lands in America. Something for which the US and UK have never apologized nor attempted to provide recompense for all the damage they caused and land they continue to occupy. Britain may maintain a stance of "these radicals rebelled and left the Crown and the UK after continued evasion of taxes" however this too is disingenuous. This, the Occupied Malvinas, Australia and other examples all provide a pattern of pathology that cannot nor should not be ignored.

]]> By: Levi Kofman http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89092 Levi Kofman Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:57:44 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89092 How many people are aware of the fact that the first partition of Palestine occurred in 1921 & not 1948…with the subsequent creation of the first Arab Palestinian land on 78% of the territory of the mandate of palestine? How many people are aware of the fact that the UN parition plan of 1948 called for the creation of a second Arab Palestinian state alongside a tiny Jewish state? How many people are aware of the fact that Israel from the very outset accepted the two (or dare I say three) state solution while the Arabs rejected this and opted for a war of anniahlaiton against the Jews & to this very day have not changed their position. How many people are aware that the fourth geneva convetion is not applicable or relevant to Judea, Samaria & Gaza and that the Arab "interpretation" of international law is a complete distortion? I wonder how many people there are who are ignorant of history vs the number people who wilfully try to revise history?

]]> By: Levi Kofman http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89088 Levi Kofman Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:42:54 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89088 You're right, the Falklands analogy falls flat…because unlike the Jews who have have a historical & spiritual connection to Judea & Samaria spanning thousands of years – with the territory being it's home land – the British have no connection at all to the Falklands – a territory that is tens of thousands of miles away from Britian. Their "connection" to the Falklands is as strong as their "connection" to Australia, Canada, Gibraltar and Ulster…pure colonalisatoin at best. And unlike the British acquisition of the Falklands & other colonies, Israel acquired Judea, Samaria & Gaza via defensive war (a war which was existential and threatend Israel's very existence). So if an analogy was to be made than Israel's acquisition of these territories could be compared to Poland's & Chekoslovakia's acquisiton of German territory after Germany lost a war it intiated. That's an accurate analogy…anything short of that is a pure revision of history. Secondly, just like the fourth geneva convetion is not applicable to Poland's "occupation" of Danzig so too it is not applicable to Judea, Samaria & Gaza. these territories were all part of Egypt and Jordan respectively & the people living there were citizens of those countries…there was never an independent country called "palestine." On the other hand the 4th geneva convetiion is totally applicable to the falklands, Ulster & Gibraltar.

]]> By: Levi Kofman http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89090 Levi Kofman Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:42:54 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89090 You're right, the Falklands analogy falls flat…because unlike the Jews who have have a historical & spiritual connection to Judea & Samaria spanning thousands of years – with the territory being it's home land – the British have no connection at all to the Falklands – a territory that is tens of thousands of miles away from Britian. Their "connection" to the Falklands is as strong as their "connection" to Australia, Canada, Gibraltar and Ulster…pure colonalisatoin at best. And unlike the British acquisition of the Falklands & other colonies, Israel acquired Judea, Samaria & Gaza via defensive war (a war which was existential and threatend Israel's very existence). So if an analogy was to be made than Israel's acquisition of these territories could be compared to Poland's & Chekoslovakia's acquisiton of German territory after Germany lost a war it intiated. That's an accurate analogy…anything short of that is a pure revision of history. Secondly, just like the fourth geneva convetion is not applicable to Poland's "occupation" of Danzig so too it is not applicable to Judea, Samaria & Gaza. these territories were all part of Egypt and Jordan respectively & the people living there were citizens of those countries…there was never an independent country called "palestine." On the other hand the 4th geneva convetiion is totally applicable to the falklands, Ulster & Gibraltar.

]]> By: Loren Griffith http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89074 Loren Griffith Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:21:43 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89074 Gideon Greenspan – no foreign colonists of an enemy occupying your land after you liberate it is not a principal of democracy. Jordan invaded and occupied our lands in 1948. We liberated them in 1967. The Arabs in Judea and Samaria are JORDANIAN citizens since 1954.

Israel and Jordan signed a peace agreement in 1994 whereby the Jordanians renounced their claim to our land, but left their colonists. That is illegal and against the founding principals of all international laws.

So no it doesn't work that way – the thieves do not get to keep their stolen goods.

]]> By: Gideon Greenspan http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89072 Gideon Greenspan Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:52:11 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89072 I don't know what you mean by "law" but it's a founding principle of democracy – that all those under the control of a country get to vote for who runs that country.

]]> By: Kibi Hofmann http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89070 Kibi Hofmann Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:43:12 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89070 You do, Gideon? Which law was that from?

]]> By: Gideon Greenspan http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89068 Gideon Greenspan Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:40:30 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89068 By all means conquer land. Knock yourself out. But if so you have to treat those inside it as citizens of your country.

]]> By: Kibi Hofmann http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89066 Kibi Hofmann Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:39:13 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89066 Sure – there was absolutely no controversy about America fighting Iraq over that, right?

]]> By: Azriel Bermant http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89064 Azriel Bermant Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:36:52 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89064 "no other country has been told not to conquer land and keep it." Come on Kibi. What about Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1991, etc.

]]> By: Kibi Hofmann http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89044 Kibi Hofmann Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:23:54 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89044 Quoting resolution 242 as a proof that "International law has evolved significantly since 1833" is disingenuous to say the least. The resolution was specifically written to tell Israel not to take the land it had just taken in the 6 day war – that's not evolution, it's the same old Israel bashing as ever – no other country has been told not to conquer land and keep it.
And the 4th Geneva convention was not in place when Jews started living in Gush Etzion and Gaza (even in modern times, leaving aside ancient claims) so the logic that the British followed acquisitive prescription ought to apply to the Jews too, no?

]]> By: Kibi Hofmann http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/how-the-falklands-analogy-falls-flat/#comment-89046 Kibi Hofmann Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:23:54 +0000 http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/?p=96778#comment-89046 Quoting resolution 242 as a proof that "International law has evolved significantly since 1833" is disingenuous to say the least. The resolution was specifically written to tell Israel not to take the land it had just taken in the 6 day war – that's not evolution, it's the same old Israel bashing as ever – no other country has been told not to conquer land and keep it.
And the 4th Geneva convention was not in place when Jews started living in Gush Etzion and Gaza (even in modern times, leaving aside ancient claims) so the logic that the British followed acquisitive prescription ought to apply to the Jews too, no?

]]>