I support Israel remaining only within their original, 1948 borders.
14
Ah the valley of decision.
The entire purpose of Word War II, the reason Britain declared war on Germany in 1939, was to rid the world of the disgraceful practice of grabbing territory by armed force. 'It's ours' is the cry of the bully and the barbarian. Claiming the land was taken in a defensive war has no bearing on the matter. The principle must be absolute. (The Germans declared their invasion of Poland was 'defensive'.) If the US allows this gangsterism to succeed, that will be the end of the UN's authority and of seventy years of international order, as surely Japan's attack on China and Italy's on Abyssinia signalled the failure of the League of Nations in the 1930s.
51
@colombus
The present system is not working. There are wars going on right now. We should change international law so that countries could lose territory for aggression. Obviously, the conquerer should not be the one who decides if the war is defensive or not.
9
@colombus
Then why doesn't Poland return the city of Gdansk to Germany? It used to be Danzig. Of course Prussia must be re-established, it is now part of Poland, and the Sudetanland and Austria returned to Germany. Yes indeed, those who start wars of aggression lose land.
In any event, Israel offered to return all liberated land to the Arab states in return for a peace treaty and were met with the infamous "three nos" of Kartoum: no negotiations, no peace, no recognition." You just want to use made-up principles of international law to destroy Israel.
18
@colombus You are right, but don't expect many Americans to have the education to understand you.
6
This is the end of our role in brokering peace in the Middle East. We've sided with Israel, so the Palestinians won't trust us. Nor should they.
The first major step was when Trump moved the US embassy to the contested city of Jerusalem, when the Palestinians also had a claim. Now he's ceding the contested Golan Heights to Israel.
To be an honest broker, you have to be trusted by both sides. We've proven to Israel that they can trust us to give them whatever they want. And the Palestinians can be confident that we'll ignore their interests.
Let's hope that some other country can step up to be the leader of the Free World, because it certainly isn't us anymore.
45
@David
There is no country would like to step in that role.
What is established post WWII by US and Western Europe clearly signaling the end.
The rest of the world doesn't have any interest in that issue.
We are ushering slowly pre WWII or WWI era like unsupervised aggressors world.
1
@David,We've always sided with Israel. The current pro-Israel crowd in Congress is just more open about it. When Nancy Pelosi and Elliott Abrams speak glowingly in the same week about the largest recipient of US foreign aid and Nancy Pelosi goes so far as to say "Israel and America are connected now and forever," the mask of evenhandedness has finally come off for good. Yes, the US and Israel are connected forever--not unlike the child whose parents won't force him to grow up, but keep providing him with reasons to stay in his room and play video games. Except the consequences for the Palestinian people are anything but a game.
12
Interesting. Netanyahu's "Drang Nach Osten" is backed here by a man who cannot claim a single grandparent born in this country, or brought up with American ideals. Hope that Israel recognizes Netanyahu's move for what it is, and puts him behind bars.
39
Where is the outrage over the human rights abuses by Hamas against Palestinians in Gaza? Omar, Tlaib, AOC, Sanders..... shouldn't you stand up for Palestinian rights across the board? Or you only fight for them when Israel is who you want to blame?
47
@Lori
Unlike Israel, Hamas is not a U.S. client state; our influence is nill, and even more so now, with no prospect of a negotiated settlement, thanks to Trump (and of course, Netanyahu). o
Israel, on the other hand, is obliged to do exactly what we want. We help bankroll it, supply it with weapons and guarantee its security. Many Jews give directly, as well.
Without the U.S., Israel is done for. That makes us complicit in the occupation and routine killing of civilians. Terrible things happen all over the world, but we're uniquely responsible for what happens in Israel.
23
Military occupation of enemy territory is legal, but colonization of that territory is illegal. Hence, the occupying power is forbidden to transfer its citizens into that territory.
President Trump cannot recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan without first withdrawing from the 1949 Geneva Convention, otherwise he violates Article VI of the United States Constitution.
I am interested to see what the American legal establishment has to say about this matter. I suspect they will be as quiet as mice.
As matters stand, President Trump has violated his oath of allegiance to the Constitution.
6
Blatant racism, supported* by Pelosi, Hoyer and Schumer. Trump must go. So must the old guard of the Democratic Party, which has not close to rid itself of the Southern Democrat instincts.
*Their defenders will claim they do not support this, but support a "two state solution". Nonsense. That's like claiming Trump isn't a racist because he says he isn't. actions - in the case of the Democratic Party leaders, their actions to never allow criticism of Israel to cross the bound into exerting any real pressure, speak louder than words.
2
Legal distinctions, historical precedents, international laws do not matter to men like Trump and Netanyahu. They want something they take it. To justify their seizure of the low moral ground, they have their army of Roy Cohens to do public relations work to justify their behavior.
They are about as convincing in their rationales as Putin and Kim are.
Trump and Netanyahu strike down all the norms until all that is left is their iron fisted wills infringing on what is right and decent in society.
2
Remember the Six Days War? That was in 1967, long time ago. But that war was initiated by Israel which in an undeclared war destroyed the air force and tanks of Jordan,Syria and Egypt, under the pretense that they were ready to attack it.
All the territories they took in this war completed the annexation of the historic Israel. Israel never paid attention to the UN or international law. It's now evident that the Six Days War had as an objective to conquer territories the Israelis considered theirs and never thought of returning as per UN resolutions.
5
"It suggests that over time, the United States might acquiesce to Russian sovereignty over Crimea."
Uh, yeah. Of course the U.S. and the rest of the world will eventually recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea.
The simple fact is that the U.S. and Europe lack the willpower and firepower to do anything about Russian control over Crimea, or eastern Ukraine for that matter.
That doesn't make Russian control right or legal, just simply the facts on the ground.
Sanctions? They won't hold in the long term. Germany is already making a mockery of them with the NordStream II pipeline. And a lot of German industrial conglomerates are pressing to get back into Russia.
Possession is 9/10 of the law. Always has been and always will be.
5
I have always been a strong supporter of Israel and admired their past leaders, but frankly with the corruption, racism and bigotry of Bibi Netanyahu and his continually inject his self into our politics; I'm rethinking my support as long as he stays in power in Israel.
I find Bibi Netanyahu a repulsive corrupt grifter who is sucking up as much money from wealthy U.S. supporters and foreign aide only to fill his and his wife's pockets to support their lifestyle.
I also know a lot of people that are feeling the say way, it's either bye bye Bibi or bye bye Israel support.
24
What an awful man...
11
Too funny. Echoed by Britain, who to this day holds Northern Ireland which she stole in a war of aggression. Echoed by Russia, who stole the Crimea from Ukraine just a few years ago. Echoed by China, who stole Tibet and continues to occupy it to this day
What a bunch of hypocrites.
37
So is Crimea 2014 OK after all?
5
Who will rid us of these two crooks? Power hungry imposters.
7
I'm so sad to hear Netanyahu say this. It undermines the state of Israel. Wasn't Israel created from territory we seized from Palestinians?
7
@Stella No, actually that is not the case at all
5
This article itself is hinting at the west bank being disputed territory, since nobody ever can say with any authority that the west bank, or Gaza (Israel will never take control, again), was any nation's sovereign territory prior to 1948. As to the stupid question of the distinction between grabbing Crimea, even if it did belong to Russia historically, or winning the Golan in a war of self defense, that shows how ignorant and/or biased many are in the media, even those in leadership roles.
A major difference between the Golan, and the west bank, is that the Palestinians played no role in either the 1967 or 1973 wars. But, in both cases the disputers have to negotiate peace terms, and draw realistic borders before returning land. Syria is incapable of having peace with the Jewish state, and most Palestinians do not accept a sovereign Israel of any size - they teach each generation to loathe Jews, their historic claims to the Holy Land, etc.
The truth is history may pass their opportunity for creating a viable Palestine if they don't act soon. Do they foolishly believe they can, for starters, go back to the 1967 armistice lines in 20, 30, or 50 years down the road?
11
Readers should not think for a second that Syria and Egypt, at one time united in the United Arab Republic, would have “given back” any part of Israel should they have conquered it in either ‘67 or ‘73. Why should Israel, a single nation saved by its own bootstraps from the clutches of four invading nations, be compelled to return territory it won on the defensive?
32
Interesting that Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights is seen as a defensive posture vis-a-vis Syria. The Syrians may see it as giving Israel a strategic location from which to sweep down on the plains leading to Damascus. Perhaps it is the moment for a Syrian-Iranian defense pact backed by Iranian-operated Russian anti-aircraft missiles.
But perhaps it is time for the United Nations to reconsider its postwar posture facilitating the invasion of Palestine by foreigners. After all the local population was impeded by external forces from mounting an effective opposition to the European invasion, effectively facilitating the illegal conquest of Palestinian territory. One could argue that all lands seized by outsiders since 1947 are held illegitimately. Was there any attempt to negotiate peaceful settlement of refugee populations there? In effect the Israeli position appears to be that we may seize what we like when we like, but those perfidious Arabs have no right to resist. Note that I am not questioning Israel's alleged right to exist because that is a different matter, but to claim a right to seize territory by force presumably may be legitimately challenged whether in the Golan Heights or the seashore. If Israel claims the right to occupy the Heights by conquest then others may question any right for it to occupy any part of Palestine. The United Nations could not give away land over which it had no title any more than it could return half of New York to the Iroquois.
8
“For decades, international law has held that territory seized in war must be returned.” Really? Were it not for seized and unreturned territory following WWI, the modern states of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan would not exist. But of that no one complains.
32
@Don Pirrigno
Really? A lot of people complained about the betrayal of both Arabs and Jews in the middle east who were promised by the British and the French their own homelands if they were willing to get the Turks out. In fact, if the U.S. hadn't stood by while the British and French through the Sykes-Picot agreement divided up the middle east, it is quite possible we wouldn't have had over a century of trouble there.
2
@Don Pirrigno
Actually after WW1 there was WW2. And it was after WW2 that we finally learnt the lesson and outlawed land grabs.
And WW2 was decades ago.
4
@Don Pirrigno I think you might not know the word "decades", as opposed to "centuries". I advise looking them up and reflecting on the distinction.
2
It's so refreshing to hear words of common sense from President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu on the Palestinian issue for a change.
20
Great. Israel has spoken. Let’s take Canada. They have everything except nuclear weapons.
24
And with this statement, your president has added to his 2020 campaign platform a plank from Polk's winning one, namely, "54 40 or fight".
Perhaps it may be the case that we have better memories than does he.
Is this really the message you wish to send your neighbours?
@Frank
Canada, minus Quebec, is next.
1
America used to be the champion of the underdog, helping the weak find justice. Under Trump, American now subscribes to “might is right.” Presidential candidate Trump argued that sanctions against Russia for the invasion of Crimea did not make sense. Now he recognizes Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a position which is contrary to international law. Trump obviously admires the strong arm tactics of the likes of Putin and Netanyahu. This is yet another reason to make sure he’s not reelected in 2020.
17
@Gene Amparo
If Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights is contrary to international law, then international law should be changed. War would be less likely if would be aggressors know that they could lose territory.
32
@m1945
Remember that we went out and started an unnecessary war against Spain so we could seizure its most valuable overseas possessions. That sure didn't prevent any wars since then.
1
That “the law is a living tree” is an essential lesson taught in most law schools. Will the international law of today be the international law of 20-years from now?
5
What peace plan was negotiated with the Israelis and Palestinians?
Netanyahu has successfully played Abbas like a fool making any minor infraction to refuse to negotiate from the very beginning Abbas took office
It’s time to tell the truth. The only reason Abbas was chosen is that he filled
Netanyahu s requirements as a weak elderly leader who could be manipulative to achieve the agenda/plan and unfortunately for the world Netanyahu succeeded
3
@Rose
It was Abbas who refused to negotiate without pre-conditions.
16
@Rose
I am not sure if you realized, but your comments, claiming israel secretly controlling the world, is a very anti- Semitic trope about jewish power and influence. You can definitely disagree with Netanyahu and his policies, but this passes the line.
12
@rose
Netanyahu had nothing to do with the "selection" of Abbas. Abbas was Arafat's natural successor and was elected to office by the Palestinians in 2005, during the the tenure of is Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon.
One can blame Netanyahu for many things, but he had no role in the election of Abbas.
9
I agree that one should be able to question some details of international law, argue that certain details should be revised to make international law a better tool to resolve outstanding problems. However, one cannot escape the fact that no legal system can function properly if people don't accept its authority.
Since binding legal decisions can be controversial, this requires the system to demonstrate in a very transparent way that any decisions taken are arrived at based on only the relevant legal arguments. In practice this is done by making sure every decision at each layer from start to finish is taken by people who don't have a conflict of interest, who are also independent of the other layers of this process.
For example, the way domestic legal system works requires that the police officers investigating a crime cannot have any relationships with anyone involved in the crime or the victims. The prosecutor must be independent of the police. The judge must be independent of the police and appeals courts must be independent of the trial court.
International law is very far from having such a very independently layered structure. In case of the Mid East the US tends to be involved in disputes who also plays the role of the police investigator, the judge, and not also wants to be the authority that can rewrite the law.
Adversaries like Russia and China will then end up imposing their own rules in areas they control like Crimea and the South Chinese Sea.
4
Annexation season is open, until 2020 , go get it. After that no guarantee to be approved.
6
Any annexation creates a "have" and "have not" type of issue. With Jerusalem being recognized by the US as the Capital center of Israel, and now the Golan Heights as annexed, next it will be the West Bank.
Prognostications as to what will happen are really difficult. Don't think I would call it a peace plan though.
15
@glennmr I'd call it a plan to perpetuate war.
8
Good. Long overdue. Did neighboring Arabs really think that there would be no consequences to perpetrating multiple terror wars against Israel, a sovereign state?
And now the Syrians are hosting the Iranian military...hence, signing up to become ground zero for the next big war. Gluttons for punishment, these people never learn.
32
@Michal
Israel started every war except 1973. Israel bombed Syria 200 times in a single year. The Syrians have the right to host anyone they wish. Iran and Russia fought ISIS in Syria, they helped liberate the country.
16
@ASimon
Not sure where you get your facts regarding who started Israel's three major wars, but here is the reality.
Regarding the 1948 war, Arab armies invaded Israel the day after the UN voted to create Israel as a state. Per Wikipedia: "On 15 May 1948, the ongoing civil war transformed into an inter-state conflict between Israel and the Arab states, following the Israeli Declaration of Independence the previous day. A combined invasion by Egypt, Jordan and Syria ... entered Palestine .... The invading forces took control of the Arab areas and immediately attacked Israeli forces and several Jewish settlements."
The 1967 war is a little trickier, however most scholars agree that Egypt commenced the war by blocking the Straits of Tiran. Per Wikipedia: "In the months prior to June 1967 ... Israel reiterated its ... position that the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping would be a cause for war (a casus belli). In May Egypt[] ... announced that the straits would be closed to Israeli vessels and then mobilised its Egyptian forces along its border with Israel. On 5 June, Israel launched what it claimed were a series of preemptive airstrikes against Egyptian airfields."
As to the 1973 war, you fully concede that it was a completely unprovoked attack on Israel (on the holy day of Yom Kippur, no less).
So there you go. Of the three major wars, two were begun by undisputedly unprovoked Arab attacks upon Israel, with the third being an unprovoked Arab casus belli.
8
1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, 2006— go read your history textbooks.
3
This is a disastrous lie. It establishes Israel and by extension the Jewish people as those who live by conquest and violence over the lives, possessions and dignity of other peoples and persons. Isn't it something like a total inversion of the meaning of the holocaust? That's what I can't help thinking.
53
@David A. Lee Quit blaming the Jews. The Arabs started this and every other war with Israel and paid the price.
30
@David A. Lee
Syria was firing artillery located in the Golan Heights at Israeli farmers down in the valley below. Israel took control of the Golan to save the lives of the Israeli farmers.
26
@Imagemaker This statement is simply false. I didn't blame the Jews. I blamed Netanyahu for a policy which will inevitably be put on the Jewish people. It is not I but Israel itself which claims to be the homeland of the Jews. What is done by one will entail the reputation of the other--and I repeat: this is NOT my doing. And no, I don't blame the Arabs for starting every war with Israel. The truth is much, much more complicated than that.
11
Who'd have ever guessed that Israel, of all places, would end up being run by a facist regime.... ?
63
@Celeste I don't think Netanyahu is representative of most Israelis. He's under indictment for crimes similar to those for which we will eventually indict Trump.
5
@Celeste
Israel was ranked 30 out of 167 on The Economist's Democracy Index. That's better than Belgium, Greece, Cyprus & at least a dozen other European countries. Israel has maintained democracy even though it's been under continual attack.
By contrast, we Americans locked American citizens of Japanese descent in concentration camps during world war 2 & we confiscated Joe DiMaggio's father's fishing boat because he was of Italian descent.
Democracy is the opposite of fascism.
18
@m1945
The right wing Economist ranking system is hardly definitive.
19
So Turkey can declare sovereignty over Northern Cyprus too, That door is opened by US president.
Watch...……….
27
@su That's what I was thinking! That & wondering when Putin & Xi get the memo.
5
@su
Cyprus wasn't attacking Turkey.
Syria attacked Israel in 1948, 1967 & 1973 & in between Syrian artillery in the Golan fired at Israeli farmers down in the valley below.
10
@m1945 Don't conflate the average Palestinian family with the country of Syria, or Egypt or Jordan in regards to the 1948 conflict.
2
Maybe sometime in a hundred years or two the States of Fatah and Hamas will hold an election and decide to accept a Jewish State of Israel living in peace alongside an independent state of Palestine.
16
Day after disastrous day, Trump is destroying any hope for peace, comity, and international progress in reforming our sad sick world. He gives the Golan to Israel as if he were an emperor, without the slightest thought about the consequences.
I can only hope that there are still enough Americans who will show up in the 2020 elections to rid this country of Trump and his fellow destroyers of worlds.
Retiring to a shack in Montana and living off the grid is begging to sound like a rational career choice.
19
The two states solution has been dead for along time, i.e. since the failure of the 2000 negotiations. Talk by Israel of annexation of the West bank occupied territories only does reinforce the one state two people concept. This, with economic compensations for the expropriations of Arab property in 1948 & 1967, will provide the least unjust solution. Only left is to let the World know about it.
1
@Frozy
Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews, the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it. There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis. The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country because majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews.
7
How quickly we became our oppressors. It only took 70 years.
1
@m1945
Jews from Europe hired a ship to take them to the US right before WWII. The ship was detained in Havana and later sent back to Hitler's Germany, the US wouldn't allow them in.
What happened to its passengers? Guess...
I know that because I was born in a very secular country (of course not the US) that allowed Jews in, no questions asked. Many of them were my friends in my youth and told me then that they had tried the US to no avail.
1
With this let go, US is allowing or laying to ground work for many disputed areas powerful should grab land asap before the next administration.
Russia Crimea ………….Done
Israel Golan …………….Done
Turkey Northern Cyprus... Waiting
China Taiwan ………..Waiting
etc.
22
@su
exactly. what will Trump do if China sends warships to Taiwan?
5
@davey385
If they give him the trade deal he wants, probably not a thing.
1
When Israel annexes parts of the West Bank. What happens to the Palestinians who live there? Do they become Israeli citizens? Do they get to vote?
10
Benya, no.
@Benya Krik
Expelled to the nearest foreign country or imprisoned is what they get.
@SPQR
Evidence that Israel has ever expelled or imprisoned innocent people in territory that it has annexed?
6
This set a new policy that the whole world will remember. If Russia or China win a war then that territory is theirs? So basically we are back to the Roman empire period? How can Republicans take this after so many war that we went thru. Bad policy.
20
@bay
There's a difference between taking territory through aggression & taking territory for self-defense. Syrian artillery on the Golan was firing at Israeli farmers down in the valley below. Israel captured the Golan to save the lives of those farmers.
7
@bay Think Texas. Texas was incorporated into the United States in an illegal war fought solely to increase slave state territory and representation in Congress. Good Yankees fought against the Mexican War. Thoreau served time in jail for his opposition.
5
@m1945
In the same way terrorism is in the eye of the beholder, so is what is aggression and what is self defense.
Remember Stalin seized the east European country after WW II on the claim that it provided the USSR self defense against Germany.
I’ve been to the Golan Heights and seen it’s strategic value. Great. Glad you got a US President to endorse it. Meanwhile, I’m tired of seeing and hearing about Netanyahu and wish him a speedy return to Israel and I hope he loses the next election. Israel needs a better leader.
7
@Craig The Golan Heights ought to be put under UN control. Jerusalem is holy to the three great monotheistic religions, and should be put under the control of a council of Rabbis, Christian ministers, and Imams from peaceful Muslim sects (NOT any Wahhabis).
1
“When you start wars of aggression, you lose territory…” That sounds like something Stalin would have said at the end of World War II, not a democratic leader and U.S. ally in the 21st century.
But Netanyahu is way off the mark here and his position will be challenged by scholars of international law. In addition, Trump’s recognition upends decades of U.S. and U.N. policy and does not constitute any sort of precedent.
I for one would like to the Golan Heights occupied by a UN peace keeping force, to remove it as a military installation and bargaining chip. That way, nobody is happy and is a good compromise. Unless of course President Trump is more interested in a hotel in Israel and not comprehensive peace for the Middle East.
13
@Chrisinauburn: not a fan of Stalin, but Russia lost over $10M dead to the Germans, so if they annexed parts of Germany they would have been justified. There should be consequences for starting wars of aggression and losing. And a meaningful deterrent.
So now Trump and Netanyahu are the arbiters of international law on captured territory? Nobody crowned them kings of the world.
30
Gotta hand it to Bibi.
In one generation, he destroyed virtually all centrist support for Israel among American jews.
Oh, I know the standard right wing response: We weren't with Israel in the first place. We talked a good game but that when the chips were down, we'd sell out our people in an instant.
What a fateful and tragically misguided reading on his part.
So many of us engaged in every possible political contortion, every compromise, to keep the idea of a Jewish state alive, even slowly letting go of the idea that a democratic, pluralistic state might be possible. The Jews as a stateless people, we told ourselves, had been vulnerable to one of the worst genocides in world history.
Now, though, it is clear, Bibi: you'll have to go ahead without us. You might sincerely believe that fortress Israel, and the continued suffering of displaced Palestinians, is a geopolitical and security necessity. But here we part.
Oh, you'll be accorded the most basic rights of sovereignty guaranteed under international law, but forget about the special case of Israel, forget about the zionist imperative as a necessity of the horrors of the 20th century.
You had that, and you squandered it. You made us ashamed of something of which we had once been so proud.
61
@Horace Dewey Oops, I almost forgot: The other mantra of Israel's extreme right-wing supporters is that I am a self-hating Jew.
Sorry guys: I'm out (as a Jew) and proud.
I simply loathe those who whose pathological arrogance extends to characterizing the nature and strength of my inner spiritual life.
Nope, no self-hate here.
13
the article needs for explanation. Could you tell us the definitions of annexation, occupation etc... and I never understood why since it was "won" during a war the golan didn't become part of Israel?
1
I just don’t understand: how does a Trump tweet constitute “international acceptance” of anything?
23
One can easily infer that if Israel sees this move as justification for annexation, there will be others that similarly interprets this as a move back to a "Might is Right" world and that we have now been pushed over onto a very slippery, and likely quickly steepening slope. It is also interesting that something is preventing any comments being posted to this article- this one too I suspect will disappear into the ether before I take the effort and time to post, and repost and repost again etc. I do hope I am wrong but the signs are not good so far.
8
Trump is doing anything he can to buoy Netanyahu's candidacy in the upcoming elections, because he knows Bibi will face prison if he loses. Hopefully the next President undoes this dangerous, ill-conceived decision.
14
The right of conquest, welcome to WW III.
21
This is a very interesting precedent for may conflict areas.
Turkey and Erdogan will be very happy to hear and embrace Netanyahu's preposition how to treat occupied areas.
In 1974, Turkey used it's international right and assumed temporary but then Permanently occupied northern Cyprus. Since the Cyprus divided two but Turkey never established a formal and recognized existence on Northern Cyprus.
Now Trump and Netanyahu open a new door for So called Cyprus problem overruling UN resolutions. Turkey will be most likely skip this opportunity. However Cyprus isa EU territory too but still Trump Administration one more time showed that he is siding with dictators.
Okay Netanyahu is not a dictator but wannabe
3
@su
Just because Trump said that the US will recognize Israeli sovereignty in the Golan doesn't mean that Israel has to formally annex the Golan. Israel can use that bargaining chip if Syria ever decides to sign a peace treaty.
Israel had offered to return the Golan in return for a peace treaty. However, one part of the border was a lake. The lake had been shrinking because of climate change. This meant that Syria kept getting bigger while Israel kept getting smaller. Israel wanted to set the official border where it was when Syria attacked. Syria wanted the lake to continue to define the border. Israel can now say either accept the original border or Israel will take the whole Golan & the US will approve.
1
And starting a pre-emptive war counts as defensive of course giventhe Israeli's started the 1967 war with a pre-emptive air strike against Egypt.
By those standards, it's a shame that we let Iraq get away from US possession by annexation.
4
@rcburr
Israel did not start the Six Day War. The Six Day War was just a continuation of the 1948 war. Egypt violated the cease fire so the 1948 war resumed. It was not a new war.
"We will not accept any ... coexistence with Israel. ... Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel .... The war with Israel is in effect since 1948." – Nasser, May 28, 1967
7
@rcburr
Syria attacked Israel first. Learn the facts.
4