There are going to be uncompromising issues, no matter how minor, that will be used as a pretext to walk out.Originally Posted by Climber
Both sides may get to 99% of an agreement, but it is that 1% that may collaspe the whole deal.
That's were an arbiter comes in a splits the baby to no one's satisfaction. But it saves and closes the deal.
Not going to happen.......the other side is not going to accept a compromise that ensures the Jewishness of Israel. 2 times in the last 15 years they were offered a really good deal, and they passed. They, by war or peace wants to undermine Israel as what it is.
You are right. That's what Carter succeeded in achieving at Camp David, and what Clinton failed to achieve with Arafat at the end of his Presidency.
You're correct.
Clinton was on a deadline and tried to rush it.
Also, if Rabin would've been alive, it would've made a big difference.
It's true Clinton was on the rush. But I don't think Rabin would have change something. Arafat was just not made for a deal.
EDIT:
It's difficult to say. Maybe with Rabin, Arafat would have been more flexible. Who knows?
Stay classy Ordie.
Algiers 1988. Please do not mistake UN recognition with a unilateral declaration of sovereignty. Now if you allow me...
No... Your explain is unsatisfactory and does not confirm in any way what you claimed previously.
The PLO 1988 declaration of independence did not change its UN status from an observer to a member states of the UN.
Therefore, the article of Unesco chart to which you pointed, and which was designed by Unesco, is just applicable for "associated members" and not for "full member states'.
Article II, entry 2.
Admission to UNESCO for states that are not members of the United Nations requires a recommendation by the Organization’s Executive Board and a two thirds majority vote in favour by the General Conference of Member States present and voting (abstentions are not considered as votes).The General Conference consists of the representatives of the States Members of the Organization. It meets every two years, and is attended by Member States and Associate Members, together with observers for non-Member States, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Each Member State has one vote, irrespective of its size or the extent of its contribution to the budget.The General Conference determines the policies and the main lines of work of the Organization. Its duty is to set the programmes and the budget of UNESCO. It also elects the Members of the Executive Board and appoints, every four years, the Director-General.
Kotemore, Let me post a question. In the US who ever wins in November will have sufficient vote to beat the other candidate. Among those votes will be several kinds, 1) votes for the candidate 2) votes against other candidate.
Reason I asked it simple, in my experience over the years, very few people are pro-Palestinian people and could give a rat's tuchas about the well being of the Palestinian people. The preponderance are anti-Israeli or worse. Which are you? The interesting part, are you honest enough to answer the question? Don't worry Ordie is still here. A certain amount of bigotry is tolerated.
I am very much in support of the Palestinian people in their need for rule of law and justice. They should be able to live life according to their choosing, like the other people on the opposite side of the green line.
I can not see why any "leftist" would have anything to do with religious bigots, especially Islamic jihad groups, or even ally themselves with them. Marx is probably rolling right now in his grave.
LOL.
You are misled or misleading.
This is not Article II, entry 2 of the Unesco constitution. This is an excerpt of the press communiqué made by the Media service of UNESCO to announce Palestine's admission.
You copied from the press communiqué and pasted it here.
Admission to UNESCO for states that are not members of the United Nations requires a recommendation by the Organization’s Executive Board and a two thirds majority vote in favour by the General Conference of Member States present and voting (abstentions are not considered as votes).The General Conference consists of the representatives of the States Members of the Organization. It meets every two years, and is attended by Member States and Associate Members, together with observers for non-Member States, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Each Member State has one vote, irrespective of its size or the extent of its contribution to the budget.The General Conference determines the policies and the main lines of work of the Organization. Its duty is to set the programmes and the budget of UNESCO. It also elects the Members of the Executive Board and appoints, every four years, the Director-General.
Here's the link dude from which you copied an excerpt and pasted it as a so called "Article II, entry 2": http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-s..._member_state/
Article II, entry 2 of UNESCO constitution says:
And Article X says:Article II
Membership
1. Membership of the United Nations Organization shall carry with it the right to membership of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
2. Subject to the conditions of the Agreement between this Organization and the United Nations Organization, approved pursuant to Article X of this Constitution, states not members of the United Nations Organization may be admitted to membership of the Organization, upon recommendation of the Executive Board, by a two-thirds majority vote of the General Conference.
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-U...CTION=201.htmlArticle X
Relations with the United Nations Organization
This Organization shall be brought into relation with the United Nations Organization, as soon as practicable, as one of the specialized agencies referred to in Article 57 of the Charter of the United Nations. This relationship shall be effected through an agreement with the United Nations Organization under Article 63 of the Charter, which agreement shall be subject to the approval of the General Conference of this Organization. The agreement shall provide for effective cooperation between the two Organizations in the pursuit of their common purposes, and at the same time shall recognize the autonomy of this Organization, within the fields of its competence as defined in this Constitution. Such agreement may, among other matters, provide for the approval and financing of the budget of the Organization by the General Assembly of the United Nations.
So are you able to clarify by which miracle "Palestine" was admitted as a "full state member" or not?
I do not support Palestine here, I support my corner, the UN (as a supra-national entity). Israeli posters in this forum have whole axes to grind with it, calling it names and what not. I am simply providing reference and understanding.
In this case, I did not mentionned Palestine, in the colonization thread, I did not pick a side. I defended the legal precedence. I will defend it as long as people that do indeed benefit from the Global rule of Law to begin with would consider it useless.
The very fact that you pose me THAT question, should pretty much be explicit of the binary thinking that has course when talking about the Near East. So I should either be Anti-Semitic or Pro-Palestinian (why not both)? I cannot have an impartial view on the situation regarding what is lawful and what is not? I cannot consider this situation beyond those two belligerents? I am supposed to be a bigot or worse an useful idiot?
I feared this simplistic view regarding my position, from the Eretz I. Strong crew, but not from people that have in the past, and still are regarded as honest brokers in this mess.
Now allow me to adress you another question, which part of my argumentation has stirred the idea that I was, against Israel? Or pro-Palestinian?
I do not see where in Article X you find a limitation that allows the UN to override the decision of UNESCOs OEB?LOL.
You are misled or misleading.
This is not Article II, entry 2 of the Unesco constitution. This is an excerpt of the press communiqué made by the Media service of UNESCO to announce Palestine's admission.
You copied from the press communiqué and pasted it here.
Here's the link dude from which you copied an excerpt and pasted it as a so called "Article II, entry 2": http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-s..._member_state/
Article II, entry 2 of UNESCO constitution says:
And Article X says:
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-U...CTION=201.html
So you able to clarify by which miracle "Palestine" was admitted as a "full state member" or not?
Actually you even have it right here.
It is called a check, mate.The agreement shall provide for effective cooperation between the two Organizations in the pursuit of their common purposes, and at the same time shall recognize the autonomy of this Organization, within the fields of its competence as defined in this Constitution. Such agreement may, among other matters, provide for the approval and financing of the budget of the Organization by the General Assembly of the United Nations.
It's simple for me: You support the UN.
OK, you are a useful idiot. I can live with that.
The UN is a political organization, sometimes too political, sometimes not enough.
On the Israeli strong crew, they are pretty moderate. The extremists, either I or another mod has banned them.
As far as their axe to grind, I would be pretty pissed too if I or any of my family could not go out for pizza with the fear of being blown up.
Two belligerents? go back to my post on the other branches of the PLO.................. They are terrorists organization. The term "terrorist" says it all.
The Israelis and the Palestinians have one thing in common, they are screwed. (as to why, I will let you figure that out) if you are impartial then I own a really cool bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to sell you.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
