Why were these thrown out?

[Sirotnikov]

Siro, it's not like the US unleashed the ****ing bombers on Israel over this. It put a little bit of pressure on Israel to incentivize its leadership to actually do something instead of allowing its courts to continue to expropriate Arab residents of occupied territories, which is hopelessly counterproductive.

two things.

First, I never blamed the US of anything so far, so I'm a bit lost on what are you responding to.

I commented my personal view on this, basically agreeing with your sentiment that it isn't the smartest thing, and will probably be counter productive in the future.

Second, regarding the settlements being counter productive - they are but I'm hardly convinced they are the major obstacle to peace they're made out to be.

Yeah, it pisses off the Palestinians, and this recent thing puts 50 people with housing problems which sucks (though it seems this group had 25 years of advance notice, since 1982 or whatever).

I hate settlements too (though probably for different reasons than you and Che). But I don't see settler activity being as large an obstacle to the peace process as they're made out. Honestly, settlers can be moved. They have been moved in different peace accords, and even without (Gaza, etc).

Suppose we totally freeze settlement activity. then what?

The palestinians clearly don't have their **** together. I'm very pessimistic regarding a possibility for a peace accord, or its viability once signed. We can remove the security barrier, and we can uproot settlers. It will be hard, but it can be done, and will be done in the future.


But I just can't see where the palestinians are going right now.

We have the Fatah party grand council meeting for the first time in a decade or two. This is already a grand event, but I doubt they'll leave it with a more functioning government or state institutions.

To be honest I was unsure who to vote for this last election.

I think Livni is on the right way strategically, but she had no chance to win or put together a coalition so I voted secular right instead, hoping to advance other issues (economy, personal security etc).

I'm not very pleased so far, but nethanyahu would have gotten elected either way.

[KrazyHorse]

I never blamed the US of anything until now, so I'm a bit lost on what are you responding to. I commented my personal view on this, basically agreeing with your sentiment that it isn't the smartest thing.

You didn't mention the US explicitly, but I thought that's what you were getting at by saying that there's an understanding in Israeli leadership that Abbas can only do so much.

[KrazyHorse]

(namely that there should be an understanding among other governments that the israeli gov't can only do so much)

[Sirotnikov]

I never blamed the US of anything until now, so I'm a bit lost on what are you responding to. I commented my personal view on this, basically agreeing with your sentiment that it isn't the smartest thing.

You didn't mention the US explicitly, but I thought that's what you were getting at by saying that there's an understanding in Israeli leadership that Abbas can only do so much.

I wasn't getting at the US.
I was just telling you that there is such an understanding among military brass and politicians too.

Whether they want to take action or 'score points' is a different matter.

[Sirotnikov]

(namely that there should be an understanding among other governments that the israeli gov't can only do so much)

Well there should be such an understanding and there is btw. For both sides.

Both Abbas and whoever Israeli PM is are locked in public opinion. Arafat had less of a problem because he was the dear leader, so he could probably have done almost anything (as he often did).

Now we're in a dead lock.


Anyways, my point still stands, I don't think its viable for an Israeli PM to fight both the court system and public opinion. I am often forgiving myself to such palestinian hardships so I expect some reciprocation.

Obviously I fully understand the fun the Palestinians are having with this. This gives them ample reason to criticize Israel, and removes pressure from their own problems.

[Sirotnikov]

For the record, practically all land (including this land) in Israel, except land owned by the Vatican and a few other select bodies, is state owned. 100-year leases are granted to all residents, people etc. Obviously I would expect they be renewed. For some reason the state has marked it as desirable to own practically all freehold land (lord knows why it's still such a controversy--the state can always take back land if it needs it by compulsory acquisition anyway). So it is possible that adverse possession laws do not apply to this case.

Not exact.

There are private lands owned by arabs that are still owned by Arabs. I think some 10-20% are privately owned.

Even in Haifa there are tons of buildings in the inner city that are old wrecks and are registered as privately owned by arab landlords who are unknown or not even in Israel.

City hall still haven't managed to re-appropriate them over the legal mess of it. If we wreck those homes now, and build a mall, the landlords could sue and the courts would reasonably defend them.

[Zevico]

What's the difference though b/w state granted leases and simple ownership in Israel?

[Sirotnikov]

come again?

[VetLegion]

I think he's asking what are the legal distinctions between various types of land ownership in Israel. For example, in common law countries there is a distinction between "fee simple" and "allodial title". Both are types of private land ownership, but each gives the owner a somewhat different set of rights.

[chequita guevara]

Just annex the territories already.

[Heraclitus]

Just annex the territories already.

What about the Bad Boy points?