There is no such thing as Israel's "pre-1967 borders" - Arutz Sheva

[TomSea]

There is no such thing as Israel's "pre-1967 borders"

The "pre-1967 borders" do not exist and never did. They are simply 1949 ceasefire lines and post Six Day War UN Resolution 242 made it clear that Israel was not expected to move back to those 1949 armistice lines. Read the truth here.

With Friday’s UN Vote, the international body and Barack Obama were basically saying that any Jewish community outside the “pre-1967 borders” is in "occupied Palestinian territory."

What they won’t admit because of their anti-Israel bias is that there is no such thing as pre-1967 borders. That “green line” running through the West Bank is the 1949 Armistice Line. 

The armistice line was created solely because that’s Israeli and Arab forces stopped fighting at the end of the War of Independence (with some added adjustments in certain sectors).Therefore that 1949 line, that people call 1967 border is really only a military line.In fact, 1949 Armistice Agreement with the Jordanians explicitly specified that the line that was designated did not  compromise any future territorial claims of the two parties, since it had been “dictated by exclusively by military considerations.” Of course the Jordanian rationale for that clause was to allow them to claim territory inside the armistice line for their very own.

Read More At: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19961

[Quix]

Wait until  Israel takes possession of all the land God promised to  Abraham. If the Arabs in those areas are still alive, the wailing  will likely be extensive.

[EC]

The pre-67 borders thing is irrelevant BS. Unless the USA wants to return Texas and California to Spain, they have zero room to talk about expansion by conquest. Especially a reluctant, almost embarrassed expansion due to winning an unexpected war. 

[TomSea]

The pre-67 borders thing is irrelevant BS. Unless the USA wants to return Texas and California to Spain, they have zero room to talk about expansion by conquest. Especially a reluctant, almost embarrassed expansion due to winning an unexpected war. 

I believe that too, mate; but the language of the resolution mentions it.

Resolution 2334:

[Condemns] all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions, and

[Expresses] grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperiling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines…

Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/24937-un-resolution-on-israeli-settlements-prompts-mixed-reactions

[txradioguy]

The pre-67 borders thing is irrelevant BS. Unless the USA wants to return Texas and California to Spain, they have zero room to talk about expansion by conquest. Especially a reluctant, almost embarrassed expansion due to winning an unexpected war. 

@EC not to go too far afield from the OP but that's the whole stated purpose of La Raza and MEChA. They believe the entire Southwestern U.S. from Texas to California was stolen illegally from Mexico and should be returned to them.  And like the BLM thugs...they state their solidarity with the anti Israel groups.

All of which...have sympathetic ears in both houses of Congress and right now...even in the WH.

[Quix]

The pre-67 borders thing is irrelevant BS. Unless the USA wants to return Texas and California to Spain, they have zero room to talk about expansion by conquest. Especially a reluctant, almost embarrassed expansion due to winning an unexpected war. 

imho, . . . to push things perhaps further into absurdity . . . perhaps not . . .

We could go back to the Romans taking Israel's land from them after 70AD.

And, long before that God Almighty gave them the land from the Canaanites . . . folks who wish to argue with Almighty God Yehovah are welcome to do so but I don't recommend it.

Considering that God says the whole earth is His . . . I figure He can give portions of it to his Buddy Abraham and descendants if He wants to. And He clearly wanted to.

He will also end up protecting it and expanding it to what He promised Abraham and David. They have NEVER taken possession of all that geography.

They WILL.

God will wipe away a lot of Arabs but then he will build them back up, as well . . . after they realize who's truly Boss.

[geronl]

The pre-67 borders thing is irrelevant BS. Unless the USA wants to return Texas and California to Spain, they have zero room to talk about expansion by conquest. Especially a reluctant, almost embarrassed expansion due to winning an unexpected war. 

Texas won its own independenc, the US did not conquer us