Trump recognizes Israel's claim to the Golan

[RoofGardener]

20 minutes ago, the-Unexpected-Soul said:

 

so you back us on supporting Hizbullah, Hamas, and Iran, it seems we are doing the right thing according to you

How on EARTH do you come to THAT conclusion ? Neither Hizbullah, Hamas nor Iran are Syrian ? 

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

How on EARTH do you come to THAT conclusion ? Neither Hizbullah, Hamas nor Iran are Syrian ? 

international law says Golan is Syrian land, united nations says Israel is to withdraw and hand over Golan to Syria,

israel and some people here say Fu** international law, israel took it by force and will only give it back by force,

so Syria is in the right to build an international resistance axis against Israel, especially that Israel have nukes and consistently threaten to use it against Syria in case of an attack by Syria 

also why Israel is not stripped of its nukes yet ?, they are more likely to use them than Kim jun un

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, the-Unexpected-Soul said:

international law says Golan is Syrian land, united nations says Israel is to withdraw and hand over Golan to Syria,

israel and some people here say Fu** international law, israel took it by force and will only give it back by force,

so Syria is in the right to build an international resistance axis against Israel, especially that Israel have nukes and consistently threaten to use it against Syria in case of an attack by Syria 

also why Israel is not stripped of its nukes yet ?, they are more likely to use them than Kim jun un

Israel has never threatened Syria with nuclear weapons, so far as I know ? 

Israel took the Golan Heights when it repulsed a titanic attack by Syrian tanks in both 1967 and 1973. (one of the largest tank battles since ww2). It chased the tanks back way beyond the Golan, and at one stage threatened Damascus. 

Israel retreated, but retained the Golan heights as a buffer zone for as long as Syria was in a state of war with Israel

Syria has never retracted that state of war, and explicitly refused to declare peace with Israel, even though Israel offered them the Golan Heights back. 

Syria can huff and puff in the United Nations, but Israel will rightly ignore them. !

 

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

retained the Golan heights as a buffer zone for as long as Syria was in a state of war with Israel

 

 

so it's a buffer zone, how come they are saying they own it now ? united nations had forces there to separate between the two states while maintaining all the time that the land legally recognized as Syria

[Peter B]

20 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Oh PLEASE Peter B

The heights where INDEED a part of Syria. But then the Syrians sent thousands of tanks OVER those heights, and into Israel, as part of the 1967 war. 

Israel repelled those tanks, and chased them back INTO Syria (coming within artillary range of Damascus). 

Israel acknowledged a temporary cease-fire arrangement, imposed by the Arab block in the United Nations. Israel retreated from the bulk of Syria, but kept control of the Golan Heights. As was their right - in the laws of those days - of a victim of an aggressive attack. 

Syria  - for the last 60 years - has refused to rescind the 'state of war' that they created by their original invasion. So when it comes to negotiations about "return of territory", well... sod them. THEY attacked. THEY lost. THEY have refused to rescind the state of war that THEY unilaterally created. 

And THAT was almost 60 years ago. Sod 'em. ... they had their chance... they blew it. 

The Golan Heights are now a part of Israel

Deal with it

 

G'day RoofGardener

No need to patronise me with Oh Please. I know my military history reasonably well, thank you.

So, could you instead please provide some reference to a Syrian attack involving "thousands of tanks" that occurred before the Israeli air attack on Syria on 5 June or the Israeli land attack of 9 June. In fact, what Syrian attack involving thousands of tanks? Are you perhaps confusing the Six Day War with the Yom Kippur War (when a Syrian force of several hundred tanks did attack Israel)?

According to the information I have, at the start of the Six Day War Syrian artillery bombarded towns in northern Israel, as they'd been doing for months, but the only actual attack by the Syrian army was by a force of maybe a couple of hundred soldiers, supported by fewer than ten tanks, on 6 June. (http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/northernfront.asp)

As for ending the conflict, sure, as I said in my earlier posts, Israel can hold it as militarily occupied land for strategic defence until Syria is willing to make peace. But not annex it.

[Peter B]

20 hours ago, and then said:

It was a bold, unexpected move that probably caught Netanyahu and his supporters off guard.  I'm sure Bibi has always made it clear he'd love to have such an announcement but I doubt he or his people expected it.  I can even agree with Sir Smoke on Trump being the first Zionist president.  Which makes it all the more ridiculous when I hear people calling him an anti-Semite.

I really believe that too many people (this isn't aimed at you) are beginning to believe their own rhetoric when they categorize Trump as being slow-witted.  Narcissistic, vain and combative?  Absolutely, but slow, he ain't.  He has a plan to force a peace on that region and he's setting the board.  If I were Bibi, I'd be getting pretty nervous waiting on the other shoe to drop.  He gives them Jerusalem, then the Golan?  It's a quid pro quo kind of world with dealmakers and he's about to put the touch on Israel for a very big "favor".  My guess is it will be half of Jerusalem and a partial right of return.  With the Arab nations in a tizzy of fear over Iran, there has never been a better time to push for peace in the region and even now, those gulf state leaders can only go so far without their people lynching them for dealing with Jews.  Yeah, Israel is going to have to give huge concessions before this is over and even THEN, the treaty won't last.  

IMHO I doubt Netanyahu wasn't forewarned of Trump's announcement regarding the Golan Heights. The relationship between the two men and between the two governments is too close for Trump to want to surprise Netanyahu with an announcement like that.

But as for your second paragraph, that's an intriguing analysis (and I'm not being ironic here). On that basis I await with interest the quid pro quo.

[Peter B]

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Israel has never threatened Syria with nuclear weapons, so far as I know ? 

Israel took the Golan Heights when it repulsed a titanic attack by Syrian tanks in both 1967 and 1973. (one of the largest tank battles since ww2). It chased the tanks back way beyond the Golan, and at one stage threatened Damascus. 

Israel retreated, but retained the Golan heights as a buffer zone for as long as Syria was in a state of war with Israel

Syria has never retracted that state of war, and explicitly refused to declare peace with Israel, even though Israel offered them the Golan Heights back. 

Syria can huff and puff in the United Nations, but Israel will rightly ignore them. !

 

Yeah, again with the reference to this titanic tank attack by Syria in 1967. Please provide evidence of this.

[RoofGardener]

3 hours ago, Peter B said:

Yeah, again with the reference to this titanic tank attack by Syria in 1967. Please provide evidence of this.

Hi there Peter B. Hmm... you may be right.. I may be muddling up (or even conflating) the 1967 "six day" war, and the Yom Kippur attack. 

Syria deployed between 500 and 600 tanks in the 1967 attack, and around 1260 to 1400 tanks in the Yom Kippur attack. 

http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/syria.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_Tears

This makes the Yom Kippur war one of the largest tank battles in history, topped only by the The Battle of Brody (1941), and the Battle of Kursk. It was bigger than the Gulf War tank battles, by a large margin.

In total, the Arab armies fielded about 3500 tanks, and Israel about 1700. https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-10-greatest-tank-battles-in-military-history-1681355416

The Soviet Union supplied around 400 replacement tanks to the Syrians during the battle.

So yes, I was incorrect when I said "thousands" of tanks. However, 1200-1400 is surely suitably titanic ?  

Edited March 31, 2019 by RoofGardener

[Peter B]

4 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hi there Peter B. Hmm... you may be right.. I may be muddling up (or even conflating) the 1967 "six day" war, and the Yom Kippur attack. 

Syria deployed between 500 and 600 tanks in the 1967 attack, and around 1260 to 1400 tanks in the Yom Kippur attack. 

http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/syria.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_Tears

This makes the Yom Kippur war one of the largest tank battles in history, topped only by the The Battle of Brody (1941), and the Battle of Kursk. It was bigger than the Gulf War tank battles, by a large margin.

In total, the Arab armies fielded about 3500 tanks, and Israel about 1700. https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-10-greatest-tank-battles-in-military-history-1681355416

The Soviet Union supplied around 400 replacement tanks to the Syrians during the battle.

So yes, I was incorrect when I said "thousands" of tanks. However, 1200-1400 is surely suitably titanic ?  

[Life of Brian]

Right. Now don't do it again!

[/Life of Brian]

[+joc]

14 hours ago, the-Unexpected-Soul said:

international law says Golan is Syrian land, united nations says Israel is to withdraw and hand over Golan to Syria,

israel and some people here say Fu** international law, israel took it by force and will only give it back by force,

so Syria is in the right to build an international resistance axis against Israel, especially that Israel have nukes and consistently threaten to use it against Syria in case of an attack by Syria 

also why Israel is not stripped of its nukes yet ?, they are more likely to use them than Kim jun un

You live in an alternative Universe.   International law...pfffft...UN...pfffft...a bunch of thugs for the most part.  We don't take our marching orders from the UN.  Israel doesn't either.  For that matter Iran doesn't either...Russia doesn't either...Syria certainly doesn't...

A study of world history and world wars might be in order.  Things are not what CNN tells you they are.

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, joc said:

A study of world history and world wars might be in order.  Things are not what CNN tells you they are

So true.  If I actually believed those here who agree with him on this were simply ignorant of the reality there I could be a lot more casual about it.  I honestly believe that they understand the reality and choose to use the noise from the UN and the plea to "international law" as an excuse because they can't stand to tell the truth about it.  

Well, if T's "Deal of the Century" is what I expect it to be, it's going to be difficult for them to continue to trash the U.S. as a force that is working against the Palestinians.  That is unless they are so deluded they are willing to demand the Jews pack up and leave the land en masse.  If they haven't pushed back the unveil yet again, it's supposed to be rolled out immediately after the election and once the new government is formed.  Probably before May 1st.

[+and-then]

8 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hi there Peter B. Hmm... you may be right.. I may be muddling up (or even conflating) the 1967 "six day" war, and the Yom Kippur attack. 

Syria deployed between 500 and 600 tanks in the 1967 attack, and around 1260 to 1400 tanks in the Yom Kippur attack. 

http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/syria.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_Tears

This makes the Yom Kippur war one of the largest tank battles in history, topped only by the The Battle of Brody (1941), and the Battle of Kursk. It was bigger than the Gulf War tank battles, by a large margin.

In total, the Arab armies fielded about 3500 tanks, and Israel about 1700. https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-10-greatest-tank-battles-in-military-history-1681355416

The Soviet Union supplied around 400 replacement tanks to the Syrians during the battle.

So yes, I was incorrect when I said "thousands" of tanks. However, 1200-1400 is surely suitably titanic ?  

The main memory I have of the Yom Kippur War was Nixon making an announcement that he was raising our nuclear DefCon level.  I turned 13 during that war and understood how important raising DefCon levels was.  Between that move and the major airlift of resupply that he ordered, they survived and we got hosed with an oil embargo.  "We" as in, most western nations that were perceived to have thwarted their plans to annihilate the Jews.  Real nice lot, eh?  

 

[RoofGardener]

Who does the Golan Heights belong to ? 

[RoofGardener]

What, no takers ? 

WHO DOES THE GOLAN HEIGHTS BELONG TO ? 

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

18 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

What, no takers ? 

WHO DOES THE GOLAN HEIGHTS BELONG TO ? 

 

 

From wiki

Quote

Internationally recognized as Syrian territory occupied by israel

 

[+and-then]

34 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

What, no takers ? 

WHO DOES THE GOLAN HEIGHTS BELONG TO ? 

Israel.  Since June of 1967.  

[+and-then]

15 minutes ago, the-Unexpected-Soul said:

 

 

From wiki

 

The reality is that if the "International" community had its way, Israel would be exterminated as a nation.  The Israelis have a different plan.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

2 minutes ago, and then said:

Israel.  Since June of 1967.  

That according to you, what about the syrian population who live in golan and completely refuse isreal identity, and say they and thier land is syrian, 

Also most nations around the world have declined tump "decision" and that include European countries which is allied with usa, plus all arab countries

https://www.timesofisrael.com/at-un-european-states-reject-israeli-sovereignty-over-golan/

https://www.dw.com/en/arab-leaders-slam-trumps-recognition-of-golan-heights-as-israeli/a-48136117

[RoofGardener]

Well here's something that might surprise you. 

Syria was created in 1946, by negotiations between the French and British mandate holders ! It's 'claim' to the Golan Heights therefore goes back just two years prior to the creation of Israel, and was based on French and British political cartographers ! 

Two years later, in 1948, Syria attacked Israel, and lost bits of the Golan Heights. Rather careless of them, no ? It got even worse in 1967, when Syria attacked AGAIN, and THIS time lost even MORE of the Heights. Then they attacked AGAIN in 1973 and briefly re-conquered southern Golan, only to be driven out again.  

14 years later, Syria was STILL at war with Israel, and I think the Israeli government finally lost patience with them, and annexed the Heights. 

[Setton]

On 23/03/2019 at 1:23 AM, and then said:

You seem to have a problem with sorting causes and effects, don't you?  Don't blow up buses or launch rockets at civilians and no one will attack you with modern weapons.  See how easy that calculus is?  

So... we should have sided with Nazi Germany over the French Resistance..? 

[ExpandMyMind]

24 minutes ago, Setton said:

So... we should have sided with Nazi Germany over the French Resistance..? 

It's hilarious to see a pro Israel guy attempt to use 'cause and effect' reasoning when defending Israel. It blows the mind.

[Peter B]

5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Well here's something that might surprise you. 

Syria was created in 1946, by negotiations between the French and British mandate holders ! It's 'claim' to the Golan Heights therefore goes back just two years prior to the creation of Israel, and was based on French and British political cartographers ! 

Two years later, in 1948, Syria attacked Israel, and lost bits of the Golan Heights. Rather careless of them, no ? It got even worse in 1967, when Syria attacked AGAIN, and THIS time lost even MORE of the Heights. Then they attacked AGAIN in 1973 and briefly re-conquered southern Golan, only to be driven out again.  

14 years later, Syria was STILL at war with Israel, and I think the Israeli government finally lost patience with them, and annexed the Heights. 

Yes, it would surprise me, as your post contains demonstrably wrong statements.

Syria's boundaries were set by Britain and France in 1923, not 1946. The Golan Heights were therefore part of Syria from 1923.

Syria did not lose any part of the Golan Heights in 1948 (but yes it did attack Israel). The 1948 armistice line pretty much follows the 1923 boundary.

Syria did not attack Israel in 1967 (except for a single raid against a single village). It had instead been using the Golan Heights to place artillery to bombard Israel in the months prior to the Six Day War in 1967. The Israeli government made a deliberate decision to capture the heights in order to stop the artillery attacks. Had this decision not been made, the ceasefire line would have again matched the 1923 boundary.

But yes, Syria did launch a major attack against Israel in 1973 in an attempt to regain the heights, but the attack was driven off.

[RoofGardener]

20 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Yes, it would surprise me, as your post contains demonstrably wrong statements.

Syria's boundaries were set by Britain and France in 1923, not 1946. The Golan Heights were therefore part of Syria from 1923.

Dubious, as the "Syrian State" did not exist until 1946. Until that point, the issue of borders becomes somewhat moot. 

21 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Syria did not lose any part of the Golan Heights in 1948 (but yes it did attack Israel). The 1948 armistice line pretty much follows the 1923 boundary.

HA ! Not so. A portion of the Golan Heights became a demilitarised zone, with neither State having control over it. Mind you - I'm reminded of that Blackadder scene where General Melchet is inspecting what he thinks is a tabletop scale model of the terrain taken by the British army in the last month. He asks what the scale is.. and Captain Darling stutters... "Umm... it's.... one-to-one General. This is the ACTUAL land that we took from the Germans".

24 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Syria did not attack Israel in 1967 (except for a single raid against a single village). It had instead been using the Golan Heights to place artillery to bombard Israel in the months prior to the Six Day War in 1967. The Israeli government made a deliberate decision to capture the heights in order to stop the artillery attacks. Had this decision not been made, the ceasefire line would have again matched the 1923 boundary.

 Hmm.. you're right. Mind you, it wasn't for want of trying. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War#Golan_Heights

I never knew that the IAF did an "Egypt" on the Syrians, and wiped out 60% of their air force whilst it was sitting on the ground. 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

So Israel goes on a land grab of Golan, Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem, SInai, Shebaa Farms, and every inch of the way, America goes, "Congrats Isreal!!"

Surely we could have done the same for Iraq after their sterling victory over Kuwait.

Prejudice... with a capital P

 

 

 

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

So Israel goes on a land grab of Golan, Gaza, West Bank, East Jerusalem, SInai, Shebaa Farms, and every inch of the way, America goes, "Congrats Isreal!!"

Surely we could have done the same for Iraq after their sterling victory over Kuwait.

Prejudice... with a capital P

 

 

 

That logic only works in a scenario where Kuwait had attacked Iraq.  The real news from 1967 and '73 is that Arabs can't trust each other enough to fight together.  They fear the lies of each other worse than their enemies.