Revision as of 10:43, 9 April 2002 editDanny (talk | contribs)41,414 edits Danny← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:20, 29 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,381 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Israeli settlement/Archive 13) (bot | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{pp-move-indef|small=yes}} | |||
I removed: | |||
{{Talk header|search=yes}} | |||
<!-- Do not remove the sanction template --> | |||
{{ARBPIA}} | |||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=Mid}} | |||
{{WikiProject Palestine|importance=high|attention=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Syria|importance=mid}} | |||
{{WikiProject Egypt|importance=low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration}} | |||
{{WikiProject Cities}} | |||
}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |||
|maxarchivesize = 250K | |||
|counter = 13 | |||
|minthreadsleft = 4 | |||
|algo = old(180d) | |||
|archive = Talk:Israeli settlement/Archive %(counter)d | |||
}} | |||
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
|target=Talk:Israeli settlement/Archive index | |||
|mask=Talk:Israeli settlement/Archive <#> | |||
|leading_zeros=0 | |||
|indexhere=yes}} | |||
{{Broken anchors|links= | |||
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Ulpana lawsuits) is no longer available because it was ] before. <!-- {"title":"Ulpana lawsuits","appear":{"revid":554432036,"parentid":554430719,"timestamp":"2013-05-10T11:49:45Z","replaced_anchors":{"Ulpana lawsuit":"Ulpana lawsuits"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":725072007,"parentid":725062973,"timestamp":"2016-06-13T11:20:49Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
}} | |||
:''As a means to legalise their position, the israelis have taken invading refugee camps ] and vilages in an attempt to scare off Palestinians and claim the land as theirs.'' | |||
== Haaretz article: "Secret 1970 document confirms first West Bank settlements built on a lie." == | |||
The massacre in Sabra and Shatilla was not committed by Israel. Israel's responsibility, and for that matter Sharon's, was in not stopping their Christian Phalangist allies in Lebanon from committing the massacre. Nor was the massacre committed to legalize settlements. It took place in Lebanon, not the West Bank or Gaza. No Israeli government has ever made territorial claims on Lebanon, nor have any settlements been created there. Of course, a statement like this also merits an Israeli explanation of the actions if it is to be considered NPOV. According to Israel, refugee camps in the West Bank have Gaza have been invaded to stop thm serving as terrorist bases. It is not a question of agreeing with this or not. Personally, I do not, however, claiming that it is a policy intended to scare off the Palestinians requires some factual backing. I'd like to see that. Finally, it is Sabra and Shatilla (S and 2 l's).] | |||
Haaretz - Yotam Berger - , 28 July 2016. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span> | |||
Let's improve the article by describing | |||
#advocacy which opposes the settlemnts | |||
#advocacy which supports the settlements | |||
== Security isn't a "pretext" == | |||
I presume Arabs are mostly against the settlements, because they regard the West Bank as properly belonging to a Palestinian state (de facto, de jure, or proposed) -- so the Israelis are trespassing, to say the least. | |||
Under '''4.2 Settlement Policy''', the article reads "The government abrogated the prohibition from purchasing occupied land by Israelis; the "Drobles Plan", a plan for large-scale settlement in the West Bank meant to prevent a Palestinian state under the pretext of security became the framework for its policy." | |||
I presume the Israeli military wants radar installations that can see across the Jordan River, to get an extra 10 minutes' warning of enemy jets or missiles. | |||
The dictionary definition of pretext is ''something that is put forward to conceal a true purpose or object; an ostensible reason; excuse''. | |||
No doubt there are other issues as well. Please, someone who knows the area and the issues, write about this. Thank you. ] | |||
The provided citation doesn't support the copy in the wiki article. The document doesn't say that security was a pretext. The document says security is one of several reasons to develop the settlements. The cited article reads, "The following are the principles which guided the plan: 1. Settlement throughout the entire Land of Israel is for security and by right, A strip of settlements at strategic sites enhances both internal and external security alike, as well as making concrete and realizing our right to Eretz Israel..." | |||
:Ed, you are confusing several issues here. military installations are not settlements. Many people in Israel, perhaps the majority, support removing most of the settlement but keeping military installations in vital places. And it is actually 3 minutes, not 10. ] | |||
So the article isn't even denying that it assumes that the Israelis have some sort of biblical or historical right to Israel, BUT it also argues that the settlements would improve security. | |||
There is also the matter that the same section of this article implies that these cited documents were written by representatives of the Israeli government; they were not, they were written by departments of the World Zionist Organization which is an NGO and not directed by the Israeli government. It was essentially written by a think tank advocating a certain perspective but the article casts it as from the central government planning office. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) </small> | |||
== ICJ == | |||
The findings of the ICJ should be treated factually and not on a POV and attribution basis. I.e. I am in favor of the settlements being simply called illegal in the opening sentence, as described by every major RS. ] (]) 09:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Given that now have an authoritative statement of the law on this matter, it should be straightforward to find RS reporting of same without caveats, it really doesn't matter any more whether "Israel disputes this" other than as historical background, imo this boilerplate should be removed from articles. There was a consensus about it somewhere but I forget where, perhaps it needs revisiting now. ] (]) 09:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Agreed; it should be Israel's arguments were refuted, rather than the classical and boring "Israel disputes this", which to me always sounded like writing on ]: "The earth is round, but flat earthers dispute this." ] (]) 09:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::OK, existing consensus ] (thanks to {{Re|Sean.hoyland}} for the link). | |||
:::It would seem that the situation has changed, even before the ICJ opinion, the US accepts (once again, post Trump) that the settlements are illegal so together with the opinion, that seems sufficient to reopen the question with a view to removing the "Israel disputes this" part and possibly rewording the rest. ] (]) 11:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 July 2024 == | |||
{{Edit extended-protected|Israeli settlement|answered=yes}} | |||
I suggest that the latest 2023 west bank access restrictions map from OCHA be added. Link provided below: | |||
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/west-bank-access-restrictions-may-2023 ] (]) 18:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
:] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:EEp --> It's a good map, but unfortunately it's . <span style="white-space:nowrap"><span style="font-family:monospace">'''<nowiki>''']<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki>'''</span> (] • ])</span> 01:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{re|CanonNi}} https://commons.wikimedia.org/Template:PD-UN-map ] (]) 10:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
== create page: ] == | |||
# unofficial | |||
# official | |||
] (]) 02:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 12:20, 29 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Israeli settlement article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
|
Haaretz article: "Secret 1970 document confirms first West Bank settlements built on a lie."
Haaretz - Yotam Berger - Secret 1970 document confirms first West Bank settlements built on a lie, 28 July 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZScarpia (talk • contribs)
Security isn't a "pretext"
Under 4.2 Settlement Policy, the article reads "The government abrogated the prohibition from purchasing occupied land by Israelis; the "Drobles Plan", a plan for large-scale settlement in the West Bank meant to prevent a Palestinian state under the pretext of security became the framework for its policy."
The dictionary definition of pretext is something that is put forward to conceal a true purpose or object; an ostensible reason; excuse.
The provided citation doesn't support the copy in the wiki article. The document doesn't say that security was a pretext. The document says security is one of several reasons to develop the settlements. The cited article reads, "The following are the principles which guided the plan: 1. Settlement throughout the entire Land of Israel is for security and by right, A strip of settlements at strategic sites enhances both internal and external security alike, as well as making concrete and realizing our right to Eretz Israel..."
So the article isn't even denying that it assumes that the Israelis have some sort of biblical or historical right to Israel, BUT it also argues that the settlements would improve security.
There is also the matter that the same section of this article implies that these cited documents were written by representatives of the Israeli government; they were not, they were written by departments of the World Zionist Organization which is an NGO and not directed by the Israeli government. It was essentially written by a think tank advocating a certain perspective but the article casts it as from the central government planning office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.105.157 (talk)
ICJ
The findings of the ICJ should be treated factually and not on a POV and attribution basis. I.e. I am in favor of the settlements being simply called illegal in the opening sentence, as described by every major RS. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Given that now have an authoritative statement of the law on this matter, it should be straightforward to find RS reporting of same without caveats, it really doesn't matter any more whether "Israel disputes this" other than as historical background, imo this boilerplate should be removed from articles. There was a consensus about it somewhere but I forget where, perhaps it needs revisiting now. Selfstudier (talk) 09:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed; it should be Israel's arguments were refuted, rather than the classical and boring "Israel disputes this", which to me always sounded like writing on Earth: "The earth is round, but flat earthers dispute this." Makeandtoss (talk) 09:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- OK, existing consensus Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues/Archive. Legality of Israeli settlements (thanks to @Sean.hoyland: for the link).
- It would seem that the situation has changed, even before the ICJ opinion, the US accepts (once again, post Trump) that the settlements are illegal so together with the opinion, that seems sufficient to reopen the question with a view to removing the "Israel disputes this" part and possibly rewording the rest. Selfstudier (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed; it should be Israel's arguments were refuted, rather than the classical and boring "Israel disputes this", which to me always sounded like writing on Earth: "The earth is round, but flat earthers dispute this." Makeandtoss (talk) 09:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 July 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I suggest that the latest 2023 west bank access restrictions map from OCHA be added. Link provided below: https://www.ochaopt.org/content/west-bank-access-restrictions-may-2023 TheTrackRecord (talk) 18:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: It's a good map, but unfortunately it's copyrighted. ''']''' (talk • contribs) 01:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
create page: Israelification of land
- unofficial
- official
2A02:2149:8B02:4F00:51D1:3E49:2755:6F87 (talk) 02:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- B-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- B-Class Palestine-related articles
- High-importance Palestine-related articles
- Palestine-related articles needing attention
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- B-Class Syria articles
- Mid-importance Syria articles
- WikiProject Syria articles
- B-Class Egypt articles
- Low-importance Egypt articles
- WikiProject Egypt articles
- WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration articles
- B-Class WikiProject Cities articles
- All WikiProject Cities pages