On this occasion Prime Minister Turnbull and Foreign minster Bishop have both slammed Obama and Kerry for their betrayal of Israel. NO Australia does not support the USA and the UN on this decision. Yet the facts correct on Australia's position.

Dear Josepheus,

What facts are 'correct on this occasion'?

Banjo,

As there were no demarcated permanent border lines in the 1949 armistice, at the demand of the Arabs, to which pre 1967 lines does the UN resolution refer?

With modern warfare and the proven treachery of the Arab states, the as yet unsettled pre 1967 were insufficient to protect Israel from attack.

"The armistice agreements were intended to serve only as interim agreements until replaced by permanent peace treaties. However, no peace treaties were actually signed until decades later.

The armistice agreements were clear (at Arab insistence) that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian-Israeli agreement stated "The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question."

The Jordanian-Israeli agreement stated: "... no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims, and positions of either Party hereto in the peaceful settlement of the Palestine questions, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations", "The Armistice Demarcation Lines are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto." (Art. VI.9) As the Armistice Demarcation Lines were technically not borders, the Arabs considered that Israel was restricted in its rights to develop the DMZ and exploitation of the water resources.

In the Knesset then Foreign Minister and future Prime Minister Moshe Sharett called the armistice lines "provisional boundaries" and the old international borders which the armistice lines, except with Jordan, were based on, "natural boundaries".

After the 1967 Six Day War several Israeli leaders argued against turning the Armistice Demarcation Lines into permanent borders on the grounds of Israeli security:

Prime Minister Golda Meir said the pre-1967 borders were so dangerous that it "would be treasonable" for an Israeli leader to accept them (New York Times, December 23, 1969).
Prime Minister Menachem Begin described a proposal for a retreat to the pre-1967 borders as "national suicide for Israel.""

.

Dear Shadow Minister,

.

You wrote :

« So the mass murder of its citizens and the theft of aid to buy weapons, etc by Hamas goes unmentioned … »
.

That was not the topic you posted here for discussion. I was commenting on the topic you proposed regarding “a lame duck President” and the UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (which makes no mention of Hamas).

Perhaps you might like to set up a new discussion on Hamas. I have no problem with that.

In the meantime, I take this opportunity of wishing you and all on this forum a happy New Year.

.

According to the following:

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blogs/jay-elwes/the-un-israels-best-friend-resolution-netanyahu

The UN resolution is favoured by most Israelis.

david The article posted is what most Arabs want in a one State, which includes Palestine.