1967 borders indefensible

[H.r.E.]

So I hear Netanyahu say over and over again that the 1967 borders are not defensible. Can somebody elaborate how theyre not defensible in particular?
I dont believe one single word until proven otherwise.
Is there any expert err.. expertise that proves that this borders are really not defendable?

[Dolgorukiy]

How the hell could you defend a territory 6 miles wide?

[Azog 150]

How the hell could you defend a territory 6 miles wide?

Israel managed to defend it successfully before and during the Six Day War. Also, an independent Palestinian state is also going to mean less hostility and less cause for young Palestinians to blow themselves up or launch rockets into Israel, and probably more support for Israel internationally.


I think it has more prospect for a successful defence of Israel then currently where Israel's dithering in the peace process is making it increasingly isolated in the international community and which is brewing increasing resentment and extremism among young Palestinians and people in surrounding Arab countries who will grow up to hate Israel and possibly want to attack it

[Dolgorukiy]

Israel managed to defend it successfully before and during the Six Day War. Also, an independent Palestinian state is also going to mean less hostility and less cause for young Palestinians to blow themselves up or launch rockets into Israel, and probably more support for Israel internationally.


I think it has more prospect for a successful defence of Israel then currently where Israel's dithering in the peace process is making it increasingly isolated in the international community and which is brewing increasing resentment among young Palestinians and people in surrounding Arab countries who will grow up to hate Israel and possibly want to attack it

Bullcrap, fat lot of good international support will give us when the Pallis will start launching rockets into the densely populated central district... If we will be ultimately forced to attack and re-occupy the West bank (and, as the whole deal with Gaza shows us, we will, otherwise we'll get a non-stopping shower of rockets and mortar shells) why in the name of bloody should we cede it in the first place?

Moreover, will the existence of this 'Palestinian' state make Hezbollah, Syria or Iran cease their hostile actions towards Israel? Not likely.

And finally, the 1967 borders are only one prerequisite of the PLO before negotiations even start. They also demand the 'right of return' of millions of people into Israel, 90% of whom have never seen it. What is the point of making 'peace' with these conditions? Collective seppuku sounds good compared to that.

[removeduser_487563287433]

How the hell could you defend a territory 6 miles wide?

By ceasing to make all neighbours your enemies.

[H.r.E.]

Ehm guys, the territory being only so wide or only so defensible is mainly a problem that comes from the zionists that created Israel. They wanted this territory and they wanted this state. But now they call it indefensible to expand and annex territory that is not their property.
Meh, Israel shouldnt have been created this way and not in palestine.

Just my thought about it, dunno wether its right.

[Dr. Croccer]

Israel has been able to ''defend'' it from Palestinians quite effectively...

[PointOfViewGun]

If only it was ok for every country out there to justify their borders on that.

[CiviC]

There are no 1967 borders, only 1949 armistice line. There was a 1947 partition plan but it was rejected by Arabs.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

A border is yet to be defined. It has to be defined based on current realities not on some 50 years old ones. Israel lost none of the wars to accept such a deal. Palestinians denied for so long even the existence of the State of Israel and they still treat the problem as they are winners and they have no reason to bargain?

[garudamon11]

There are no 1967 borders, only 1949 armistice line. There was a 1947 partition plan but it was rejected by Arabs.

A border is yet to be defined. It has to be defined based on current realities not on some 50 years old ones. Israel lost none of the wars to accept such a deal. Palestinians denied for so long even the existence of the State of Israel and they still treat the problem as they are winners and they have no reason to bargain?

Ok so colonists come in, kick you out and then give you some sort of a parition plan that gives them more land knowing that you'll surely reject it so they can use that as an excuse to take everything... I cant believe people still say "ARABZ REJECTED TEH PARITION PLAN ITS DER FAULT!!1!!1"

[Mr. Scott]

Ok so colonists come in, kick you out and then give you some sort of a parition plan that gives them more land knowing that you'll surely reject it so they can use that as an excuse to take everything... I cant believe people still say "ARABZ REJECTED TEH PARITION PLAN ITS DER FAULT!!1!!1"

Dude, you know like half of the land the Jewish state was supposed to get was desert... you know, crappy land.
On the contrary the Palestinians were going to get the good and arable land.

The logic by the British made sense.

32% of the population in Palestine was Jewish, so they should get about that percentage of the arable land. The rest was given to Palestine.

The reason the Jews were supposed to be given the desert region was because the British knew they had money, money to turn that land from desert into workable land.

Its not necessarily the Jews fault for the region being so screwed up, its the Palestinians and their sheer stubbornness.

[Treize]

Some Israeli general said it was an outdated concept, they don't need it. They are the regional superpower. And secondly, it doesn't matter.

[MehemtAli_Pasha]

if Hamas ever concedes Israel's right to exist, would Israel have any right on those land acquisition then?

[Gromovnik]

So we're back to the beginning. How can Israel negotiate with people who want to see it destroyed?

[Dolgorukiy]

The real question is how do you explain it to people who are deaf and blind to that fact.

[♔Goodguy1066♔]

I believe it is defensible, but I still think the '67 line is obsolete and unrealistic and meaningless in 2011. We should base the peace process more or less on the '67 line as a favour and an exchange for peace to the Palestinians, but the PA simply saying 'everything East of this non-physical line, nearly half a century obsolete and the former border of Israel and Jordan, is going to be a Palestinian state by September, and there will be absolutely no negotiations and no flexibility' is silly, to say the least.

[Treize]

It is rather silly that the Israeli's still want more land after they already annexed 80% in 1948 without questions asked.

[♔Goodguy1066♔]

It is rather silly that the Israeli's still want more land after they already annexed 80% in 1948 without questions asked.

Because in 1948 they declared war on us, and no normal country gives their invaders a red carpet. The keeping of '48 land was justified since the Palestinians weren't willing to take their land back for peace, or indeed settle for anything less than the total annihilation of the State of Israel, untill around a decade ago, and now even they understand the time when they had a claim on it was long gone.

We don't want more land, we're willing to give up most of our settlements in exchange for peace, but a unilateral decleration that everything East of the green line is Palestinian is, as I said before, very silly indeed.

[irontaino]

Yeah, the best air force in the Middle East and the most powerful, modern military in the region.....indefensible my a

[Dolgorukiy]

What use is the best air force, air defense, or military if you can't act on a threat if you don't see it on time, or if there's a huge swath of hostile territory you must cross before you reach it.

it, here's a video, watch it.