Hamas will NEVER accept peace (for flub)

[flubadub]

If you think that some VI resolutions are binding, per the ICJ ruling, then 1701 is binding but the IAEA/Israel resolution is not, due to the different ways in which they make use of the word "decides".

Ah, but they don't make different use of the word 'decide'.
All of paragraph 11 (including 11b) deals with UNIFIL and their responsibilities (in joint with Israel and Lebanon). The paragraphs that deal directly with Lebanon and Israel all start with the words 'calls upon'. I've read it, its sitting there on my desktop open, and if you repeat your very incorrect assertion one more time, I'll paste the whole darned thing in for proof.

You're still very wrong. So wrong even your mother would be upset.

 

[basketcase]

...

Once more, with feeling:
So which is it?
Is Lebanon bound to disarm Hezbollah and Israel bound to allow its nuclear industry to be inspected by the IAEA?
...

According to the resolution you say Israel is in violation of, yes. 110%. Absoultely and beyond a doubt. As a part of fulfilling the obligations of 1701, Lebanon is expected to disarm all non-state militias with a specific emphasis on Hezbollah. They are also supposed to take control of the south and stop arms smuggling. None of that has been done. Why should Israel stop the occasional surveilance fly-over when Hezbollah is still running around the south and building up their illegal arms supply?

Have no clue what that has to do with the IAEA.

 

[basketcase]

Ah, but they don't make different use of the word 'decide'.
All of paragraph 11 (including 11b) deals with UNIFIL and their responsibilities (in joint with Israel and Lebanon). The paragraphs that deal directly with Lebanon and Israel all start with the words 'calls upon'. I've read it, its sitting there on my desktop open, and if you repeat your very incorrect assertion one more time, I'll paste the whole darned thing in for proof.

You're still very wrong. So wrong even your mother would be upset.

Please do. Don't forget to include the parts that say that Hezbollah needs to be disarmed.

 

[fuji]

AAll of paragraph 11 (including 11b) deals with UNIFIL and their responsibilities (in joint with Israel and Lebanon).

If you want to assert that it's a non-binding resolution I'm fine with that, I think it's non-binding because it's Chapter VI. If you want to say it's non-binding because it doesn't make strong enough use of the word "decides" that's fine too.

Either way the conclusion is that you haven't yet managed to locate a single binding resolution that Israel is in violation of.

 

[flubadub]

If you want to assert that it's a non-binding resolution I'm fine with that, I think it's non-binding because it's Chapter VI. If you want to say it's non-binding because it doesn't make strong enough use of the word "decides" that's fine too.

Either way the conclusion is that you haven't yet managed to locate a single binding resolution that Israel is in violation of.

Ah, trying to change the subject.
Score one more point for me.



Lets go back to the important question.

If you hold Lebanon to resolution 1701, then you must hold israel to a large number of resolutions.
And I do think Lebanon should be held to #1701, as should Israel, both have failed and both should still respond.

 

[flubadub]

Please do. Don't forget to include the parts that say that Hezbollah needs to be disarmed.

Heres the link.
I'd post the full doc, but Fuji has admitted defeat by trying to change the subject.
As cheerleader, I fully excpect you to not bother reading and wait for the Fuji (coles) notes.
http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/1701%20(2006)&Lang=E&Area=UNDOC

 

[fuji]

If you hold Lebanon to resolution 1701, then you must hold israel to a large number of resolutions.

What binding resolutions apply to Israel?

We've got two different theories of what makes a resolution binding here:

1. It has to be chapter VII, according to the overwhelming majority of international lawyers, or

2. It has to be an explicit "decision" of the UN SC, according to the single and disputed ICJ case you cited

Pick either one of those theories of what makes a resolution binding and provide the resolutions that Israel is in violation of that are in fact binding resolutions.

So far you haven't produced one single solitary resolution that Israel is in violation of...

 

[flubadub]

What binding resolutions apply to Israel?

We've got two different theories of what makes a resolution binding here:

1. It has to be chapter VII, according to the overwhelming majority of international lawyers, or

2. It has to be an explicit "decision" of the UN SC, according to the single and disputed ICJ case you cited

Pick either one of those theories of what makes a resolution binding and provide the resolutions that Israel is in violation of that are in fact binding resolutions.

So far you haven't produced one single solitary resolution that Israel is in violation of...

I pick door number 2.
Decisions marked upon with phrases such as 'calls upon'.


Meanwhile, looks like the EU is getting fed up with Israel as well:

EU envoys: Treat East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital
Sunday's demolition of the Shepherd Hotel has sparked international criticism
EU envoys in the Middle East are urging Brussels to treat East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state.
The recommendation comes in a leaked report by the heads of 25 European missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah.
The report also calls for an EU presence at the demolitions of Palestinian homes, and intervention when peaceful protesters face arrest.
The document follows the razing of an East Jerusalem hotel to make way for 20 homes for Jewish settlers.
The destruction of the Shepherd Hotel has angered Palestinians, who want East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12150792

Looks like the Palestinians will bring a resolution to the UN in Sept, now that they are getting more countries on board. Chile being the latest one.

 

[fuji]

I pick door number 2.
Decisions marked upon with phrases such as 'calls upon'.

"Calls upon" is not a decision you blithering idiot. You can't just make this stuff up yourself.

 

[flubadub]

"Calls upon" is not a decision you blithering idiot. You can't just make this stuff up yourself.

Back to the insults, is it?
More fun all around, I suppose.


So lets see. If the UN makes a decision, say to send more UNIFIL troops, that is more binding then when the say they 'call upon' a country to do something?
Another fail.
When the UN uses the term 'decision', it will be in reference to an action they will undertake, but if they want somebody else to do something they will use the terms 'calls upon'.
Here's an example for you:

I 'decide' that you will learn how the english language works.
I 'call upon' you to learn how the english language works.

Which one infers action from you?



If you don't understand this, I can provide some references that might get you back into grade 3.

 

[fuji]

So lets see. If the UN makes a decision, say to send more UNIFIL troops, that is more binding then when the say they 'call upon' a country to do something?

Correct. Call upon is a request, clearly not a decision. When the UN decides something it is binding. The UN is authorized to make decisions on behalf of all member countries, and when it does those decisions are binding.

For example: Decides that Iran shall without delay comply fully and without qualification with its IAEA Safeguards Agreement

That is an example of a binding decision made by the United Nations Security Council on behalf of member state Iran.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc9948.doc.htm

 

[rld]

FYI looks like Hez is pulling out of the unity government as you squabble. Things about to heat up again...

 

[basketcase]

Hey fuji. Blackrock's advice makes sense. Flub has absolutely zero credibility and everyone knows it. There is absolutely no reason to argue with him. He won't change his mind. He won't admit when he's wrong, and more important, no one believes him anyways. Even notty refuses to support him.

Let the guy rot with his own innane posts. The ignore function is there for a reason.

 

[fuji]

You're right, I guess even he knows he's a clown:

http://0.tqn.com/d/collectibles/1/0/g/f/3/193flubadub.jpg