Talk:Occupied Territories: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Jackson No edit summary |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::Another point is that the name doesn't fit the facts. Gaza, at least, is obviously not occupied by Israel. I've lost track of the situation in the West Bank, but there have certainly been periods when parts of it have not been occupied. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 17:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | ::Another point is that the name doesn't fit the facts. Gaza, at least, is obviously not occupied by Israel. I've lost track of the situation in the West Bank, but there have certainly been periods when parts of it have not been occupied. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 17:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::Gaza is under the effective military control of Israel. Further, it is under the Palestinian Authority, which does not have sovereign rights and is effectively occupied in terms of the Third Geneva Convention. The settlements are not desired by said Authority. | |||
:::Now, if you want to add to the article that some consider this an incorrect name and cite it, fine. In practice, without taking on a legal or political judgment, "Occupied Territories" is commonly understood to be Gaza and the West Bank. I certainly agree that it's ambiguous whether to include East Jerusalem, but that's a common usage. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:07, 28 October 2010
Is it about the notion of "occupied territories" in general, or just one case of it? Boris Tsirelson 08:57, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- One case of it, usually capitalized. I would not object to disambiguation, but the proper-name phrase has a specific meaning and common use. I'm not immediately thinking of other examples where it is used as a proper name. Howard C. Berkowitz 14:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Another point is that the name doesn't fit the facts. Gaza, at least, is obviously not occupied by Israel. I've lost track of the situation in the West Bank, but there have certainly been periods when parts of it have not been occupied. Peter Jackson 17:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Gaza is under the effective military control of Israel. Further, it is under the Palestinian Authority, which does not have sovereign rights and is effectively occupied in terms of the Third Geneva Convention. The settlements are not desired by said Authority.
- Now, if you want to add to the article that some consider this an incorrect name and cite it, fine. In practice, without taking on a legal or political judgment, "Occupied Territories" is commonly understood to be Gaza and the West Bank. I certainly agree that it's ambiguous whether to include East Jerusalem, but that's a common usage. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)