Should All Occupied Territories Be Given Back?

Except that the Americans have treaties with the Indian nation. There's a reason you don't see any Indian resistance groups.

 

They agreed to adhere to the will of the UN and the UN ruled this would be the case so in effect, even though they disagreed with it the majority carried the day as the UN is a democratic entity.

And since you state some need to be taken over for their own good then in effect you are stating the UN should take over Egypt and the others for not adhering to the will of the UN. Wow, incredible extreme right wing logic you have going applied to a left wing whine.

 

And that reason is because they, unlike the Muslims, don't believe in Terrorism.

 

Actually the Egypt military took care of that problem. Give them time to initiate new elections and see if they go back to being a democracy before you complain about them. You can't expect state building to occur over night.

You ignored Africa. Plenty of places there a good billionaire with his own private army could move in create his own fiefdom in the name of civilizing a place. Maybe it's something Bill Gates should think about?

 

They didn't change anything to do with their official policy of recognizing Israel and have no intention to.

Didn't. When a billionaire is recognized by the UN as a nation and is afforded a vote then we shall peak again on this matter ok?

 

So.

PLO isn't recognized as a nation either therefore the land Jordan forfeited can't be theirs. Israel being there on the spot could legally absorb that land abandoned by another country.

Who says a Gates can't pull off something a Chavez has previously pulled off. With enough money he could buy his own army.

 

UNSC 181 which is the basis for Israel and, the state of Palestine has assigned this land to Palestinians not to Israel.

When he creates his own nation as I said, get back to me.

 

No, it's because they have treaties with the Americans.

 

?

A non-binding recommendation eh. Doesn't count.
http://www.think-israel.org/hertz.unresolutions181and242.html

 

Nope. While non binding it states the entire assembly by vote accepts the two nations within those parameteres. The Palestinians used this as their mandate for statehood just last year.

 

You posted before I corrected my post so you might want to read it again.

 

Again, the UN voted on the text of the resolution put before them. Any asides from any sources, afterwards or before, have no authority over or influence upon the text itself. Enjoy the memoirs.

 

This isn't even good shysterism, let alone any threat to truth.

 

It may serve as a merit point towards a full Fencesquatter's Badge. I'll check the rulebook.

 

The Israeli High Court itself rules on the status of the occupation as ' Belligerent Occupation '.

That's a really scrawny over-simplification. The judgment was specifically a judgment with regard to the illegal nature of the wall but , in arriving at that conclusion, other, pertinent points of law regarding the Occupation were included;

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1677.pdf

The judgment made it clear that military occupation is only legal if it is based upon self-defense. It struck off Israel's claim that the wall was necessary for ' self-defense ' and the same claim for Occupation obviously went with it, notwithstanding the principle of erga omnes which the neoZionists offend.

 

Note. I don't post in threads which are moved out of Latest World News so I won't be adding further to this one. Suffice to say that your claim for Israeli protection of its illegal occupation status under Article 51 of the UN Charter was torpedoed by this ruling. That's why they tried so hard to have the case withdrawn. Now the Palestinians themselves have access to the courts- following their UNESCO membership and the overwhelming recognition of their State on the pre-1967 borders. The law is an existential threat to Zionism- which is itself criminal by default.

 

Israel should give back 90+% of the West Bank including the Arab parts of East Jerusalem.

The other 10% should be land swaps. Israel will get some of its settlements and trade land in the Galilee bordering the northern West Bank in exchange.

 

No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
George S. Patton

 

Yes, the one that does not say anybody must do anything much less move "all" forces from "all" territories. That was not in the text despite your attempts to change the meanings of words within it with silly 'camel semantics.'

 

Another classic example of the blindness and lack of smell that accompanies intransigent ideological thinking.

you never fail to not surprise me.

 

Yes precisely. its a state of belligerent occupation. Not and illegal occupation.

thanks for reposting my original link.

The advisory opinion does not even deal with the legality of the occupation. It strictly deals with the legality of the seperation barrier.

this of course is notwithstanding your seeming complete lack of understanding of the legal process and the scope of a legal ruling.

Since I have read the advisory ruling your spurious use of erga omnes does not a case make.
It must be an indication of the desperate need to validate the parroting of the specious propaganda that the occupation itself is illegal.

Here's the actual majority opinion.

PLEASE POINT OUT TO US ALL WHERE IT STATES THAT THE OCCUPATION ITSELF IS ILLEGAL. And perhaps after you have failed to do so, you can actually find a ruling on the legality/illegality of the occupation itself by any recognized international judicial source.

It about time you started putting up or shutting up with an appropriate humble apology for attempting to propagate a blatant untruth.

(bye the bye - I am more than prepared to humbly apologize to both you and the community if you can prove me wrong, Can you say the same?)

 

So far as I can tell, the occupation in light that there is no rulingfrom a qualified body that it is illegal, is legal.

 

I can say with 100% Certainty that if it was the United States that was the country that was being now and then attacked by Rockets and the like in the manner Israel has been from Gaza....we would go it there and obliterate the area.

Israel has shown great restraint as far as this is concerned.

AboveAlpha

 

......

 

People tend to ignore the facts that Israel had multiple Arab states invading it and this happened several times. Nasser spent Billions of Egyptian Treasure attempting to destroy Israel and as I think about what the U.S. would do to any country that tried to do the same to it....well...let's just say there would not exist a Palestinian Issue as if it was the U.S....we would not have left anyone on the other side alive.

AboveAlpha