pbel, georgephillip,
et al,
Yes, if it were an "illegal occupation."
(COMMENT)
Be specific, what makes the "occupation" illegal?
The issue has been addressed as an item called PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS (Oslo I) with the CHAPTER 2 - REDEPLOYMENT AND SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS in accordance with
Oslo II.
I was pretty sure that Isreal and the PLO agreed that the outcome of the Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, and borders would be based of further negotiations under the "Permanent Status Negotiations clause."
(FURTHER)
I may be biased. It is hard not to be in today's political climate.
The response on the nature of CI was directed at: georgephillip You are correct, it has little to do with the Occupation.
I can say with great confidence that there is no ally of any consequence and capability, that does not pose a threat to sensitive US Operations, where ever they may be conducted overseas. This includes Israel, but is not limited to Israel. The internal security forces of every nation in the Middle East (and elsewhere) are formidable. And I can say, with great confidence, that nearly every nation, of any capability, interest, or of some consequence, believes that the US conducts either overt, covert, or clandestine collection operations against them; whether or not that is in truth the case. Everybody watches everybody else; friend or foe.
Most Respectfully,
R