Hamas escapes almost all accountability for a war it started in a malicious act of depravity.

[Billo_Really]

no, 242 doesn't say that. Do I need to link to the statement of explanation and intent by one of the writers of 242?

Security Council Resolution 242 According to its Drafters

The main drafters of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 — Lord Caradon, Eugene Rostow, Arthur Goldberg and Baron George-Brown — explain that Resolution

www.camera.org

and land taken in a defensive war doesn't have tyo be given back. If you recall, I believe we went through this and I showed the various maritime laws that were violated by Egypt when they closed the straits of Tiran and how that was an act of war. Do I have to repost the same stuff I showed you already?

I've already told you, your bullshit takes on "the" and "and" are horseshit examples of manipulation. In no way shape or form does 242 allow you to keep any of that land. It goes against the entire meaning of the UN Charter.

Not a single country on the planet agrees with your horseshit answer. Not one! So are we supposed to think Israel is right and the entire world is wrong? Fuck that! You are wrong! Period!

 

[Billo_Really]

Obviously, you have never read 242. It addresses Israel and the Arab nations party to the Six Day War, not the so called Palestinians, and it calls for Israel to withdraw to safe and secure borders, which was accomplished to the satisfaction of Egypt and Jordan, the parties that lost the land to Israel, in their respective peace treaties with Israel.

You cannot hold onto land seized in a war. That's what 242 says. Was it okay for Germany to annex Poland? No, it wasn't. And it's not okay for Israel to hold onto land it seized in the '67 war.

 

[Billo_Really]

I don't know if that's true.

Correct.

Correct.

I always say to people that may disagree with my comment about no country on the planet that recognizes Israel's right to that land, then pony one up!

Name me one country that has publicly stated Israel's right to that land. Just one!

 

[Shusha]

I'm sorry, there isn't a single country on the planet that agrees with you.

I'm not certain that is true. The "world" calls for the creation of a new State of Palestine in a loosely-defined territory with no determined borders. The thing that is delaying the creation of a State of Palestine is this lack of a defined territory (one of requirements for statehood). The territory which was the Mandate for Palestine has never legally been divided. It remains one territorial unit in law. The only way for that territorial unit to be divided is with the permission of the sovereign of that territory (Israel) in a treaty.

You really should read UNSC 242. It mentions "territorial integrity". The reason why the acquisition of territory in war is prohibited is because such acts of aggression disrupt the territorial integrity of sovereign States. Territorial integrity is one of the most recognized concepts in international law.

UN resolution 242 specifically states Israel needs to get the fuck off that land! They have no sovereign title to that land.

Here are two relevant sections (emphasis mine):

1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

2. Affirms further the necessity
(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area ;
(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area,

So, a couple questions for you:

Which States were in the area at the time?
Are all claims of belligerency between the States in the area terminated?
Does each State in the area recognize the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the others?

Honest answers to these questions will demonstrate that 242 has been brought into effect and is no longer relevant today.

That land was seized in the '67 war and you cannot hold onto land seized in a war, you fucking Nazi!

No, that territory was reclaimed from belligerent occupiers (Jordan and Egypt), and brought under the control of the sovereign (Israel).

 

[Shusha]

You cannot hold onto land seized in a war. That's what 242 says. Was it okay for Germany to annex Poland? No, it wasn't. And it's not okay for Israel to hold onto land it seized in the '67 war.

Your hypocrisy is showing.

Was it okay for Germany Jordan to annex Poland Israel? No, it wasn't.

 

[Billo_Really]

"Dust" is a figure of speech. If, for example, the Palestinians overrun Israel and allot the Zionists a piece of the Sinai to call "Israel" then it will effectively be nothing but dust.

Israel cannot be defeated militarily. It is the big dog on campus and no other country in the ME has the capability of taking Israel out. They are the biggest military power in the ME and then when you throw in the US umbrella...

 

[rosends]

I've already told you, your bullshit takes on "the" and "and" are horseshit examples of manipulation. In no way shape or form does 242 allow you to keep any of that land. It goes against the entire meaning of the UN Charter.

So what the actual authors say about the words they chose is BS because you know better than they do. Brilliant.

Not a single country on the planet agrees with your horseshit answer. Not one! So are we supposed to think Israel is right and the entire world is wrong? Fuck that! You are wrong! Period!

No, you are and I showed you the various laws. But instead of dealing with facts you just keep stamping your feet and repeating yourself as if the number of times you say something changes reality.

 

[GLASNOST]

Name me one country that has publicly stated Israel's right to that land. Just one!

I don't know. The US?

 

[toomuchtime_]

You cannot hold onto land seized in a war. That's what 242 says. Was it okay for Germany to annex Poland? No, it wasn't. And it's not okay for Israel to hold onto land it seized in the '67 war.

Again, you obviously haven't read 242.

 

[GLASNOST]

Israel cannot be defeated militarily.

I do not agree.

..... no other country in the ME has the capability of taking Israel out.

Maybe.

They are the biggest military power in the ME

Presumably.

and then when you throw in the US umbrella...

That's a mistake. If you include the US then you've shot yourself in the foot in your previous statement.

 

[MJB12741]

Murder, rape and kidnapping were the consequences of Hamas crossing the border.

The current war would not be occurring but for Hamas, almost certainly at the behest of its Iranian mentors, committing such widespread atrocities, in the certain knowledge that the Israeli response would be massive.

And why did Iran choose to push Hamas last October?

At this time, US diplomacy appeared to be succeeding in encouraging Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to recognise Israel.

This would be catastrophic for Iranian ambitions in the region.

So, let us be clear.

The Iranians in particular bear enormous responsibility as an openly terrorist regime for all that has happened in the Gaza strip.

They are a regime dedicated to creating maximum turmoil in the region.

This is part of the regime's survival strategy in Teheran.

If anyone should doubt Iranian involvement, then a glance at the presence of Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Syria in liaison with the Hezbollah terrorist grouping will remove any doubts.

https://www.skynews.com.au/insights-and-analysis/hamas-escapes-almost-all-accountability-for-a-war-it-started-in-a-malicious-act-of-depravity/news-story/c9897152f06e1d5ef87fa7ceaaad589b

All so true. And the irony is the Palestinians blame Israel instead of Hamas for the desperation.

 

[Billo_Really]

I'm not certain that is true. The "world" calls for the creation of a new State of Palestine in a loosely-defined territory with no determined borders. The thing that is delaying the creation of a State of Palestine is this lack of a defined territory (one of requirements for statehood). The territory which was the Mandate for Palestine has never legally been divided. It remains one territorial unit in law. The only way for that territorial unit to be divided is with the permission of the sovereign of that territory (Israel) in a treaty.

You really should read UNSC 242. It mentions "territorial integrity". The reason why the acquisition of territory in war is prohibited is because such acts of aggression disrupt the territorial integrity of sovereign States. Territorial integrity is one of the most recognized concepts in international law.



Here are two relevant sections (emphasis mine):

1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

2. Affirms further the necessity
(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area ;
(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area,

So, a couple questions for you:

Which States were in the area at the time?
Are all claims of belligerency between the States in the area terminated?
Does each State in the area recognize the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the others?

Honest answers to these questions will demonstrate that 242 has been brought into effect and is no longer relevant today.



No, that territory was reclaimed from belligerent occupiers (Jordan and Egypt), and brought under the control of the sovereign (Israel).

What part of "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from the occupied territories" do you not understand?

 

[expat500]

What part of "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from the occupied territories" do you not understand?

You can’t occupy something that doesn’t exist.

 

[Billo_Really]

Your hypocrisy is showing.

Was it okay for Germany Jordan to annex Poland Israel? No, it wasn't.

Except that is not Israeli land! It has never been Israeli land. And it will never be Israeli land.

Israel was not given that land in the Mandate and no one is going to give it to Israel now.

Name me one country on the planet that recognizes Israel's right to that land? Just one! Name one country that has come out and publicly stated Israel's right to that land.

 

[Billo_Really]

You can’t occupy something that doesn’t exist.

Are you saying the West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza and East Jerusalem do not exist?

 

[Shusha]

What part of "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from the occupied territories" do you not understand?

The part where you quoted the text incorrectly?

 

[expat500]

Are you saying the West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza and East Jerusalem do not exist?

Are you really that thick?

 

[Shusha]

Except that is not Israeli land! It has never been Israeli land. And it will never be Israeli land.

You are not being clear here. Are you trying to argue that no territory is under Israeli sovereignty? Or are you trying to argue that the territory that was the Mandate for Palestine has been legally apportioned between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine? If the latter, please provide the date and document which divided that territory.

Israel was not given that land in the Mandate and no one is going to give it to Israel now.

The Mandate for Palestine is one territorial unit. It has never been divided. When Israel declared independence the territory in its entirety passed to her following the requirements laid out in the treaties.

 

[Billo_Really]

So what the actual authors say about the words they chose is BS because you know better than they do. Brilliant.

No, you are and I showed you the various laws. But instead of dealing with facts you just keep stamping your feet and repeating yourself as if the number of times you say something changes reality.

What you provided was some bullshit attempt to cherrypick parts of 242 to make it seem it was saying something other than it was stating. I completely reject your bullshit attempt at redefining what 242 said.

The meaning of 242 was clear. It is inadmissible to hold onto land seized in a war and Israel needs to get its fucking, immoral army out of the OPT.

 

[expat500]

It is inadmissible to hold onto land seized in a war

Seized from whom?