Israelis Should be Proud of Helping Syrians, Says EU

[Billo_Really]

Ok, so prove to me it is illegal to hold on to land gained in a defensive war.
​

First off, it wasn't a defensive war. Israel attacked first.

And second, I do believe you requested this?

The right of conquest is the right of a conqueror to territory taken by force of arms. It was traditionally a principle of international law which has in modern times gradually given way until its proscription after the Second World War when the crime of war of aggression was first codified in the Nuremberg Principles and then finally, in 1974, as a United Nations resolution 3314.

The completion of colonial conquest of much of the world (see the Scramble for Africa), the devastation of World War I and World War II, and the alignment of both the United States and the Soviet Union with the principle of self-determination led to the abandonment of the right of conquest in formal international law. The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact, the post-1945 Nuremberg Trials, the UN Charter, and the UN role in decolonization saw the progressive dismantling of this principle. Simultaneously, the UN Charter's guarantee of the "territorial integrity" of member states effectively froze out claims against prior conquests from this process.

Questions or comments?

 

[Alfalfa]

And move an Enemy Population onto soil (the Golan Heights) captured as spoils of war from that same Syria during the 1967 Six Day War - real estate that is absolutely vital to the continued advantage of the high ground on Israel's northeastern border with enemy Syria - ground that gives Israel the edge, the next time the Syrians try to attack?

Yer a funny guy...

It is illegal to hold onto land seized in a war.

You have the memory of a goldfish.

I explained to you last week it is not illegal if it is done in a defensive war. It is illegal if done in an attacking war. Pay attention.

Baloney

During 1965-7, Israel's armed forces staged numerous provocations along the Israeli-Syrian border area.[39] The pattern was of action and reaction. Israeli armoured tractors, often guarded by police, would start to plow in a disputed area of the DMZ. From its high ground positions, Syria would fire at those advancing,[qt 8][40] and, adopting a new policy,[41] retaliated for Israeli fire at Syrian military positions by firing on civilian settlements in the Hula Valley. Israel would retaliate with raids on Syrian positions, including the use of air power.[qt 8][40] U.N. officials blamed both Israel and Syria for destabilizing the borders.[qt 8] This escalation led the Syrians and the Soviets to believe Israel was planning to overthrow the Syrian regime using military force.[39] On April 7, 1967, a serious incident broke out between Israel and Syria, after Israel had begun to cultivate more westerly tracts in the Ha'on sector of the demilitarized zone.[42] Israel took military action against Syria, and eventually both sides employed artillery, tanks, and mortars.[43] During this clash Israeli airstrikes were launched a few miles from Damascus. Israel bombed both Syrian border villages and military targets. After several hours the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization managed to arrange a cease-fire. Following this confrontation Arab governments pledged their support to Syria.[44]
On May 7, 1967, the Israeli cabinet authorized a limited retaliatory raid against Syria in case Syria failed to heed Israel's public warnings and non-coercive methods failed.[45]

On June 7 and 8, the Israeli leadership debated about whether the Golan Heights should be attacked as well; the attack on Syria was initially planned for June 8, but was postponed for 24 hours. At 3 am on June 9, Syria announced its acceptance of the cease-fire. Despite this, four hours later at 7 am, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan "gave the order to go into action against Syria." Syria had supported the pre-war raids that had helped raise tensions and had routinely shelled Israel from the Heights, so some Israeli leaders wanted to see Syria punished."[149]

So syria had accepted a cease fire offered by israel but israel, intent on gaining the golan heights and wishing to punish syria, went on the offensive, disregarded the cease fire acceptance THEY THEMSELVES OFFERED and started bombing syria.

 

[Jos]

The International Court of Justice,[2] the UN General Assembly[3] and the United Nations Security Council regards Israel as the "Occupying Power".[5] The term "Occupying Power" has taken on a precise legal meaning following the International Court of Justice advisory opinion in July 2004 that Israel is occupying this territory in violation of international law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

 

[Sally]

The International Court of Justice,[2] the UN General Assembly[3] and the United Nations Security Council regards Israel as the "Occupying Power".[5] The term "Occupying Power" has taken on a precise legal meaning following the International Court of Justice advisory opinion in July 2004 that Israel is occupying this territory in violation of international law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

Joey is going to tell us what this has to do with the Israelis helping Syrians. Why not tell us, Joey, how the Iranians are helping the Syrians? Is it by way of their supplying Hezbollah with weapons to kill more Syrian people?

 

[proudveteran06]

It is illegal to hold onto land seized in a war.

Not for israel...

Ok, so prove to me it is illegal to hold on to land gained in a defensive war.
​

It's not " illegal" to start a War to steal land not respecting borders but it's " illegal" for the Country defending themselves to keep anything they get in their quest for Freedom??

Anti-Semitism of the "Church Fathers"

Antisemitism in History: From the Early Church to 1400


Some Goyim can dish it out but can't take it

 

[Kondor3]

So sue them...

"Mister Marshal has made his decision. Now, let him enforce it."

They will use the court-judgment as a supplement to their stock of toilet paper...

A sensible use for such things, in this context...

Nice of you to shit on the memory of Holocaust victims.

So, let me get this straight...

The Israelis are shitting on the memory of their own Holocaust victims, by retaining a piece of land that they obtained as a spoil of war after the Syrians had massed troops along the Israeli border in preparation for a multi-pronged attacked by multiple Arab armies, with the avowed goal of destroying Israel?

The Israelis are shitting on the memory of their own Holocaust victims, by retaiining a piece of land that gives them the high-ground and prevents Israel from potentially being overrun from the northeast?

Is that your assertion?

Do you have some kind of credible and statistically significant opinion-poll sampling the perceptions of Holocaust Survivors, in connection with Israel's retentiion of the Golan Heights?

Oh, and, by the way, what does any of this have to do with Israeli relief-aid to the nearby border-region Syrian victims of their civil war?

 

[Billo_Really]

So, let me get this straight...

The Israelis are shitting on the memory of their own Holocaust victims...

That's right! Because international laws were created, in part, to prevent another Holocaust.

So by not honoring international laws, you are not honoring the memory of Holocaust victims and
have effectively rendered their lives to have died in vain.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Rubbish. Comparing the plight of syrian refugees involved in a civil war..."

Does anybody else feel like dragging out little friend up-and-down the metaphorical basketball court for a while to school him in (non-Coyote -focused) analogies, and similar and even larger-scale examples of the global community refusing entry to refugees as a result of a long-standing civil war or natural disaster or other warfare or tragedy? I'm on a bit of a tight schedule this morning, I don't think our colleague liked my dead-on-target counterpointing, earlier, and this bit of schooling is probably going to take a while for the point to sink home, if, indeed, it can be sunk-home, at all.

 

[Kondor3]

So, let me get this straight...

The Israelis are shitting on the memory of their own Holocaust victims...

That's right! Because international laws were created, in part, to prevent another Holocaust.

So by not honoring international laws, you are not honoring the memory of Holocaust victims and
have effectively rendered their lives to have died in vain.

And we can park THAT 'judgment call' right alongside your OTHER spectacular one earlier this week...

----------

...in which you said that if you were the Israeli Prime Minister in 1967, you would have let the Arab Air Forces cross into Israeli airspace, only seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in Israel, and be willing to suffer hundreds or thousands of Israeli civilian casualties (bombing of Tel Aviv, et al), and to allow your own airfields and armored formations and troop concentrations to be bombed, and possibly crippled to the point where you risked defeat and annihilation, all so that you could say that you obeyed international law (link available upon request, when I return later today)...

----------

...we have a picture of a colleague whose judgment-calls and pronouncements may be reasonably argued to be considerably disconnected from Reality and Practicality and objectivity, in the context of the conduct of Israel and its best interests and survival.

Consequently, you're going to have to forgive me if I don't take your judgments and pronouncements as seriously as I once did in this sort of context; which includes your opinion in the matter of the Golan Heights in a Syrian-refugees subcontext... which, if followed, would work greatly to the detriment of Israel and its security. The Israelis are better off using their own judgment rather than yours.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Makes me sick how some on here think Israel should just lie down and take bashings. Israel has to defend itself from aggressors all around. Countries know not to mess with Israel.