Why / Why not
2007-11-14 18:43:33 · 12 answers · asked by X 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Yes; Israel did not wake up one morning and grab that land. It was taken AFTER they were invaded.
Every single time that Israel has traded "land for peace" ala Neville Chamberlain, the terrorists have used used the land as a staging ground for their attacks.
2007-11-14 19:00:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Until the racist xenophobes who live there learn to respect, there really is no other way to ensure any measure of stability. Israel has repeatedly tried ditching the occupation, often with disastrous results. They pulled out of Gaza and look what happened there.
2016-05-23 05:59:20 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Can you believe the total arrogance of these jewish israelis? They believe anything is permissible. They believe that there are no limits when it comes to their policies! When the American public realizes the truth about the jewish israelis and 9/11 there won't be enough flights out of NYC for all the jews attempting to flee and escape to israel! They ALL contribute to AIPAC and are therefore equally complicit in the crimes of israel!
2007-11-14 22:30:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe there are no Israelis Forces in the Gazza strip at this time!
The only time they enter is in response of terrorist rocket attacks launched into the Sovereign State of Israel.
If the so called legitimate political representatives of the "Palestinian" people were not to busy fighting a mini civil war to see who will be top dog, and who can cream off money to line their own pockets, then more dialog could take place to help resolve this mess.
2007-11-14 19:46:02 · answer #4 · answered by conranger1 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Israel gained this land after it was invaded in an unprovoked war. How can it be occupying it? using that logic it could be said that France is occupying Alsace and Lorraine, a german region that it gained after a war. Is the U.S. occupying california, nevada, Guam? These are all plots of land lost to the U.S. in wars. If those nations didn't want gaza and the west bank to be occupied, then maybe they shouldn't have invaded.
2007-11-14 18:58:32 · answer #5 · answered by Agent Archer 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I actually feel sorry for the Israelis, who have to live there in that worthless region. Only desert. But I guess someone has to support them, surrounded as they are by filthy dirtfarmers.
2007-11-14 21:10:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
First of all, modern Israel exists LEGALLY by mandate from the United Nations. It is almost totally surrounded by nations that have repeatedly sworn to destroy it and who have repeatedly attacked it and to this day continue to slaughter Israeli innocent men, women and children.
Just a little research would reveal that what would some day become the State of Israel was occupied by Jewish people in today's Palestine at least 1,000 years BEFORE the first Arab came wandering by.
Whatever...repeat, WHATEVER Israel does to protect itself in its ancient homeland is justified.
2007-11-14 18:58:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Israel bought that land with their blood.Lets just say you owned a piece of land and your neighbor vandalized your property.So you end up buying your neighbors land to stop the vandalism.Then you say ok,I'm going to rent you this property but you must leave me alone.
One night they decide they don't like you and slash your tires.Would you let them stay,or would you come down hard on them and run them out?
I support Israel because its not them causing all the problems.
2007-11-14 19:26:22 · answer #8 · answered by Ronboy 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
No. Israel is in violation of dozens of UN resolutions. The humanitarian situation is atrocious for Palestinians. Collective punishment is an international war crime.
Israel should have borders and Palestine should be recognized as a state again as mandated by the UN in 1948.
Israelis just voted to seize East Jerusalem, also in violation of UN resolutions. They have no legal right to this land.
Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
http://www.imemc.org/article/51511
2007-11-14 18:53:33 · answer #9 · answered by doug4jets 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
yes
if Us can occupy iraq on the premises that war should be fought on foreign shores, the israel is right to carry war to west bank as it has no place to station its troops on other bank
2007-11-14 18:48:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋