Israel is justified in attacking gaza

Under the UN Partition Plan of 1947, which est. the modern jewish state, it called for palestine and israel. Forget about Jordan and Egypt.The Jews were given all but gaza, the w. bank, and jerusalem. These pieces of territories were granted to the palestinians. In the war of 1967, israel illegally expropriated gaza, the w.bank, and jerusalem. We can argue all day about who started the war, but in reality, this is not necessary. Under the international rules of war, no state can aquire territory as a result by war. To quote Ehud Barak's former foreign minister, Abba Aben, and also author of the book, "Scars of War, Wounds of Peace," he says the following: "It is inadmissible to acquire territory as a result by war; Israel acquired Gaza, the W.Bank and J-lem as a result by war; therefore, it is inadmissible to keep them." That is the fundamental principle of int'l law. Israel occupies them today, therefore, this is an occupation which is illegal as a result. http://daccessdds.un.org... http://www.wrmea.com... http://www.geocities.com... http://www.washington-report.org... There is something clearly wrong w/ your case. The Palestinians, including under hamas, have always recognized and respected the two state solution, further allowing israel to remain a state of the jewish people. I will now list many times in which the Palestinians, regardless of what leadership they were under, recognized the two state solution and everytime israel rejected it. 1. Since the mid-1970s, there's been an international consensus for resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict.It's called a two-state settlement. Israel has to fully withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza and Jerusalem, in accordance with the fundamental principle of international law, cited three times by Mr. Ben-Ami in the book, his book, that it's inadmissible to acquire territory by war. The West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem, having been acquired by war, it's inadmissible for Israel to keep them. They have to be returned. On the Palestinian side and also the side of the neighboring Arab states, they have to recognize Israel's right to live in peace and security with its neighbors. That was the quid pro quo: recognition of Israel, Palestinian right to self-determination in the West Bank and Gaza with its capital in Jerusalem. That's the international consensus. It was voted on every year in the UN. The votes typically something like 160 nations on one side, the United States, Israel and Naru, Palau, Tuvalu, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands on the other side. Now, the Israeli government was fully aware that this was the international consensus, but they were opposed to a full withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza and Jerusalem, of course, and they were opposed to creating a Palestinian state in the Occupied Territories. In 1981, as pressure builds on Israel to reach a diplomatic settlement in the Israel-Palestine conflict, they decide to invade Lebanon in order to crush the P.L.O., because the P.L.O. was on record supporting a two-state settlement. Avner Yaniv, in his book, Dilemmas of Security, he said, ï¿½€œThe main problem for Israel was "the P.L.O.'s peace offensive. They wanted a two-state settlement. Israel did not.ï¿½€ï¿½ And so Israel decides to crush the P.L.O. in Lebanon. It successfully did so. The P.L.O. goes into exile. 2. Clinton parameters (2000)-both the Israelis and the Palestinians have accepted the Clinton parameters with some reservations. Both sides entered reservations on the Clinton parameters. In Clayton Swisher's book, "The Truth at Camp David," he says the following: "Barak sent a ten-page letter of reservations to the Clinton parameters." (pg. 402) 3. Taba talks, Egypt and Camp David (2000-2001)- there were four key issues at Camp David and at Taba. Number one, settlements. Number two, borders. Number three, Jerusalem. Number four, refugees. Let's start with settlements. Under international law, there is no dispute, no controversy. Under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, it's illegal for any occupying country to transfer its population to Occupied Territories. All of the settlements, all of the settlements are illegal under international law. No dispute. The World Court in July 2004 ruled that all the settlements are illegal. everyone, including you, talks about the huge concessions that Barak was willing to make on Jerusalem. But under international law Israel has not one atom of sovereignty over any of Jerusalem. The World Court decision said Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. Now, the Palestinians were willing, to divide Jerusalem roughly in half, the Jewish side to Israel, the Arab side to the Palestinians. The Palestinians were willing to concede 50% ï¿½€" 50% of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank. That was a monumental concession, going well beyond anything that was demanded of them under international law. Israel has not abided by any of these rulings. And then you ask yourself, "why are the pals. killing?" Why did Taba end? According to former professor at dePaul unversity Norman Finkelstein, it officially ended when Barak w/drew his negotiators from the table. Annapolis (2008)- The Pals, under pres. abbas, recognized the two state solution. During this time, Israel's illegal construction of settlements increased at a much rapid pace than ever before (40 times faster). This was a major impediment to the process, therefore, no solution was made. Israel was supposed to evict the settlements in gaza. Gaza, as i have already est. w/o dispute, is occupied pal. territory, and i have proven that already. you cant counter intl law. The reason why the pals keep launching the rockets is because they are under occupation. Once again, i have proven that not only is there an occupation, but that it's illegal. The palestinians have the right to defend itself. "Hamas in particular to "kill Jews" Vey foolish. If this were true, hamas would have been est. many decades ago. Hamas, including in the charter, recognizes and is willing to go back to the 1967 borders. This is what intl law ruled, and hamas abided by that. Hamas has also signed the document that has now been sitting in the arab league for 6 yrs, recognizing the 2 state solution. We can argue about the charter, and i must say, that your evidence regarding its charter is not valid because it comes from israeli sources. It is biased. Come up with something better than that. Hamas has offered long term truces, but israel has rejected them. In the last truce, hamas showed its willingness to maintain peace by not launching a single rocket into israel. israel breaks it on nov. 4 when it goes in and kills 6 militants. Since hamas was dem. elected, it did not send out a single suicide bomber into israel. what does this tell us? "And Qassam rockets have been falling since 2000... well before any "blockade." yes, and there has been an occupation ever since 1948. this is just a simple response. Hamas manufactures its own rockets, regardless of where it gets the material. They arent deadly either. As i have stated, only 21 israelis died from such rockets. over 6000 pals have died: http://www.btselem.org... Israel has given no proof, during or after the war, that hamas used human shields. How would u kno this when no reporters were allowed in? proof on idf bombing civil areas: http://www.time.com... http://www.juancole.com... http://imeu.net... http://www.guardian.co.uk... israel said from the beginning that it gave up ALL of gaza. It never mentioned stages. it said it completely w/drawed. This is a lie.