Israel is justified in attacking gaza

Since this is the final round and we haven't even really touched the main topic of this debate, I really just need to spend this argument showing how everything you said in the previous argument is either a willful lie on your part, or absolute ignorance. First you quote "Israeli writer Benny Morris in his book 'Expulsion of the Palestinians'". Benny Morris never wrote a book "Expulsion of the Palestinians." Nur Masalha did write such a book, although it basically contradicts all first hand accounts from newspapers around the world at that time. Now why would you write this as from "The Israeli Writer Benny Morris" to give off the impression that this is a widely held view? Error on your part??? Deceit?? This has been your motif throughout this debate. Consistent lies. And of course this quote from Ben Gurion is a lie as well. There never was a policy of ethnic cleansing and, after the war 300,000 Palestinians became Israel citizens, of which there descendants number around 1.5 million. Pretty bad ethnic cleansing Job if you ask me. "Ben-gurion and his policies of mass ethnic cleansing were what brought arab rejection in the end." There is no indication of this from ANY SOURCE ANYWHERE. Again, willful deceit, or just ignorance. Here is an actual quote from Arab League Secretary General Hazam Pasha in 1947 in response to the partition plan: "The Arab world is not in a compromising mood. It's likely... that your plan is rational and logical, but the fate of nations is not decided by rational logic. Nations never concede; they fight. You won't get anything by peaceful means or compromise. You can, perhaps, get something, but only by the force of your arms. We shall try to defeat you. I am not sure we'll succeed, but we'll try. We were able to drive out the Crusaders, but on the other hand we lost Spain and Persia. It may be that we shall lose Palestine. But it's too late to talk of peaceful solutions." It is clear from every first hand account and second hand account that the partition plan was rejected b/c of a refusal to allow a Jewish State to even exist. "Once again, egypt and jordan are irrelevant to this subject. They have nothing to do with this. Keep it simple." I love this line. Of course they are irrelevant to you, because you have NO answer for why the Palestinians did not try to establish a state during those 19 years, and that would mean that when they suddenly do want their own state when the land is controlled by Israel, would have to mean they have ulterior motives i.e. the destruction of the Jewish State. "Jordan did not kill thousands of innocent pals." Should you really even be debating?? Do you know anything about the middle east at all? http://en.wikipedia.org... I know I am not being civil... but your willful distortion is just aggravating. "I have already proven w/ several sources that the PLO and Arafat accepted the two state solution." Do you even read anything I say? I said the PLO accepted the two state solution (although there were reservations on the part of Israel that this was merely a stage that would allow them to destroy all of Israel as per their 10 point plan in 1974 as quoted in previous arguments) What you HAVE NOT SHOWN obviously is that HAMAS, the currently elected government of the Palestinian people, accepted the two state solution. And that is because they have not. You have LIED about them signing the Arab charter calling for two states, WHEN They did not, and you have LIED about them wanting a two state permanent solution when there has been NO SUCH THING. "'We also have statements by Both Syria and Egypt stating their intentions to destroy all of Israel.' Yes, but you have NOT A SINGLE SOURCE, that the palestinians, intended to do the same." Except of course the Hamas charter... oh and every speech by any member of Hamas... oh and tons of speeches by Arafat in arabic... yeah... except for those. "All of this was stated in UN res. 242 and is acknowledged by intl law." NO. the quote was "on the whole of the soil of their homeland" i.e. NO ISRAEL. This is not was 242 says. "I already explained to you the interpretation of the hamas charter. " Your only "explanation" was quote from the Washington Post where Hamas spokesmen refused to recognize Israel, and refused to give up any claim to the entire area of Palestine. This explains a charter calling for the "Death of Jews" and the destruction of Israel?? "Israel MUST and has been DEMANDED by intl law to give it back." International law DOES allow for the negotiations of territory acquired in war to be negotiated back for a peaceful resolution. That is what Israel did. War does not work that way. Your enemies cannot try and destroy you and then when you acquire territory, just give it back with your enemy still wanting your destruction. It doesnt work that way. International law allows for ceasefire lines as a pre-condition for peaceful negotiations. Israel has every legal right to hold on to that land until their are assured peace. "'agrees to give the Palestinians limited self rule' WHEN??! Do the pals have this? NO." Yes they do http://news.bbc.co.uk... This has been confirmed by independent agencies. they operate their own police force and their own courts. Limited self rule. "Arafat in 2000 DID ACCEPT the 2000 peace plan. This was proven even as he shook hands w/ rabin in front clinton in thw white house lawn." This has to be the most aggravating of all paragraphs in how much it shows a lack of knowledge. Rabin and Arafat did not shake hands in 2000 after the 2000 peace deal. This would be hard b/c Rabin was dead. There never was any handshaking at 2000 b/c Arafat never accepted the Israeli peace proposals. As your source from Kristof clearly says he NEVER made a counter offer, and never gave any commitment to any peace deal. This entire paragraph, is a lie. "Hamas accepts two states" None of your sources state this. Not one. At most they have agreed to a long term truce, but REFUSE to give up on their goal to establish Palestine on the entire territory!! Not just pre-1967 borders!! Is this willful deceit? Ignorance?? Ability to confuse yourself? "By the way, Dershowitz's book is a proven fraud. He playgarized (sic) from several different sources. He has no credibility." Yeah... except that he's a tenured professor at Harvard University arguably the best University in the world. He has been described by Newsweek as America's "most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights" and by Corriere della Sera as "America's most famous progressive lawyer." But that won't stop people who disagree with him on Israel from trying to smear him. "Israel has given NOTHING to the palestinians. If it did, PROVE IT. The pals dont have to give anthing (sic) to anyone. they are not the ones who grabbed all the land. they are legally entitled to what intl law says." As previously proven, Israel HAS given the Palestinians limited self rule (their have their own police, their own elections, and their own court system). And the Pals DO have to do something. Under international law you DO NOT have to return land if it will harm your security. Aside from the fact that Israel conquered the land from Jordan and Egypt and not the Palestinians... who have since relinquished their claim, so it is hard to argue why this land should be returned under international law to the palestinians if there never was a land to begin with. "Meir asks Jordan not to fight" Your source: That same morning, Israel sent a message to Jordan's leader King Hussein via the US State Department, the UN and the British Foreign Office, saying that, despite the outbreak of war, it would not attack the West Bank if Jordan maintained quiet on that front. Jordan ignored Israel's appeal to avoid conflict.