And can you expand on the point here? Yes, it’s occupied. We all know this. It’s the “occupied territories.” The region hasn’t become normalized since the war. The Sinai was returned to Egypt, but there isn’t anyone to whom the West Bank can be “returned.” It isn’t part of Jordan. It isn’t part of anything. So, yes, it’s under belligerent occupation. We all know that, and nobody likes it, but how is it “illegal,” as you have declared?
More to the point, even if it were illegal…what is to be done about it? How is it to be ended?
How is it illegal? Where do you want to start? How about the occupying power have no intention of leaving and are building all over the occupied lands?
And it could have been ended by Israel fucking off out of the occupied territories and allowing a viable Palestinian state to be formed. This is the consensus position of the international community and one which even Israel has been paying lip service to for the last twenty years. But now we’re off to South Africa instead.
Ahhh, the “aftermath of WW2” exception to the “no occupation” rule. Note that there is no “aftermath of the 6-Day War” exception. The “aftermath” rule – which apparently exists only in Dick Dastardly’s brain – applies only to occupations besides those of Israel.
I’m sure most people will be able to spot the difference. One occupation was an inevitable consquence of the war to defeat Nazism and set up a functioning, civil, democratic society in the ruins of the former Nazi state. After the occupation ended the US even spent billions of dollars in today’s money in building up the economy of the former Nazi state in various kinds of humanitarian and economic aid.
And then look what israel has done to the occupied territories in defiance of the international community and various United nations resolutions.
Yes of course, because one occupation was by Israel (and therefore illegal) while occupations by the United States; the USSR; Turkey; Armenia; Egypt; Jordan; etc. are not by Israel – therefore they are not automatically illegal.
OK, you have repeated variations of this in enough posts that it can no longer be overlooked as rhetorical hyperbole. Either cite the UN or ICC saying that any Israeli policy regarding Palestinians is automatically illegal, or drop this ridiculous straw man. There’s not much point in debating someone whose base assumption is a paranoid fantasy.
It’s a reasonable – if slightly exaggerated – conclusion based on statements from the likes of Dick Dastardly. For example, when discussing Israel, he asserts that military occupations are “illegal.” When it’s pointed out to him that the U.S. occupied Japan after World War II, suddenly an exception to this rule appears – it was the aftermath of World War II.
It’s obvious that the likes of Dick Dastardly have more than one set of standards for determining what is “illegal,” with a special set of standards for Israel.
Of course Israel’s detractors are often unwilling to admit that they have a double-standard, but it’s still there.
I wouldn’t want to favourably contrast the behaviour of the Allies after WW2 with that of Israel. Remember the Allies included the Soviets, who mass-deported the population of parts of what had been East Germany in one of the great humanitarian disasters of the 20th century - millions were displaced and many of them killed - and simply re-arranged the borders of Poland and Germany to suit themselves.
But then, if you won’t accept Canadian treatment of native americans as a humanitarian issue, perhaps you won’t accept this one, either.
What specific standard of law are you citing? What is the time horizon? Does Italy have to give Rome back to Austria; does the U.S. have to give California back; etc. etc.? Is Vietnam “illegally” occupying “South Vietnam?” Is China illegally occupying Tibet? What about the Kashmir crisis?
Nations have been conquering each other for a damn long time. Where is the rule of law that says it’s illegal?
I think everyone agrees that the situation is bad. The occupation does not serve the overall causes of peace, freedom, or justice. At the same time, how can Israel be expected to negotiate in good faith with entities who refuse to acknowledge its right to existence? Negotiations need to involve a true meeting of minds; both sides have to make some very basic offers, and the offers must be credible.
So, hell yes, I want the occupation to end. But I want it to end well… And I don’t see that it is “illegal.” There are lots of things that are perfectly legal, which we don’t like.
You can look at each and every case and judge each situation. You can start a thread and discuss the various crime of the Soviet Union or whatever but here we’re talking about Israel.
And just look at how you’re talking about Israel! You’re comparing them to countries that have practiced genocide and, on a dead bodycount basis, the most murderous repressive tyrannical regime in history. You’re saying, hey, Israel is no worse than these guys! Israel are supposed to be operating at a higher standard than the ones you’re comparing them to. The only democracy in the Middle East, that sort of thing, you know.
You can certainly make a case. The entire world did that through various UN resolution that I already listed and said building settlements all over the occupied territories is illegal. And if a military occupation has lasted almost half a century and the occupiers are building all over the occupied land at an increasing rate of speed then you can make a good case that they’re not really concerned what the law or anybody else thinks about how long they’re occupying the land, can’t you?
Since the creation of the United Nations the UN has been the forum to deal with these kind of issues. And the UN is pretty clear on how it sees this particular situation.
Actually, both of those nations have behaved far worse than Israel! Israel never massacred entire tribes of natives, nor gave syphilis to its own citizens, or waged offensive war solely for the purpose of annexing land. And, of course, the Soviet Union is so far out there into the realm of pure evil, only a tiny handful of tyrannies come anywhere near it.
Israel is far more law-abiding than the U.S.A., USSR, Great Britain or France – at least at the time of the height of their imperialist aspirations. These days, the U.S., Great Britain, et al are fairly well behaved. And…so is Israel.
