<<
<< Ummm, if I'm attacked hundreds, no THOUSANDS of times from a land just outside my country... and finally, after the people of that land colluded with every surrounding country to attack me... you can bet your ass I'd take over that land, occupy it, and settle it. >>
In violation of international laws. You don't 'settle' land you have invaded under the color of 'self-defense', at least not with a straight face. You eliminate the threat and give it back (as the US does). And you certainly don't encourage your citizens to build homes on that land at the same time you bull-doze the homes of people who live there and pose no threat to you, under the color of "self-defense". >>
Do the Philippines and Puerto Rico sound familiar?
<< If necessary for security purposes, you maintain these areas as occupied security regions. You don't build "Rolling Hills Estates" and golf-courses there, allowing only your citizens to move in, and with a wink and a nod, claim you have no other choice but to protect your people now that they just 'accidentally' ended-up building a community there (wink wink) and call it "self-defense". You and I both know what that is, and its not "self-defense". If you want to be fundamentally dishonest, be my guest.
Palestinians in the settlement areas largely just want to be left alone, they are caught between terrorist organizations on the one hand who move through their communities in order to launch attacks on Isreal and Isreal on the other hand trying to protect themselves, (and grabbing a handy share of valuable land for their ever-growing population while they can). I don't dispute that Israel has a right to defend itself, but not everything Israel does can possibly be called or justified under the guise of "defense".
Attacks against Israeli citizens have rarely came from any of these settlement areas, they have originated primarily from Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon (where Hamas and Islamic Jihad hang-out).
<< Between 1948 and 1967 Israel did not occupy the so-called "Palestinian" lands. After the 1967 war, they had had enough, and decided to occupy the land to protect their national security. Now, my only question is "why the f'ck did they stop there?" Were I Israel, I'd have kept the entire Sinai Peninsula, and probably half of Jordan and Lebanon just as payment for attacking me not once, but twice, and facilitating thousands of smaller attacks. >>
The Sinai is worthless desert, it cost Israel more to keep it than give it back. Isreal didn't give back the most valuable pieces of real-estate they captured from Jordan and Lebanon - Golan Heights for example. Israel only returned the real-estate that was relatively worthless to them or would prove to be more of a liability than an asset (there is something about having to murder or make refugees out of masses of people already living there that gives some governments pause). >>
As for the rest: f'ck them. The Arabs, both local, and from the surrounding nations made their bed with Israel, now they get to lay in it. How many times does Israel need to take it up the ass before you'll let them take DECISIVE action?
If I was Israel, I'd deport the Arabs, close my borders, and be done with it.
BTW, Gaza and the west bank and the Golan heights are what I was talking about. The rest belongs to Israel, and is no longer considered "occupied lands."
Facebook
Twitter