By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 23 July 2008
Edit Thread
superchunk said:
Kasz216 said:

Do you want to argue morals or legality here?

If your arguement is based on international law you need to follow the mandates of the international community. If someone attacks someone else because they were screwed out of their money by a lawyer. They still go to jail... they still pay a penalty.

 

 

Your right, legality only.

When Israel fought for its existance in 1948/49 it gained land that was immediately granted by the international community since it hadn't existed yet as a Nation and was not bound by those specific laws.

However, in 1967 Israel was a State that had specific legal borders. Upon the end of that war it has unilaterally claimed land outside of their legally owned land. Regardless if that land was part of a "State" it is still not part of their land. Therefore it was still illegal and against UN laws.

Also, the reason why older UN resolutions have various terms have been rejected on certain resolutions had nothing to do with their legality. It had to do with US bias and veto powers.

Actually if you look at the law it deals with the adition of lands owned by other states through war... and deals not with the addition of land, but the rule over people of another state or another state in it's entirity... or the removal of people from a state from said land.

Palestine not being a state had no claim via international law... and UN resolutions are simply the interpretation of the itnernational community of the law and what needs to be done to bring things to legality.  Just like the US supreme court it is an interpretation of the laws.