Israel Settlements a violation of international law?

Do the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories of Palestine violate international law?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 82.4%

  • No

    Votes: 3 17.6%

  • I don't know / Je ne sais pas

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    17
Ryan Miller

Ryan Miller

Active member
Throughout recent times, we've seen Israel always come into a tight mess with Palestine. We've seen these two come into conflict with each other as we've seen in the Six Days War (a war the involved Israel and Palestine). Recently, there has been a huge controversy about Israel settlements in occupied Palestine territory. Some say that this is a violation of international law while some say that it isn't because Israel deserves Palestine territory as they've won a war about it. What do you think? Do you think that the settlements of Israelis are a violation of international law or are these actions justified as Israel deserves Palestine territory and have the right to have settlers there.

 
A little note: I've been a little bit off lately as I'm busy with many ongoing projects. I'll certainly continue with the Justified series in a couple of days as I have to continue research on topics. Probably during the weekend where I'll definitely be back on track, I hope.

 
I don't see why there even needs to be a Jewish state, and if so, why they aren't putting it in one of the countries that think Jews need their own state. Taking someone else's holy city is not very nice.

And just the fact that they have Jerusalem is good enough. They don't need to annex the rest of Palestine.

 
Ryan Miller said:
Throughout recent times, we've seen Israel always come into a tight mess with Palestine. We've seen these two come into conflict with each other as we've seen in the Six Days War (a war the involved Israel and Palestine). Recently, there has been a huge controversy about Israel settlements in occupied Palestine territory. Some say that this is a violation of international law while some say that it isn't because Israel deserves Palestine territory as they've won a war about it. What do you think? Do you think that the settlements of Israelis are a violation of international law or are these actions justified as Israel deserves Palestine territory and have the right to have settlers there.
Click to expand...
I say that Israel herself is a violation of international law since she wouldn't exist if the UN hadn't STOLEN land from surrounding countries to create this fake nation. They had no rights or claims to the land, they were just given it by the UN. as far as "occupied" Palestinian lands? Sorry, the Palestinians aren't occupying anything, it is their own land. When you take into account the first part of hsi response, the Palestinians weren't defeated by anyone.

 
Brits weren't the owners of the land. They merely had a mandate to govern it after the Ottoman Empire collapsed after WW1. When the mandate ended the Brits just pulled out. That was in 1948 I believe. And right after that Israel was DOE-d.

 
The sun is yellow, the sky is blue, Israel is occupying a territory belonging to others, all questions with only one clear answer.

If it was the opposite situation with the arabs invading Israel dear Uncle Sam would have already led a coalition of western nations in a war "to bring peace, justice and freedom" and maybe some new pipeline, we all know that it's true, but many of us don't care.

 
I mean if manifest destiny was justified then why not the expansion of israel?? 
They are effectively simmilar like taking other's land by force and staying there just because you are stronger than them.

(although don't get me wrong I personally never support this nor do I support what India doing in Kashmir those are simmilar things like using your power/technology to do all the bad stuffs) 

 
Bhuto said:
I mean if manifest destiny was justified then why not the expansion of israel?? 
They are effectively simmilar like taking other's land by force and staying there just because you are stronger than them.

(although don't get me wrong I personally never support this nor do I support what India doing in Kashmir those are simmilar things like using your power/technology to do all the bad stuffs) 
Click to expand...


Manifest destiny modernized the people who were conquered, gave their children a better life, and benefited everyone else around the world. Similar with most forms of colonization.

Israel's expansion just ZIed a lot of places including historical sites, indirectly fed the instability of the region, accomplished nothing except the invention of Krav Maga.

 
Well @Rin how can you claim that what we use these days is only form of modernization I mean do you think throwing nuke is a sign of a modernized country (I think modernized is a bit of excess word it can't even be a sign of a civilized country).

Honestly if this missile/arm race among the nations is a sign of modernization then I don't want to be modernize. 

 

But again it is obviously one side of the coin there are a lot of good things modernization provided to us but my question is, 
Is it really necessary to invade a country to modernize it ?? Also what is the correct definition of modernization according to you ?

 
Back
Top