The Hamas Charter

Oh my Allah..

Kind of the way we rolled in on sovereign German land in WWII?

Egypt had assembled a massive invasion force. They were waging war.

Oh my Allah..

Kind of the way we rolled in on sovereign German land in WWII?

Egypt had assembled a massive invasion force. They were waging war.
We know they massed their force. No one is denying that. But the fact remains, Israel struck first. Here's another thing to think about, the Israelis knew at the time Egypt would NOT attack!
 
We know they massed their force. No one is denying that. But the fact remains, Israel struck first. Here's another thing to think about, the Israelis knew at the time Egypt would NOT attack!

Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, past President of the International Court of Justice, “What Weight To Conquest?”

“The facts of the June 1967 "Six Day War" demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is indicated by the fact that Israelresponded to Egypt's prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR's use of force inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of UNEF. It is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated. The conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest.”

“(a) A state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense;

"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;

"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.

"... as between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."
 
Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, past President of the International Court of Justice, “What Weight To Conquest?”

“The facts of the June 1967 "Six Day War" demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is indicated by the fact that Israelresponded to Egypt's prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR's use of force inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of UNEF. It is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated. The conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest.”

“(a) A state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense;

"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;

"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.

"... as between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."
Israel provoked Jordan by bull-dozing its way to their water wells.
 
We know they massed their force. No one is denying that. But the fact remains, Israel struck first. Here's another thing to think about, the Israelis knew at the time Egypt would NOT attack!

Israel went in and crushed the invasion before they crossed the border - but the Muslims struck first by assembling a massive war machine.

Again, if you point a gun at your neighbor, even if you're in your yard, he has every right to shoot you dead - in fact would be a fool not to.
 
Israel went in and crushed the invasion before they crossed the border - but the Muslims struck first by assembling a massive war machine.

Again, if you point a gun at your neighbor, even if you're in your yard, he has every right to shoot you dead - in fact would be a fool not to.
Are you saying Egypt had no right assembling an army? On their own soil? According to international law, you cannot attack first unless the threat is immanent. And in this case, the threat was not immanent. That includes frontier incidents.
 
Are you saying Egypt had no right assembling an army? On their own soil? According to international law, you cannot attack first unless the threat is immanent. And in this case, the threat was not immanent. That includes frontier incidents.

There is no such thing as "international law."

The one world dictatorship you fantasize over doesn't exist.

Egypt pointed a loaded gun at their neighbor.
 
Maybe he was just showing off his new Colt?

Arab supremacists' chest beating tends to quickly carry away too far,
right before the whining about getting humiliated...

"If you want to shoot, shoot, don't talk"

 
Arab supremacists' chest beating tends to quickly carry away too far,
right before the whining about getting humiliated...

"If you want to shoot, shoot, don't talk"

It's a little hard pointing the finger at someone else and calling them the "supremacist", when you are the occupier.
 

Forum List

Back
Top