Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
In 1967 Egypt, Syria and Jordan whose leaders had never ceased to call for the destruction of Israel (up till then) massed hundreds of thousands of troops on Israels borders and blockaded the straits of Tiran (to the south of Israel) and blocked their only access to the east. This was seen as an act of war, and Jewish leaders fearful of the massive troop concentrations on their borders with not much in the way of geography seperating them, decided to strike first rather than to wait for the hostile nations to strike. Israel defeated the Arabs and came to control the Gaza strip and the west bank and the oil rich fields of the Sinai desert. By nternational law, Israel had every right to keep the lands that they won from the defeated Arab Armies and count them as annexed territories. Israel did not do this, but then again they did not withdraw their armies either. It was thought that by holding these lands they could use them as a buffer between the small state of Israel and the much larger surrounding Arab states. The defeated Arab league still did not ask for peace and in fact maintained that they were still atr war with Israel.
|
A lot of what you posted is a great (slanted a bit) Cliff's Notes version of history. But, they were NOT entitled to keep ANY land by international law. I don't mean to cross-post here, as I also attempt to point this out to you regarding this on another thread. It's a mistaken assumption you've made before. Otherwise, the UN would not have sanctioned action against Iraq during the gulf war. To drive home my point, here's the UN Resolution regarding Kuwait, a recent act affirming my assertion that sovereignty of a nation is permanent, and will be "restored" if taken away by another sovereign.
http://www.lexicorient.com/e.o/un687.htm
[ 10-28-2002, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]