Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Illegal annexation of the west bank ruled by the UN to be illegal under international law.

Not ruled; advised. ICJ advisories are non-binding. Israel’s annexation of the West Bank, which was ceded to them through negotiated agreement with Jordan, is legal under both Jordanian and Israeli law and no other law applies because no other sovereignty applies.

The ICJ ruling that the United States “unlawfully” annexed Alaska or Hawaii would have similar import: literally none whatsoever. The simple fact is that borders move and land changes hand and the ICJ doesn’t have the authority to say what’s what.

We do not live in a pre world war 2 political order anymore

Israel’s claim to the lands of Judea and Samaria is based on agreements that predate WWII. Israel as a nation is older than several of the countries that make up the European Union, but nobody says that Germany unlawfully “annexed” West Berlin.

Under international law, a people under occupation by a foreign government have the right to armed resistance

Rape and murder of children aren’t “resistance”, hope that helps

What numbers?

Again there’s no source for civilian casualties in Gaza. Any numbers you hear are estimates based on formulas; they’re not tallies of bodies.

The IDF’s estimates don’t make them look “bad.” It makes them look like the most moral, most professional army on Earth.

Removed by mod

Why wouldn’t they be at war with Gaza when they were attacked by Gazans?

What part of war isn’t bad?

Must be sharing the feelings of average Germans at the end of the war when they had to face up to what they had allowed to go on.

The ones who hadn’t died in the war, you mean. Or do you also think “German” is a word that can’t mean “soldier”?

Famine is present in some areas of Gaza and is imminent in other areas. As UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned more than two months ago, “1.1 million people in Gaza are facing catastrophic hunger

What does this statement mean? It certainly can’t mean 1.1 million people have been unable to acquire food and eat it, because they have and have continued to.

This occurred through the imposition of a total siege over Gaza that involved completely closing the three border crossing points, Rafah, Kerem Shalom and Erez, from 8 October 2023 for extended periods

It is not a crime of war to besiege an enemy city, nor to deny an enemy people access to a nation they wish to attack.

What’s the source for your claim that 52,000 civilians died in Gaza?

You’re doing what’s known as “guilty-before-proven-innocent”.

Wars don’t only kill the guilty.

Again, what’s your source for 52,000 civilian casualties in Gaza?

Israel’s relentless war on Gaza has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians, at least 16,456 of them children

Is 16,500 “most” of 42,000? Does that math math?

Removed by mod

Doing what? Fighting a war they didn’t start?

Too late, he already admitted I was right

Which of these is the source for your claim of 52,000 civilian deaths in Gaza? Because a quick review shows none of them say that.

But most of them arent children.

I accept the 42,000 casualty figure, but there’s no source for how many are civilians. Certainly some are! But the mistake you’re making is that you’re reading “42,000 Palestinians” and some brainworm is causing you to interpret that to mean “42,000 civilians.” But that’s not what that means - Hamas fighters and unassociated militants are Palestinians, too.

The Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on October 7 killed at least 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals

Literally from your article. Did you read it?