The "occupying, torturing, oppressing, starving,and denying the existence of an entire nation" would be but a small part of what would happen to the State of Israel if it lost but one war against her neighbors. However, the Palestinians are much better off under Israeli occupation than under the thumb of Egypt and Jordan.

We control their money? We do not mind them having their money providing the pay off their debts to Israeli firms and not use it to murder us as they have been doing. Controlling food, water and medical supplies? If they had invested in infrastructure instead of war they would their own food, water and medical supplies. And the only time the transfer of food and medical supplies is interrupted is when the border crossings are under threat of attack. BUT THEY ARE NEVER STOPPED. We shell them? Yea we shell them, - the armed gungs who try repeatedly to murder our civilians with qassams and Katyushas. Your new definition for occupation is so broad it denies us any form of self-defense. In your world we are not even allowed to defend the borderline – a green line border, from infiltrations. Your worldview sentenced our civilians to brutal death, which makes you a murderer.

my logic is quite simple, and what I'm sayiing applies to occupied peoples. attacks in UK, Spain etc.. are not included in what I say, and don't put words in my posts that I've never said. Now back to the topic: if Palestine was empty, if palestinians didn't exist, if there were no palestinians living under the Israeli nation, then palestinian claims would have been unjustified. But this is hardly the case, and there is a people, ie Israel living in a land that is inhabited by others and this must stop. speaking about victimization, don't try and fool anybody, because Israel is the top (oxymoron?) self-victimizer, while being at the same time 6th nuclear power worldwide.. isn't it strange? even when a soldier is killed in combat, he must be considered innocent, or victim? stop contradicting basic logic, by accepting the very fact of occupation, and imagine for a second to be invaded and occupied by another people. What would be your reaction?

Your statement of legitimacy of attacking an illegally occupying army is strange since Israel has left Gaza a year ago. Is all Israel illegal? Why is the British Empire any legal? Jews have been in Israel since Ramses II ruled over Egypt. Where does the UK gets its legitimacy?Should the British Army (where my father served during WWII, when Britain had guts) be a target? think before talking, that is legitimate!

Ellen Prescott is talking about a nation. When was there a Palestinian independant state? or when was Jerusalem capital of an Arab country, ANY Arab country? The answer is NEVER to both questions, period. Jerusalem was founded by king David centuries before Mohamed started killing people to spread his religion. The only "warrior" to create a religion, a violent one of course. He had no problem killing all the Jews of Medina, including the children! think a little, then talk.

karl your country saved many Jews during the war thanks to a King who remains the exception. Your government did not give in when Muslims wanted to dictate a new Constitution upon you with restricted freedom of speech. Why do you want Israel to give up and die? or what is your answer, Israel has left Gaza, what else? Is it Ok for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons? it may be legal it will never be legitimate. Reconsider your opinion; in a country like Denmark you must be better than that.

You say it is legitimate to attack Israeli soldiers, maybe, then retaliation is legitimate as well and in a war there is no limit. You may be right but be careful what that means for all people involved. Israel withdrew from Gaza, what else can they do?