All these borders did not change as a result of voluntary peace treaties. The borders of Germany, Poland and Russia were not changed by voluntary peace treaties for the simple reason that the victors themselves set the terms and conditions for the "peace treaties". These peace treaties were not voluntary. The wars are not going on because one side defeated the other side. Sudan opposed the creation of South Sudan and now there is a war going on. We can't make any agreements with the "Palestinians" because they don't exist. The "Palestinians" never had a state dear John so what exactly is their connection to the land? An occupation can only take place involving states. "Palestine" is no state and has never been one either. ICJ has only an advisory role - something that ICJ themselves admit. Answer my questions: who are the "Palestinians", what are their connections to the land and why should international law be given precedence over national domestic laws? ICJ admits itself that its rulings are binding only if states agree to them. Israel doesn't agree. "Palestine" is no state. No nation or people is created in a vacuum and no "legal text" - a piece of black ink on white paper can change the fact that no "Palestinian" state or people have ever existed in recorded human history. You repeating the word "Palestinian" is simply done out of malice and malign intent, because you know the historical truth that you refuse to talk about because you are forced to admit that you are wrong.

Ynet selectively censors my responses. I will not write them over for fear they will do the same thing. Sorry,that is the best I can offer your current comments.

Your post is wrong, even about this. If you use different words or post at certain times of day, they will get through. You only have to read many of these posts; although none of you know what you are talking about, theirs is more vitriolic. If you get tired and want to move on the another TB (and post the same stuff), say so.

The responses they consistently censor are the ones that give detailed legal explanations to your responses (and mine are contrary to the Israeli gov't positions.) Whether you believe it or not that is that truth.

If making peace with the defeated side was simply dictating the terms then, after forty plus years, one would assume you could have made peace with the Palestinians. in the Palestine Mandate the British referred to the indigenous residents as Palestinians. Call them Arabs if you want, I don't care, but to say they don't exist is just a stupid remark. I gave you the law of treaties and to assume they aren't voluntarily signed is naive. Again , look at the Palestinian example if you think it is just a matter of dictating to the defeated party. As for South Sudan, the North did recognize them as a country although the borders are still being negotiated. They still qualify as a country under a legal position called uti posidisis. Under Article 94 of the UN Charter any opinion rendered by the ICJ (most are not advisory) has the force of law. Simply because the ICJ has no army to enforce their decisions doesn't change that. Israel ignores them because the US vetoes any actions taken by the Security Council to enforce them (that happened 3 times when the other 14 members wanted to impose sanctions) Most peoples and nations (including America) never existed before they were created as a country. Most of the nations in the world were created in the twentieth century and this can certainly be said of them. Pieces of paper like the UN Charter and the Geneva Convention constitute international law which Israel (that ratified both) is obliged to obey. In summary, your remarks reflect no knowledge of either history or the law but they do reflect unbridled ignorance.

"Palestinians" are from Egypt and Saudi Arabia - immigrants from somewhere else. Whether they arrived as part of the 1930s illegal economic immigration or if they arrived during the illegal annexation by Jordan between 1949-1967, the fact remains - they are YOUR citizens which you refused to accept back after the 1948 war in order to use them cynically as fodder against Israel. They're not our problem, and they do not constitute a unique population. They can return to Arab lands, if they choose or they can stay in a semi-autonomous non-State entity (where they are). And in addition, we wish you luck with the 5 million+ "refugees" in your country which we assume you will happily grant citizenship to with equal rights.

you believe we should accept the same situation we have with Gaza, also with the West Bank? Having rockets and cross-border terror attacks, especially on our capital, our airport, and major population centers is neither a recipe for sustainable peace nor an obligation by Israel. Casualties among "Palestinians" are high because they use each other as human shields and place bomb labs in residential areas. So, when you cite casualties you're including children killed when qassams fall short and land on their playgrounds, or when a "work accident" occurs inside a family home. None of which is our problem, or our concern. West Bank aquifers do come under the 1967 lines into Israel, and even if just 1 inch, we have a right to tap it. Keep in mind, Israel provides a value-added where water it takes in is thus cleaned and sent back to "Palestinians" in far more quantity than the Oslo Accords requires. And while sitting on 300+ well permits, the PA still claims "thirst" of WB citizens. Jerusalem has been reunited after the 1949 illegal annexation by Jordan, and despite the 2005 Supreme Court ruling you cite Hamas' Haniyeh admitted that Gush Katif was Jewish property and lauded the fact that Hamas "threw Jews off their land".

the UK and Pakistan. The UN and its members considered it ILLEGAL, including the resulting ethnic cleansing of Jews and theft of their property which is considered a war crime under the Geneva Convention. That's how the Jewish family was able to reclaim their property in Sheik Jarrah, through the Israeli courts.