Legally, under the rule of war, it owns all the land it conquered in a war

You said "owns." Not "occupies" or "administers."

Note that I am not talking about annexation

Right. Because annexation would be "owning."

Why does nobody seem to understand that their previous comments still exist out there?

they certainly do not need any egging on from glenn or any of us from the comfort of our computer screens.

Consider this... they may not need it, but it legitimizes killing, and so the cycle continues. Especially when the primary vehicle of expression is suicide homicide.

Doesn't it strike folks as strange that the entire world aligns itself against Israel, while doing next to nothing for the Palestinians? That alignment, including all the pro-Palestinian sentiment here leads the Palestinians to believe that targeting Israeli civilians with pitiful rockets is a good thing to do.

Do I need to go into how that's idiotic? Of course not, but having the entire world cheerleading them on to greater and greater feats of futility like a stadium cheering on the home team, is just absurd. It's like St Mary's taking on the Patriots, with pretty speeches about how noble it is to be carried off the field in the good fight. It's destructive to the poor high schoolers fooled into thinking there is some point to getting mauled.

Consider this too.... what if the world started to take Israel's side and emphasized their legitimacy as a country? And what if the world actually did things like condemning suicide bombings, and killing Israelis? would that be an effective headwind to Palestinian youth? Who knows, it's never been tried.

But I can say with certainty that people here are inflaming the situation and making it all but impossible for peaceful resolution. Multiply this group by billions of similar opinions and any addled adolescent with testosterone poisoning is scarred for life. There is no other way to put it other than this group is enabling more war.

Ah, so they have not permanently acquired the land; it is just theirs pending a treaty. Sort of makes it de facto theirs forever, doesn't it. International law is fun!

I apologize if I was rude.

I apologize if I was rude, too. Consider that we seem to agree on the larger issues here, but due to a mutual misunderstanding, we escalated from civil argument to name-calling (mild though, compared to what else I've seen around here). Obviously Palestinians and Israelis agree that what they want most is a peaceful life in which to live and raise their families, but despite that very huge common ground, they instead have war. To me, this letters thread is merely a microcosm of the world at large, sadly.

Straight from the mouth of Salon's resident warmonger.

Well, I don't really agree with your analysis, or comparison. But you had me at 'I apologize.'

re: your post: "This Just In; Greenwald Unfair to Friedman"

True, Friedman was attempting to analyze Israel's motives, but by presenting the indiscriminate maiming and killing of innocent civilians as a reasonable (rational) option, he implicitly condoned it - it requires denunciation.

The second point is that he never mentions Israel's long and continuous sanctions and strangulation of Gaza, keeping needed commerce and even enough necessary food and medicine out through a very heavy-handed and inhumane blockade of Gaza's perimeter.

Our good friend Mr. Ash made his day by pointing out that I used the word "own" incorrectly, albeit my entire point in that post was that they "own" it until an agreement is made on final disposition. Still, give him credit, as it was my error of terminology.

As far as the right to hold land as an occupier for an indefinite period, I have attached an interesting brief apparently filed some time ago on behalf of a group calling for Taiwanese freedom from Republic of China rule --it goes through Supreme Court and international law justification for occupation until a peace treaty resolving the dispute is reached and a new government is up and functioning.

http://www.taiwankey.net/dc/recitals6.htm

"all the pro-Palestinian sentiment here leads the Palestinians to believe that targeting Israeli civilians with pitiful rockets is a good thing to do."

- shooter242

Thank you for enlightening us. I guess what the Palestinians really need is a bit of collective punishment (how about some white phosphorous to burn them while you're at it)!

Did you ever consider ending the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and allowing them to live free? (Sorry I forgot it is their fault the occupation hasn't ended because they always reject Israel's "generous" offers)

"Consider this too.... what if the world started to take Israel's side and emphasized their legitimacy as a country? And what if the world actually did things like condemning suicide bombings, and killing Israelis? would that be an effective headwind to Palestinian youth? Who knows, it's never been tried."

Are you for real? Where do you live that you don't hear condemnations of suicide bombings (which have been practically nonexistant for the last few years in case you've been asleep for the last few years)? Maybe Saudi Arabia? Or now of their rockets, with which, at the present rate, it would take Palestinians between 2 and 4 centuries to kill as many civilians as Israel has killed in about 2 weeks? It is a very common fallacy made by the more extreme pro-Israel supporters that anybody who criticizes Israel supports everything their opponents do, when in all actuality, they usually support very little of what either side does.

That alignment, including all the pro-Palestinian sentiment here leads the Palestinians to believe that targeting Israeli civilians with pitiful rockets is a good thing to do.

Do I need to go into how that's idiotic?

-- shooter242

"Idiotic" and blatantly deceitful framing, as usual. And yet another excuse for you to call Palestinians stupid.

Not cheering on Likud to slaughter Palestinians is not the same thing as advocating that Hamas should lob home-made things that are somehow labeled as rockets into Israel.