You cannot steal a country that doesn’t exist. There has never been a country called Palestine. Check any history book.

In a report by the British Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan in 1938, it was made clear: "Palestine is not a State, it is the name of a geographical area."

Filistine was a name coined by the Romans around 135 CE from the name of a seagoing Aegean people who settled on the coast of Canaan–the Filistines. The name was chosen to replace Judea, as a sign that Jewish sovereignty had been eradicated following the Jewish Revolts against Rome.

Arabs as the name suggests are not indigenous to the region. Indeed there is not an F sound in Arabic. That's why a change in the name to a P from an F

A tool used for propaganda reasons, invented by the Russians was the name change. On June 4th 1967, overnight Palestinian Arabs became Palestinians.

Israel proclaimed Statehood in 1948, the Arabs didn’t and 5 Arab armies attacked the fledgling State and were resoundingly beaten .To this day despite good deals, they do not have any land or a country officially.

Article 80 of the UN Charter implicitly recognises the “Mandate for Palestine” of the League of Nations.
The Mandate granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, a right unaltered in international law and valid to this day. Settlements in Judea and Samaria, Gaza and the whole of Jerusalem are legal.

One more comment as I can't post any more today.

A few notable quotes

March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein.

He said: “The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people.”

Time and time again the Palestinian Arabs have refuse deals the last in 2008
http://www.smh.com.au/world/it-was-our-mistake-says-palestinian-chief-20111029-1mpc9.html

To Avw:

Israel has not withdrawn from Gaza. It withdrew the settlements, but then sealed Gaza off and subjected it to a crippling blockade.
Israel has not withdrawn from all of southern Lebanon either. It still occupies the Sheaa Farms.

To SF:

Regarding your argument that there was never such a country as Palestine: There was definitely a Palestinian identity. Palestinians agreed to support the British in World War One with the promise that Britain would help them get independence from the Ottoman Empire. And under British-Mandated Palestine "Palestinian" was a full-fledged nationality. There was a Palestinian flag, currency, and passports.

I also feel it is irrelevant whether or not there was ever such a country as "Palestine". People were already living in Palestine in well-established communities. They had towns, cities, farms, schools, and businesses.

Regarding your claim that the Israeli settlements are legal under internatinal law: that is demonstrably false. The United Nations had on numerous times that those settlements are illegal.

You are also wrong that there is no "F" sound in Arabic. There is an "F" sound in Arabic. I studied Arabic for three years at uni. The Arabic word for "Palestine" is "Falasteen". The Arabic word for "Palestinian" is "Falasteenee". There is actually no "P" sound in Arabic, and there is a special Arabic letter to represent the "P" sound when a foreign word is used that has that sound.

The Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites, who, according to the Bible, were there before the Israelites were.

http://www.stml.net/text/Populations.pdf

fungus:

“Israel has not withdrawn from Gaza”

Yes it has. The blockade you are referring to does not change the fact that there is no Israeli presence in Gaza.

As for the ‘crippling blockade’, many tons of goods are flowing into Gaza from Israel on a daily basis. Palestinian patients are often transferred from Gaza to be treated in Israeli hospitals, including Hamas PM’s brother-in-law who was recently treated for a serious cardiac episode. Israel also supplies electricity to Gaza.

Here is more about the ‘crippling blockade’:

“In Actual Terms, Gaza Is Not Under Siege... The resorts and markets have come to symbolize prosperity, and prove that the siege is formal or political, not economic…everything already was coming into the Gaza Strip from Egypt…Several months ago, Gaza had only one luxury resort, Zahrat Al-Madain. Today, another one opens up every day, such as Crazy Water, Aqua Park, and Al-Bustan.”

Middle East Research Institute, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4482.htm

Let’s not forget that Gaza is also sharing a border with Egypt, a border not under Israeli control in any way.

Not very ‘crippling’ after all.

“Israel has not withdrawn from all of southern Lebanon either. It still occupies the Sheaa Farms”

This is not the position of the UN. Security Council resolution 425 confirms that Israel has indeed completed the withdrawal from Lebanon.

The Shebaa Farms area appears as Syrian territory in maps from the 1930s and 1940s. From Syrian independence in 1946 the land was administered by Syria, not Lebanon. It was shown as Syrian territory in all international maps, as well as Lebanese and Syrian military maps. The 1949 armistice agreements between Syria and Israel also show the area to be Syrian territory. The area was captured by Israel in 1967 from Syria, not from Lebanon (which did not participate in the war).

In short, there is no basis for the claim that Israel has not withdrawn from all of Lebanon.

Avw, you criticised me earlier for citing Gush Shalom.
Then you cite MEMRI.
Double standards much?

Here are some links about the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7545636.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle+east-10520844

http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/report/palestine-report-260609.htm

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/Ocha_opt_Gaza_impact_of_two_years_of_blockade_August_2009_english.pdf

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2012/11/23/roy/sctFniw6Wn2n9nTdxZ91RJ/story.html?s_campaign=sm_tw

Personally, I do consider controlling Gaza's borders to be a form of occupation.

Regarding the Shebaa Farms, Syria says they are Lebanese. If Syria says they are Lebanese and not Syrian, then I guess they are Lebanese.

http://web.archive.org/web/20070209180352/http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=119

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/763504.stm

To Jonathan J. Ariel,

In your first post you wrote, 'The writer makes numerous errors in his article, but time permits me to only address three.

'1. He rails against Israel’s use of what he calls “disproportionate force”.

'He bandies this term about as if there is a clear principle of international law behind it, telling us when force is “disproportionate” and why it is illegal.
But there isn’t such a principle.'

You also wrote, 'Among all the dozens of war crimes in international law, none mentions the element of disproportionate force. None.'

In your second post you wrote, 'while the body of international law known as “the law of war” mentions the concept of proportionality in several contexts, the concept does not appear in any international legal text, convention or treaty.'

The link I provided contains the following:

'The principle of proportionality is embedded in almost every national legal system and underlies the international legal order.'

'As formulated in Additional Protocol I of 1977, attacks are prohibited if they cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, or damage to civilian objects that is excessive in relation to the anticipated concrete and direct military advantage of the attack.'

'Article 85 defines an indiscriminate attack undertaken in the knowledge that it will cause excessive damage to the civilian population is a grave breach and therefore a war crime. The principle is hard to apply in war, still harder after an attack has occurred. But grossly disproportionate results will be seen as criminal by all belligerent parties and the world community.'

'The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court reaffirms this by qualifying in Article 8 as a war crime intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities. The use of indiscriminate weapons such as cluster bombs in populated areas is a war crime as well.'

Here are two more links.

http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/392/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(law)