🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <JIME.92Apr14230116@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# In article <1992Apr14.232215.21465@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (perlman eric) writes:

# >   In article <JIME.92Apr14165943@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# >   >Both, actually.  The mere occupation goes against UN resolutions.  And
# >   >there are considerable injustices going on as a result of the occupation.

# >   Jim, this has been discussed before in tpm.  The occupation does not go
# >   against international law.  There have been a number of GA resolutions
# >   railroaded through which demanded a unilateral end to the occupation,
# >   but UNGA resolutions don't have the force of international law, and also
# >   those resolutions contradict the wording of UNSC 242 and 338, which talk
# >   about territorial compromise as a part of a peace plan, not unilateral
# >   withdrawal.

# >   Certainly I don't approve of everything going on in the territories, but
# >   let's get our facts straight.
 
# The occupation, as I clearly wrote above, goes against UN resolutions.
# Your posting agrees with me on this count.  Why do you admonish me to
# get my facts straight, if we agree?
 
	It is not that your facts are wrong, but because the UN resolutions
are meaningless, your facts are irelevent.

# 242 and 338, if I remember correctly, do ask for territorial
# compromise, which is a code phrase for trading land for peace.
# As Israel occupies the land, it is clear that Israel would have to
# withdraw from at least part of the occupied territories under these
# resolutions.
 
	The author of 242 has repeatedly stated that Israel is not now in
violation of it, and that by giving up the Sinai Israel may have
fufilled all of its obligations under it.

# As for whether the UNSC or UNGA resolutions hold the force of
# international law, well, international law doesn't have much force
# anyway, so I don't know what this argument buys you.
 
	Since UN resolutions for the most part are political and
ethnocentric (just look at all the block voting), using them does not
buy you any kind of a morality high ground either.

# The way the occupation is being run (deportation of elements of the
# local populace, construction of permanent settlements, ...) also goes
# against the Geneva Convention.

	No they do not.
--

David Makowsky
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu