I can't help but see precedent for the Jews... after all who came to america several hundred years ago claiming god gave it to them, and proceeded to
destroy every native civilization on both continents?
Begin long, semi-technical rant on internation law and hypocrisy (not for the thinking impaired):
It is true that certain insurgencies can be judged lawful.
Yet, even these insurgencies must always conform to the laws of war.
The ends can never justify the means in international law. Never. Where the insurgent group resorts to unjust means, as in the case of exploding a
public bus, its actions are unambiguously terroristic.
How shall we know precisely when insurgent means are just or unjust?
The determinable standards that must be applied in judgment are known in law as just cause and just means.
These standards, and these standards alone, allow us to differentiate lawful insurgency from terrorism.
National liberation movements that fail to meet the test of just means are not protected as lawful or legitimate.
Leaving aside the very doubtful argument that Palestinian organizations meet the standards of "national liberation," especially after the prior
Barak Government offered the PA/PLO control of over 97% of West Bank (Judea/Samaria) and Gaza, it is assuredly clear that they do not meet the
standards of discrimination, proportionality and military necessity.
These formal standards, applicable under the Laws of War, have been applied to insurgent organizations by the common Article! 3 of the four Geneva
Conventions of 1949 and by the two protocols to these Conventions of 1977.
They are binding upon all combatants by virtue of both customary and conventional international law.
The ends can never justify the means.
As in the case of war between states, every use of force by insurgents must be judged twice, once with regard to the justness of the objective (in
this case, the avowed objective is a Palestinian state built upon the charred ruins of a dismembered Israel) and once with regard to the justness of
the means used in pursuit of that objective.
A Palestinian organization that deliberately targets indiscriminately with intent to maximize pain and suffering can never claim to be "freedom
American and European supporters of a Palestinian State presume that it will be part of a "two-state solution," that is, that the new Arab state
will exist side-by-side with the existing Jewish State.
Yet, this presumption is dismissed everywhere in the Arab/Islamic world.
Indeed, the "Map of Palestine" at the official website of the Palestinian National Authority includes all of Israel.
There are not two states on this map; only one.
(taken in part from: "On the differences between murderers and freedom fighters" 29 Jan 2004, Dr. Beres Ph.D Poli-Sci, Purdue.
As for how hypocritical this is: get over it. Personally, they (Israel and Palestine) may continue to fight and die ad naseum with further escalation
an no resolution as they see fit.
The point of all this is though that "The Isreali's are NOT INNOCENT VICTIMS, BUT BARBARIC PERPETRATORS OF GENOCIDE!!" but nor are "The
Palestinians are NOT INNOCENT VICTIMS, BUT BARBARIC PERPETRATORS OF JIHAD!!
I say, let them fight, but it is ridiculous to label one states acts "right" and the others "wrong". Any attempt to do so cuts both ways and is
just as applicable to the "justified" group.