P01135809 goes after "Liberal Jews" on Jewish New Year

[Dill]

(09-28-2023, 05:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:2) that Israel annexed land taken in war, and

They did indeed.  I have gone on record in this very forum stating that it would have been better for them long term if they had not.  But claiming that Israel started the conflict is 100% wrong.  They were constantly provoked by overtly hostile neighbors who specifically stated their intent.

I don't see how it can be "100%" wrong if 1) Israel struck the first blow and, as I note in the previous posts and your source agrees, 2) there is no consensus even among Israeli historians that they did, because Israel was also constantly provoking it's neighbors before it also struck the first blow.

But your insistence it is 100% wrong arises from your "basic sense of fairness" and "need to set the record straight"? Whatever record that is, it doesn't seem to reflect the consensus of historians about the Six-Day War.  

(09-28-2023, 05:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You aren't calling the reported legal application a "flat out lie" anymore. Maybe it never was?  

That happened in 1981, fourteen years after the war.  You make is sound like Israel was labelled the aggressor during the six days war.  This must be a mistake, because you would never do something so disingenuous.

Is such an omission by you and them proof that that goal wasn't and still is, proclaimed by Israel's enemies?

I responded to LSUfan's statement on the annexation of the Golan Heights, explaining why the annexation violated international law, and why Israel is viewed as the aggressor there by the rest of the world. Fourteen years after the war it still did that.

You decided that my clear factual statement of the legal decision was a "flat out lie," and all "disingenuous"  and "amazingly biased" if not buttressed by reference to "Palestinian guerrillas" and a "but Iran!" Like the UN, I "omitted" factors could which play no role in the 1981 decision. If you know what Iran thinks, then you exempt Israel from the law?

None of which makes what I said a "flat out lie" since the law is what it is and Israels actions were what they were and the UN correctly assessed the annexation according to law, knowing full what what Iran thinks. Yet you appear to have decided something is "disingenuous" about this factual reporting of facts, because in your view Israel was not an aggressor, regardless of the law. 

So where are you on this now. Do you still say I just "flat out lied" when I described the UN decision as it is without mentioning Iran?