Well I agree with you on that but Israeli critics have a different plan -
Israeli critics with a
plan? I think you mean thesis or argument.
which is just to portray the whole thing as an 'operation' against MB and Hamas and you know very well that's not true.
No, I don't.
Egyptian people still aren't happy with the military at this moment and if Sisi does enter elections I really don't know how he would manage the economy. I'm afraid there won't be a real solution to Egypt anytime soon.
I don't know how popular or unpopular the military is. I don't want the "Free Officers" solution. The M-B failed miserably, and unfortunately the whole shebang was restructured in their last months of power to prevent them from being democratically removed from power, hence the coup.
For 70% of its existence yes, but the camp david accords made it so there are conditions placed by Israel and the United States. They rarely open it because it's not in their hands anyways.
Cite specifics, please.
Please, they were an occupying army on Palestinian territory and those 'Jews' were given land by the IDF which forcefully acquired Palestinian land.
Gaza is part of the Mandate of Palestine; the area is open to Jewish settlement under Mandate Law, the proviso being that Arabs' civil and property rights must be respected. If it was state land, or land purchased by Jews from Arabs, the Jews had every legal right to be there as residents, not "occupiers", and only the post-WWI settlements of
Arabs in state or Jewish-owned land can be considered illegal. It may be 90 years old, but Mandate Law still applies and is cited as the basis for UNRWA, the social-service welfare system that so many Arab "refugees" depend on to this day. If the Israeli military had bases on privately-owned Arab land, that's also a matter covered by international law.
Recall that the same Mandate that encouraged Jews the to purchase and re-settle land in Palestine also called upon the Arabs to respect Jews' civil and property rights throughout the Middle East; but with the partial exception of Lebanon (where some absentee Jews retain realty) the Jews were kicked out of Arab countries in defiance of international law. (Morsi supporters experienced the same technique used against the Jews: being compelled to sign statements that their property was surrendered to the state "voluntarily").
Nobody ever talks about crimes Arabs committed against Jews and what the Arabs owe the Jews, do they? Obviously some sort of consideration of these matters should be taken into account in a fair settlement.
It wasn't about security we already got passports checked, they just kept us waiting for 7 hours to get on a bus and it's to basically make it a tough experience to give a message to foreigners not to travel back again. They failed however.
Experience sounds familiar, but of course that reason you cite can't be why the Israelis sometimes do this with visiting pro-Israel Jews from the U.S. It has to be security in such instances, so I can't see why it wasn't security in yours.
Absolutely not, fighting against an occupation is completely justified and legal. They had the right to target the occupying power.
Really? Can you go to international law and cite just what the rights
are of an "occupied" population? Or if, since the Israelis are operating under the Mandate, the IDF can even qualify as an "occupying" power?
We come full circle, back to the problem of Arabs denying the civil, human, and property rights of anyone targeted as an "enemy". The culture promotes tribalism and clans and is poisonous and stifling; but there is no need for Pakistanis to support such backwardness and accept that the poison of hate must flow through their own veins.
