Pure Zionism by the right in Israel

As I wrote:

the ICJ refered the West Bank as areas that constituted "Palestine" under the British Mandate. Now, if the ICJ refered the West Bank as areas that constituted "Palestine" under the British Mandate, then it means that they used what was written in the Mandate that says that the Jews have the right to settle in "Palestine", which means that if they used a statement from the Mandate (when they wrote in Article 73 that it's cunstituted "Palestine"), then they need also to refered the West Bank as it was refered in the Mandate, which is a place that Jews can settle, which makes the argument that "the settlements are illegal", as false argument

And today there is no "hostile army", thuse cannot be considered as "occupied". Moreover, the Jews have the right over the West Bank, as I showed here numerous of times.

I provided epxerts to reinforce what I said about Article 80, and also I provided with a reply from international law esperts to the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ from 2004. Hence, I have an argument with 80 and the ICJ court decision from 2004.

According to Article 2 of the 4th Geneva Convention:

 

Post limit thread closure notification

Shangrila
Moderator