Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (35012)	7/25/2002 3:53:10 PM
From: boris_a	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

not by that definition. The west bank doesn't belong to Israel. for that matter does UN Resolution 242 call it an illegal occupation Resolution 242 : Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied* in the recent conflict;* Legal (selfdefense) or illegal (aggressive) is irrelevant. It's an occupation. Geneva Convention is applicable. the Kurds are waiting to use it! There's no "disputed" territory or an occupation. Different case. Geneva Convention: Article 1 The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.[ Article 2 In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. The Occupation of the west bank is clearly a case of an armed conflict between High Contracting Parties. The status of the occupied territory is irrelevant. I don't think you find too many experts who agree with the position of Israel wrt. the non-application of the Geneva Convention there. Boris