It was the Arabs who were the most infuriated with the Jewish settlement following the second world war.
Yup. Point?
Secondly, most Palestinians today wouldn't care about Israel, if only the land was divided equally. Instead, Israel now controls about 90% of the land, which is shocking considering they started from nothing. To add to that, many Palestinians can't get to their work or reach hospitals, and Israeli forces have built an illicit fence on Palestinian territory. Besides, do you think the land was given willingly? I severely doubt it, as any rational man would.
A really rational man might be aware that the immigrant Jews
bought the land (at cut-throat rates, I might add) from the Ottomans, who owned it. Darn colonial powers. Yet, I daresay you won't find any bitching by Palestinians and proponents of Palestine against the Turks. Excess of rationality, maybe?
Anyway: now imagine if only purchase of the land had been recognized as legitimate by local Arabs, or if the split of the disputed territories - most of which went to Palestine and Jordan, 83% or thereabouts - had been accepted by the Arab leadership. The land they legally bought wasn't exactly a start from nothing. Yet, instead, there were raids by their Arab neighbours and outright attempts at intimidation of the Jewish immigrants, much as they were already doing to local Christian dhimmis. Then, open wars and invasion. What was it the Jews were expected to do? Submit as dhimmis? Live as second-class citizens under their muslim overlords? I submit that they'd had enough of that in Europe and elsewhere and that it would be unreasonable -
irrational, even - to expect them to do so.
What reason is there for the people to obey colonial lines drawn on their land? I'm curious as to why you think they should
Fair usage and purchase, maybe. End to violent conflict. Not everyone agrees with that, of course.
Um, go to Israel please, and I mean REALLY go and experience it, and see if you're still the same.
I have friends who are Israeli. None of them have ever been beaten by their fathers or cut off anyone's finger. When were you last in Israel? Are you getting all your info from Syrian TV? Is it the same Syrian TV that aired "Knight Without A Horse"?
Obviously if it's a crime they must not care for their own laws. Under Geneva you need to treat PoW's humanely, correct?
Some don't care for their own laws. These would be criminals. Again, compare them to members of the Iranian 'justice' industry, where correct application of Iranian law means teenagers must swing and women be hounded under a burkha.
I just don't see how killing hundreds of palestinian children stops mortar attacks, just doesn't make sense to me
Also, Hesbollah is "just" trying to stop Israel from killing innocent people, so you don't make much sense.
Kind of a polemical overexaggeration at the start; propaganda, really. Secondly and more pointedly, how is the killing of Israeli children with mortars and rockets and suicide bombers and poison and stabbing and whatnot (which, owing to the alternately indiscriminate or intensely personal methodology of the attacks, is far more morally wrong than the accidental killing of children while trying to strike terrorists, who often hide behind civilians) going to "stop Israel from killing innocent people"? You make it sound as if the Israelis are deliberately trying to kill civilians and Hamas and Hezbollah defend them, when exactly the opposite is true. The Israelis seek truces; Hezbollah rearms with missiles. Does this seem like they want peace?