"Occupied" Territories
Reader comment on item: Two Years of Intifada

Submitted by Gabriel Davidovics (Chile), Oct 6, 2002 at 20:17

To the best of my knowledge, after every war that were waged against Israel, Israel had to retreat from the territories she conquered, with the exception of the Six Day War and Yom Kippur war. ( with the exception of the Sinai returned to Egipt ).

Why should Israel give up territories that were conquered in wars imposed upon her?

If one returns those terrirories, one is only motivating the aggressors to repeat their intent. If Israel is required to return the land despite her enemies' inability to defeat her, then her enemies have nothing to lose by trying again.

In my opinion, the aggressors should be punished by losing the lands taken by their adversary in self defense and in an effort to frustrate their intent. This is the same result of wars that have been fought throughout the history of the world.

Additionally, why does the media continue to classify "Judea & Samaria" as the "West Bank", and as land "occupied" by Israel?
That land historically and morally ( because of the wars of aggression), belongs to the People of Israel, and the media should not be allowed to continue with the mantra of "conquered" lands. Those lands were liberated and returned to their legitimate owners. If somebody says that lands gained through any wars should not been allowed, then start changing the maps of the world

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.