ImSpartacus2 wrote on Aug 1
st, 2014 at 6:22pm:
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
"[Israel] continues to both expand its settlements and settle new areas in the West Bank,[4][5][6][7][8] despite being condemned by 158 out of 166 nations in one vote, and 160 nations out of 171 nations in a different vote, in the UN.[9]
The international community considers the settlements in occupied territory to be illegal,[10] and the United Nations has repeatedly upheld the view that Israel's construction of settlements constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.[11][12] Israeli neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and communities in the Golan Heights, areas which have been annexed by Israel, are also considered settlements by the international community, which does not recognise Israel's annexations of these territories.[13] The International Court of Justice also says these settlements are illegal in a 2004 advisory opinion.[14][15][16] In April 2012, UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, in response to moves by Israel to legalise Israeli outposts, reiterated that all settlement activity is illegal, and "runs contrary to Israel's obligations under the Road Map and repeated Quartet calls for the parties to refrain from provocations."[17] Similar criticism was advanced by the EU and the US.[18][19] Israel disputes the position of the international community and the legal arguments that were used to declare the settlements illegal.[20]
The presence and ongoing expansion of existing settlements by Israel and the construction of settlement outposts is frequently criticized as an obstacle to the peace process by the Palestinians[21] and third parties, including the United Nations,[22] Russia,[23] the United Kingdom,[24] France,[25] the European Union,[26] and the United States.[22]"
The peron who composed the wiki piece is mistaken.
International laws does not prohibit a state which was attacked [e.g. the state of Israel, 1948, 1967, 1973], from occupying and annexing the lands of an aggressor, so as to prevent further attacks.
Quote:
"ISRAEL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW....Israel’s presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defence. International law forbids acquisition by unlawful force, but not where, as in the case of Israel’s self-defence in 1967, the entry on the territory was lawful. It does not so forbid it,
....for the effect of such prohibition would be to guarantee to all potential aggressors that, even if their aggression failed, all territory lost in the attempt would be automatically returned to them.
Such a rule would be absurd to the point of lunacy. There is no such rule..."
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1528