[cnlevy]

Legality ends up following the de-facto reality. What's the future of the legality of Golan annexion ? With the new Syria, its soon going to become legal.

Jewish people coming back to live on its ancient homeland has no legal basis; It's their collective will which allowed its coming into existence (continuous immigration from other countries since the 1840s).

The legality of its existence wouldn't help it survive even one second.

[pyrale]

> Do you still think that today its a colonial project ?

Thanks for answering your own question.

[cnlevy]

So all palestinian Arabs are autochtones and all palestininan Jews are colonists. How many generations to lose that status then ?

[throw310822]

> Legality ends up following the de-facto reality.

Then what was the purpose of your previous objection about ceasefire lines? None. You just threw it there hoping to derail the argument with a pointless distraction, and now that it didn't work you are saying legality doesn't matter. This fundamental, shameless dishonesty is common to most defenders of Israel and frankly unsufferable.

[cnlevy]

I was asking why the post-1948 ceasefire lines are more legal than the post-1967 lines ? If you decide to go after the 1947 UN partition, keep the 1947 lines as the only legal border. If the 1948 war can redefine what's legal, then the 1967 war can do it as well.

I personally think the borders should be decided between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The only agreement to date between them has been the 1991 Oslo accords, with A, B and C zones. Further talks about definitive borders stopped with the Second Intifada in 2000.