Dang, I sure hate it when I discover that I have been wrong about something and have to eat a big old mouthful of crow. But being the human I am it seems I’ve done it again and thanks to the help of FromTexas, whose debate resulted in my digging deeper into the matter then I had previously done, I will be modifying my position as to the plight of the Palestinians. As most of you know I had for a very long time been of the mindset that Israel was illegally occupying Palestinian territory. But after much research and evaluation of the factual information freely available on the wonderful World Wide Web I must now have a shift in my approach and thinking as it relates to this continued conflict in the Middle East.
The key point of this transition is focused on the pre-existing agreements and arrangements prior to the 1947 Partition Plan. I must step further back in time seeking the legal control for that region because in every essence UN Resolution 181 is null and void because there was never any acceptance by the Arab world as to the creation of two states within the defined portion of the areas as was identified in Resolution 181. Because of the Arab nations vehement rejection to accept that plan they basically left themselves under the authority of the British Mandate which was the last, and more importantly, the rightful and legal controlling accord dealing with this matter. Compounding my previous mistaken beliefs were the acts taken as control was transferred from the British via the League of Nations to the newly founded United Nations and UN Resolution 181. Had the Arabs accepted the proposal they would be in the right, but that isn’t how it happened..
It was the UN themselves that made my decision to switch such an easy choice. Under the UN charter it states in Article 80, “nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.”
Here is a little background to help clarify my shift of position. The area falling under the Mandate was initially proposed in November 1917 (confirmed by the League of Nations in July 1922, but didn’t actually come into operation until September 1923) and included all of current day Israel, Lebanon, Palestine and what we now call Jordan (at the time of the Mandate the area was known as Trans-Jordan). The sole purpose for the area was to establish a homeland for the Jews. This was made very clear by the League of Nations and by a separate Joint Resolution of the Congress of the United States (we weren’t a member of the League of Nation). Shortly after the concept of the Mandate (1921) it was modified as the British authority parceled off roughly three-fourths of the area to Arabs for the creation of a new Arab protectorate (now Jordan) and Jews were barred from owning or occupying any territory east of the Jordan River. In 1923 the area of the Golan Heights was ceded to French Syria and again Jews were barred from that area. The southern part of the Mandate was eventually declared as an open area because of the fact that there were no Jewish or Arab settlements in the desert and the area was sparsely inhabited by bands of roaming Bedouins.
Upon the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel they were immediately recognized by the United States (something shy of 15 minutes after Truman was advised he formally recognized them as a sovereign nation) and thus the last established international instrument was the British Mandate of the 1920s. When Israel entered as a member of the UN in 1949 it did so not as a nation established by the Partition Plan but as the fruition of the British Mandate (because the Partition Plan was never agreed to by the contracting parties).
Once Israel declared independence they were immediately attacked by surrounding Arab nations. With the war of 1948 concluded the remaining portion of the Mandate was divided along the lines of the cease fire, which was now just under 7 percent of the original area encompassed by the proposed Mandate with the West Bank falling under Jordanian control and the Gaza strip coming under Egyptian control and the tiny morsel of remaining territory became Israel. In 1967 Israel regained these areas that under the only legitimate controlling agreement had been occupied by Egypt and Jordan since 1948. Thus the West Bank and the Gaza strips are legally and rightfully Israeli territory as defined by that only legitimate agreement, the British Mandate. As such it is now my belief and more complete understanding that Israel is justified in controlling that entire region including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Those claiming to be Palestinian are actually non-Jewish-Israelis or Arab-Israelis and should be subject to Israeli authority.
I think that the UN needs to reassess their view on who is the legitimate territorial authority and only use those agreements that have been accepted and confirmed and not rely upon those that they would like to see as controlling the issue. By doing this it would seem more appropriate to include the Arab-Israelis into the established nation of Israel and bring resolution to this nearly 100 year-long nightmare.
I wonder if I have got it right this time or if there is anything else that I have missed?
while somewhat like you doesn't quite do complete justice. 
The Palestinians are like the Moveon.org crowd - they will NEVER be satisfied until their enemies are all dead. Doesn't matter that they make their own problems, they will insist that they are victims of some plot.
I'm sure you're feeling a bit defensive right now. Had I contradicted myself in print for the whole world to see, I might feel a little defensive as well.
