You are saying that Israel is an 18th/19th century colonial power, and should therefore live by the rules of International Law as it existed centuries ago. But Israel was created under post-ww2 Int'l Law, to which it must abide. It can not justify its actions by pointing to Int'l Law that no longer exists. Your analogy is therefore flawed; Britain colonised Australia under the legal pretext of terra nullis, which had legal standing THEN and does not have legal standing NOW. You would be better served to ask if Australia could *now* annex, say, Fiji. The answer is NO, we could not. We "Australians" owe the aborigines an apology. But that obligation is a moral one, not a legal one. But Israel? Its obligation is legal. Has been even before the State was proclaimed. "Occupied or colonized, they have it now." - go back to UN Resolution 242 and read the preamble. That says it all, really.
Aden hotel used by Yemen goverment hit by grenade (Reuters)
from the article: While Livni is polishing her wording