Onto Res 242 then. It is not MY interpretation; look up 242 and tell me exactly what it says in the preamble regarding the acquisition of land by force of arms. No hurry...I'll wait. "To them it means that Israel has to withdraw to secure and recognized borders!" That is my interpretation too. That is the only sensible route that Israel can take. But that is not the route Israel is taking; it is not simply OCCUPYING that land i.e. using it as a buffer between its citizens and Those That Mean Them Harm. It is COLONISING that land i.e. it is actively putting its citizens in harm's way. "possible border adjustments (for security) that need to be negotiated and agreed by both parties " YES YES YES. IT DOES. This is the problem; if the land is simply being OCCUPIED then Israel has a strong incentive to negotiate. If it is being COLONISED then it has a strong incentive to delay and delay - because the longer it can delay the more land it ends up with.
Australia to spend $64.9 billion on ships, submarines over 20 years (Reuters)
from the article: While Livni is polishing her wording