D: "yet when it tried a military response to lebanese aggression with the exception of usa it was condemned by the world." Kofi Annan was the first to make the important and proper distinction, duncan: he said that Israel was QUITE entitled to defend herself from an armed attack, but she was NOT entitled to launch a DISPOPORTIONATE aerial bombardment along the length and breadth of southern Lebanon. It is the difference between "legitimate self defense" and "venting your frustration". The response must fit the provocation, duncan; that is how nations are supposed to behave, and the criticism came because everyone except Israel's fellow warmongers in Washington understand that simple concept. If an independent Palestine fired rockets then Israel would be perfectly entitled to response with SELF DEFENCE. And that includes re-occupation IF that is the only way to stop the rockets. But that does not include simply shouting "I'VE HAD ENOUGH!" and flattening the country.
Woman wounded by stones thrown toward her car near Jerusalem (Haaretz)
from the article: PlayStation Palestine