JB: "Your claim is flatly rejected by 'Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war' " D: "That means Israel`s claim to land had to be based on secure borders rather than on the fact that it had control" I'm sorry, but that as an outrageous statement. It MEANS what it SAYS; land can not be acquired by war. Israel seized that land. It did not acquire it. Her CLAIM to it is nonexistant, because all of it was promised to the Pals in the Partition Plan. So if Israel wants any then she needs to talk the Pals into ceding it to her. The UN SC has no power to strip that entitlement away from the Pals and give it to Israel, and it didn't attempt to; what it did was to safeguard Israel's right to seek a NEGOTIATED land-swap. Israel was/is entitled to recognition, and for her borders to be recognized and respected. She is NOT entitled to claim that the UN SC has given her carte blanche to redraw her borders.
Magnitude 4.2 quake strikes near Grand Coulee Dam in Washington (Reuters)
from the article: Failed marks in comprehension