Reply #71: Nice spin.

[Malikshah]

You are interpreting and parsing your statements now that you have been challenged.

Always good for discourse.

Now you have qualified your statement about UN resolutions as not having *moral* authority.

That is your interpretation and one that is not shared by others when it suits them.

You have completely spun the latter half of the history of the Palestine Mandate and the actors/actions involved. It might help to read a bit more about the key actors and their views regarding the final years.

Shlaim is a decent start.

The UK didn't give a toss--after the King David Hotel, WWII, problems in India, and countless other issues--they basically stated-- you guys do what you want-- we're out of here in May 1948.

Bevin was done with it.

I never state that Israel is illegitimate. I simply called you on your faulty logic, which would lead to that conclusion--which, in the end, is a moot point. Legitimacy is not a factor. Reality is what is key.

Reading a Resolution and its text repeatedly does not allow one to arrive at an accurate assessment of the history behind the Resolution.

Case in point-- the Baskin Robbins 31 Flavors versions of the Balfour Declaration, UN Resolution 242.

In the end-- one cannot have it both ways.