Which war crime would that be? Would it be imposing strict security measures on a population that has launched terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians since the 1940s, and which continues to call for the annihilation of all Jewish people? Would it be answering the repeated cold-blooded murder of innocent civilians with military action and arrests of terrorists? Or would it be evicting the families of terrorists, given that the clear pattern is those families wholeheartedly support the terrorists in word and deed? And do you think that the idea of national survival might have something to do with the lands seized in 1967?
Nonsense.
Isreal won that land fair and square while defending itself against an attack by several surrounding Arab nations who intended to destroy Israel.
The so-called "Palestinian" refugees are simply Arabs who tried to get out of the way so their Arabs brothers could wipe out the Jews. But the Arabs lost.
"any other nation" would not be expected to give up land won while defending itself.
Much less to create a nation for the people determined to destroy them.
That is totally absurd.
Still no has answered my questions why it is right for Israel to seize land that does not belong to them and commit what would be for any other nation a war crime.
I think you already know the answer to your question, it has been asked and answered many times on this forum, and there is no need to answer it again.
What you view as war crime some view as defending themselves.
(I earned my CIB with 1st/503rd Infantry in Viet Nam between 65-66)
