Username

What's the use of advance notice if I want to achieve exactly what I have: honest response based on what is written, even if a ruse. This stuff is supposed to challenge comfort zones.

By what Israeli policy is wiping put Palestine evident? 

Palestine can be somewhere else. Palestine is not recognized by the UN as a sovereign nation of a particular locale.

Since the Arab world occupied the temple mount 1400 years ago, what's the difference?

 I do not interpret Israel as the entirely faulty party when I say that they have initiated the war. But I am saying that for that reason it can hardly be constituted as a one-sided aggressive war to the 1948 War and for that reason cannot at all justify the current prolonged state of the occupation.

Did the Egyptians know that closing the Suez canal for specifically Israelian ships would be interpreted as an act of war? If not, did they expect to destroy the innocent lives of peaceful Israelian shippers by taking away their jobs?

Allow me to bring all of this back: Syrian initiated skirmishes with Israel caused Israel to fight Egypt because Egypt took defensive movements to protect Syria and Jordan was allied to Egypt... And so therefore... Israel gets to permanently occupy the homes of people who want nothing to do with them?

A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious, and historical right to self-determination.
C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

Do you claim that a minority (religious and political activists; self-appointed leaders who don't care about human rights) should rule Palestine?

Or

Do you agree that they should be able to rule themselves by living in a free democracy wherein their voices are heard and their votes counted?

Whatever the average Palestinian says is determined by religious fundamentalism and political propaganda by groups who breach the basic human rights of both Jews and Arabs. One cannot hear their real voices clearly, and thus backing one's claims on "Palestinian opinion" is a fallacy.

Do you support the regime of North Korea? The population does, and you would be a hypocrite if you do not accept the fact that a populations opinion is irrelevant unless it is free of outside control --- as is the case with North Korea and the west bank. 

"May" being the operative word.

Though one would suggest that logic is always logical, at any level.

I agree that human rights are important. Tell that to the Arab nations

The major takeaway point is that Arabs living inside Israel live better, freer lives with more democracy and human rights than Arabs in any Arabian nation. 

Unless one agrees with those Arabs who are motivated by irrational religious or nationalistic extremism, then one should agree that Israel annexation is a valid possibility.

The Israelian occupation of the west bank started in 1967 and has been in effect for more than half a century. Before 1967, the piece of land was occupied by the Transjordanian kingdom - also illegally I might add. Before that, the piece was a part of the British mandate "Palestine", which included Israel, Gaza, Jordan and the west bank. Before that, it was controlled by the Ottomans. It would be dubious to claim that the current occupation is more a legal problem than any of the previous ones.

Additionally, the territory is important for Israel's security, an all-important thing for the Israelian state due to the 6+ wars and conflicts with the Arabs. 

If we are talking about issues in terms of importance, aka priority and feasibility of solving, the occupation of the west bank isn't high on the list. 

Even if you could instantly remove this occupation, who is to say that Arabs won't invade Israel in an attempt to eradicate the state as they did in 1948 and later in 1973?