Israel's 1967 borders are indefensible!

Is the argument that is often proffered by the Likud in the Israeli Knesset and the Ultra Likud who sit on Capitol hill in Washington.

This is given as an excuse for both not moving forward and indeed in many ways moving backwards particularly in settlement building.

Where this all falls back though is a brief examinations of the facts. Firstly it is proposed that a Palestinian state be de militarised. Secondly Israel defended the 1967 borders in the 1956 Suez war (which it started) and the 1967 war (which it also started by pre-emptive strike). In the latter example it expanded it's military sphere of influence.

Israel now has an equal or better superiority in fire power over it's neighbours than it did then.

So what is the conclusion?

Israel has defended the pre 1967 borders, and in one out of two cases expanded them therefore they are clearly eminently defensible so that argument is clearly rubbish.