@echinoccocus Yes, agreed, we speak for ourselves. But you have spoken incompletely here. Try writing down a couple paragraphs on the proposition “the Treaties of Westphalia make the creation of the State of Israel in ’48 illegal as a matter of international law,” and see what that argument looks like. Try writing down a couple paragraphs on the proposition “the covenant of the League of Nations makes the creation of the State of Israel in ’48 illegal as a matter of international law,” and see if you can cite some actual provisions and bring some actual analysis that is sound in the context of international law? Try doing the same for the charter of the UN. And try doing the same for any of the “countless of international treaties” you reference but did not share. Try writing a few paragraphs on the proposition “Israel is illegitimate as a matter of international law absent a Palestinian plebiscite approving creation of the state.” Or perhaps you can point to some authority who has done this analysis? As they say in the writing business, I think you’ll find “showing” is harder than “telling,” and more persuasive.
As a general matter, taking a moral stand is a strong stand. A narrow legal argument is a difficult argument and the whole field of international law is of dubious authority in such matters. Better to stick to solid ground, than to take a stand on quicksand.