[yes_really]

> Then anything I say about the right of the invaded and occupied to resist occupation under international law will land on deaf ears.

There is absolutely no part of international law that allows terrorism from Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah, or Houthis to "resist occupation".

And it is really quite worrisome how you are openly supporting terrorism.

[gzread]

While I don't agree with terrorism, this is incorrect. International law is quite deliberate in allowing the victims of aggression to do almost anything against the aggressors to get control of their land back, including terrorism. Those who wrote the law hoped this would be a sufficient deterrent against invasions.

[dlubarov]

> victims of aggression

There is no such notion in IHL. IHL has a notion of self-defense, but that's only relevant to jus ad bellum. Once a conflict exists, there are no carveouts whatsoever for those who claim self-defense, or consider themselves victims, or claim that the other side violated international laws. Customary IHL doesn't care about such claims.

[yes_really]

And Israel is an aggressor who is occupying the land of Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis? Are you even reading what you write?