firstly there is a strong arab presence in Israel who are well integrated into Israeli society and benefit from the country's economic and wellfare resources. Secondly it would be a bit difficult to focus on "imposing laws on territories" as put by Greg when you are still struggling to survive against an actively hostile opposition. It is also worth noting, that Israeli history does not go back "38" years but rather 4000 years. That Jew were expelled from Israel 2000 years ago, does not make the struggle for a home and security less relevant today. In the 4000 years land has switched hands and borders have changed. Thus the term "Occupied Land" to me is area that is very open to debate. Israel is hardly the British empire. Israelis have only one home, Israel and the hardships being faced by settlers today cannot be trivialised. Not only are families facing losing their homes, but for many, disengagement means loss of a livelyhood they spent a lifetime building, and for what? a blind hope for peace even in light of the the fact that still no solid agreement has been made. Could you even begin to imagine the prospect of suddenly being forced to evacuate your cosy apartment, leave your community and cosy little job for an uncertain future?. I,m not anti-disengagement, but perhaps we should step back and be a little more understanding.
from the article: IDF: Demolition of settlement houses may start at end of next week