Fear of peace will be the death of Israel

Im a 17 year old boy living in Dubai and although my sympathies are with the Palestinian side, i must applaud Haaretz! I never expected it to be so honest and neutral. Truly the right wingers must envy this amazing paper. Netanyahu's government is as big as a threat to peace as Hamas is. I just wish Hamas would just vanish or something xD lol

"Are you really telling me that it is fear of what "the powerful coalition of Arab/Muslim nations" (name some of them) can wreak on the international community - that has led it to help Kosovo gain its independence from Serbia?"(Zeev) Actually you brought Serbia into this and you won't let go of it. I thought we were discussing who is responsible for the stalemate in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. But seeing that you insist on discussing Serbia, I'll oblige you and say YES and YES again, the Arab/Muslim bloc WAS influential in the outcome of Kosovo. Poor Serbs, they cannot match the political and oil power of the Arab/Muslim lobby. But times will be changing just wait and see Zeev. There are a lot of people out there who have had enough of terrorism and blackmail. Poor Zeev who will you complain to after the change of tide that is coming?

"You can`t win against someone who has renounced all common sense for the sake of an ideology"(Zeev) Let's compare ideologies. I support the ongoing existence of Israel as the state for the Jewish people. And their right to live in secure and recognised borders. As for the Palestinians, I wish them no harm. In fact, I wish them health happiness and good fortune but that is conditional upon what they do and how they behave towards Israel which is the ONLY Jewish nation in the Middle East. If they wish and do harm to Israel, all bets are off .... What is your ideology Zeev? It seems to me that you only see the Palestinian/Arab view and always advance THEIR party line ... So please, spare me your lecture on ideologies ....

"Israel would have difficulty dismantling West Bank settlements without causing a civil war in Israel."(Zeev's Quote) Difficulty, yes but NOT impossible. They have done it when peace was concluded with Egypt and they have done it in Gaza. In any case, who is talking about dismantling ALL the settlements, only people like yo Zeev. Now listen carefully and try to digest what I say (and said before): Israel will keep the larger settlement blocs for security reasons. The Pal Arabs will get land offsets in return ... That will be the shape of the final peace deal when it comes. "No WB settlements dismantling, no end to the occupation ..."(Zeev) Why is that Zeev? Last time I heard there are NO Arabs living in the settlement blocs. "We can try advancing our case as best as we can. That`s what successive Israeli governments have been doing with mixed degrees of success." (Tim R) "Mixed degrees of success? The understatement of the year..."(Zeev) There you go again, asserting your opinion and NOT letting facts stand in your way. But people like YOU do hinder that effort, one must admit. And you can take "pride" in the harm that you are doing to the country that you pretend to be part of.

"THEY will NEVER be part of Israel, no matter how much fellows like you will jump up and down to talk of that possibility."(Tim R) "Part of Israel"? Good lord, certainly not. We have already 20% Arabs"(Zeev) Good, then what exactly is your problem again? "Israel having failed to separate from them in time and the Two State formula has become non-implementable"(Zeev) Why exactly would it not be implementable? But even if in the unlikely event that it would not be, why exactly would that be Israel's problem? It would be THEIR problem for NOT taking up multiple opportunities to accept the two state solution ... They would then have two remaining choices: 1. Keep on as they are forever .... 2. Beg their Jordanian brothers who are Arab and Muslim too, to let Jenin, Nablus and other WB Pal Arab population centres be part of Jordan (which was the case between 1948 and 1967). Ditto with Gaza and Egypt. The third choice that you so fret about, to become part of the Jewish people, will NEVER happen because Israel will NOT allow it to happen, NOR are they obliged to let their historic enemies be part of a nation between the Jordan and the sea, just because THEY want it in order to take over the Jewish people via the back door ... Do you understand now Zeev? Or must I continue to explain this simple concept to you?

"They can and always will have the right for equal voting rights in THEIR own country ... " (Tim R) "Has nobody told you yet? Palestinians have no country of their own"(Zeev) They were offered THEIR country several times but they chose to play for higher stakes. They want to usurp Israel and make it their country. So, while they persist with their zero sum game, they just won't be able to vote, sounds fair to me ... ""Just think what they could have got ... " (Tim R) "Poor you, stuck in the past"(Zeev) I just responded to your assertion that time is on their side and demonstrated, using recent history (the last 62 years) that time is NOT on their side. Are you sorry I did? "Remember the days ...."(Zeev) Now who is stuck in the past Zeev? "their Chairman has been received in great pomp, more than once, by the President of our only ally country"(Zeev) So? "The Palestinians deserve to live under better conditions..."(Zeev) OK, so why didn't/don't they take up the opportunity when it was/is offered to them? ANSWER: Seemingly because they are the ones who are afraid of peace, not Israel. You can do it Zeev, admit it ... if you want, I can say it slowly again and you can just repeat it after me ...

I am glad somebody had the guts to say this aloud. For some time it is clear that Israel does not want peace. It created this temporary security and there are articles about how Israel flourishes in every aspect. Why peace then some asks? Because it cannot be a permanent solution and if it would become one, and the WORLD looks at it silently, then we did not learn anything from the Holocaust. Finally it would be devastating for Israel.

Israel never ever negotiated in good fate and offered something that any self-respecting leader could accept. The peace Israel offered to Palestinians would not create an independent viable state. It would remain under Israeli dependence and hence not free. Would you accept a similr offer yourself?

" ... you have NOT answered it. You only repeated THEIR excuses." (Tim R) Bingo! You have found at long last the only way to be always right: For every argument you can't refute, you will argue that all I do is repeating a Palestinian 'excuses'. The very same way of a colleague of mine who was an admirator of Stalin, in the country I came from - when we were discussing USSR: I was repeating "capitalist lies and excuses." No matter what I said, I could never be right. I finally gave up. You can't win against someone who has renounced all common sense for the sake of an ideology. This why I am now resting my case.

"The Palestinians deserve to live under better conditions..."(Zeev) OK, so why didn't/don't they take up the opportunity when it was/is offered to them? ANSWER: Seemingly because they are the ones who are afraid of peace, not Israel. You can do it Zeev, admit it ... if you want, I can say it slowly again and you can just repeat it after me ... ""THEY will NEVER be part of Israel, no matter how much fellows like you will jump up and down to talk of that possibility."(Tim R) "Part of Israel"? Good lord, certainly not. We have already 20% Arabs"(Zeev) Good, then what exactly is your problem again? "Israel having failed to separate from them in time and the Two State formula has become non-implementable"(Zeev) Why exactly would it not be implementable? But even if in the unlikely event that it would not be, why exactly would that be Israel's problem? It would be THEIR problem for NOT taking up multiple opportunities to accept the two state solution ... They would then have two remaining choices: 1. Keep on as they are forever .... 2. Beg their Jordanian brothers who are Arab and Muslim too, to let Jenin, Nablus and other WB Pal Arab population centres be part of Jordan (which was the case between 1948 and 1967). Ditto with Gaza and Egypt. The third choice that you so fret about, to become part of the Jewish people, will NEVER happen because Israel will NOT allow it to happen, NOR are they obliged to let their historic enemies be part of a nation between the Jordan and the sea, just because THEY want it in order to take over the Jewish people via the back door ... Do you understand now Zeev? Or must I continue to explain this simple concept to you?

"your assertion that the settlements are the main cause for the stalemate in the peace negotiations." (Tim R) Of course they are. Listen to our Pres. Shimon Peres warning us, "Israel would have difficulty dismantling West Bank settlements without causing a civil war in Israel." 20 nov 2008. www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1038961.html No WB settlements dismantling, no end to the occupation, and no Palestinian state. No wonder that Bibi, who so relunctantly accepted a Palestinian state, half-heartedly, on his second term only, the least willing to risk a civil war, has refused to stop building in East-Jlem, even not for a while, willfully stalling negotiations. "We can try advancing our case as best as we can. That's what successive Israeli governments have been doing with mixed degrees of success." (Tim R) Mixed degrees of success? The understatement of the year. Well, this year is still young. You have enough time to come up with a more pathetic joke than this one.

"They can and always will have the right for equal voting rights in THEIR own country ... " (Tim R) "Has nobody told you yet? Palestinians have no country of their own"(Zeev) They were offered THEIR country several times but they chose to play for higher stakes. They want to usurp Israel and make it their country. So, while they persist with their zero sum game, they just won't be able to vote, sounds fair to me ... ""Just think what they could have got ... " (Tim R) "Poor you, stuck in the past"(Zeev) I just responded to your assertion that time is on their side and demonstrated, using recent history (the last 62 years) that time is NOT on their side. Are you sorry I did? "Remember the days ...."(Zeev) Now who is stuck in the past Zeev? "their Chairman has been received in great pomp, more than once, by the President of our only ally country"(Zeev) So?

"They can and always will have the right for equal voting rights in THEIR own country ... " (Tim R) Has nobody told you yet? Palestinians have no country of their own. "Just think what they could have got ... " (Tim R) Poor you, stuck in the past. Just think, they have never been so close of getting their own country. Remember the days our leaders were denying their very existence as a distinct people? Since then their Chairman has been received in great pomp, more than once, by the President of our only ally country. And we all had to hear, not so long ago, a US Secretary of State telling us that, "The Palestinians deserve to live under better conditions than they are subjected to, and be free of the humiliation of occupation, in a state of their own." Ms. C. Rice, in October 2006. www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/773549.html "THEY will NEVER be part of Israel, no matter how much fellows like you will jump up and down to talk of that possibility." (Tim R) "Part of Israel"? Good lord, certainly not. We have already 20% Arabs. Some of us are openly talking about 'transferring' them elsewhere. They don't say where, nor how. But - Israel having failed to separate from them in time and the Two State formula has become non-implementable - yes, part of a new country in the making, for all its inhabitants, extending from the sea to the river, where a Jewish minority is caught between two impossible choices, either to live under a Palestinian prime minister's rule, or to attempt desperately to impose its own rule over an Arab majority. That would not be the state of Israel. THAT is the "possibility fellows like [me] jump up and down to talk of". You have misread me. As so often.

"Why is it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to retract THEIR old policy and to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people?" (Tim R) "I already answered that. See #133"(Zeev) No, Zeev, you have NOT answered it. You only repeated THEIR excuse for not making that simple symbolic gesture for peace which would show that they are willing renounce their old excuse to wage war against the Jewish state ... But you know what Zeev? Don't bother answering, I am OK with that. I already know the answer: THIS GENERATION OF PALESTINIAN ARAB LEADERS DON'T REALLY WANT PEACE WITH ISRAEL, THEY STILL DREAM OF ISRAEL'S DESTRUCTION ... That's what their refusal shows. Otherwise, at worst, they might just be bemused by Israel's insistence, make a joke of it and then grudgingly agree.... FOR THE SAKE OF PEACE .....

"Unlike the Arabs in 1948 who ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews, Israel did NOT ethnically cleanse Arabs from East Jlem after 1967. Arabs are still allowed to live there."(Tim R) "That`s a fact, I agree with you. Just don`t say "the Arabs", say "the Jordanians"(Zeev) OK, let's be precise, Zeev, Jordanians together with Palestinian Arab irregular forces did the ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem's Jews in 1948 "Can we consider this issue closed?"(Zeev) Only if you won't repeat your assertion that the settlements are the main cause for the stalemate in the peace negotiations. "What the Arabs are objecting to what, even regarding East Jlem, is of no weight at all to me and to my like-minded friends"(Zeev) Then please stop repeating their propaganda about so called international law. Call it what it is: Power politics involving the arab/Muslim voting bloc in the UN and the politics of intimidation, blackmail and oil... "Debating whether the entire world`s position is baseless or not, morally right or wrong, is childish and wasting time, unless you can think of some practical way for Israel to change it - before it is too late. Can you?"(Zeev) OK, at long last, you have come up with a fair argument. No, Israel and we cannot change world opinion overnight. But at least we can try by advancing our own case as best as we can. That's what successive Israeli governments have been doing with mixed degrees of success. As for the rest of us, all we can do is help wherever we can instead of rolling over, playing dead and parrot the propaganda of our enemies as if we were afflicted by Stockholm syndrome.... I actually do believe that Israel has the chance to present it's case effectively because NOT everyone out there is corrupt and biased. There is a silent majority that tends to formulate it's own opinion, slowly but surely. And in the longer term, it will be THEIR opinions that will count, not that of the idle chattering class. "Think Serbia and South Africa. We don`t want Israel to be, one day, added to the list, do we?"(Zeev) That's back to your BS Zeev. I have already answered this assertion of yours, I won't waste my time answering it again ....

"Why is it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to retract THEIR old policy and to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people?" (Tim R) I already answered that. See #133. "For 62 years they have been saying that they MUST remove the Jewish character of Israel and make it an Arab state instead." (Tim R) They were not alone. All our neighbours used to say the very same thing. We are now in peace with two of them [and a third one is offering to negotiate] and that, without any of our PM's having ever thought about demanding them "to retract THEIR old policy". Begin and Rabin were smarter than that. Or simply sincere in their search for peace.

"Unlike the Arabs in 1948 who ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews, Israel did NOT ethnically cleanse Arabs from East Jlem after 1967. Arabs are still allowed to live there." (Tim R) That's a fact, I agree with you. Just don't say "the Arabs", say "the Jordanians". And let us be precise: "To live there" as non-Israeli residents. Up to now. Can we consider this issue closed? "yet Arabs are still objecting to Jews settling in East Jerusalem because despite history, they still claim that it should be an exclusively Arab city?" (Tim R) What the Arabs are objecting to what, even regarding East Jlem, is of no weight at all to me and to my like-minded friends. Why should we view the Arabs' objection as more important than what the international community without exception is telling us: that when it comes to decide who should be sovereign in East Jlem, our past history there is in its eyes, totally irrelevant. That's a hard fact, like it or not. Our leaders have accepted it. Proof is their unrelenting and feverish construction in E-Jlem, in the hope that the rest of the world would one day bow to the 'fait accompli'. Debating whether the entire world's position is baseless or not, morally right or wrong, is childish and wasting time, unless you can think of some practical way for Israel to change it - before it is too late. Can you? Don't wait too long, not much time is left to us. We have been warned. See "Battle of numbers: Jewish minority [in all Eretz-Israel] by 2020", Jerusalem Post, Oct 25, 2007. www.jpppi.org.il/ (click 'News & Events' then 'From the press') Prof. Della Pergola holds the chair of Israel-Diaspora Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and is a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute. Think Serbia and South Africa. We don't want Israel to be, one day, added to the list, do we?

"The Debate (Zeev and Tim R) on the Exaggerated Demographic Threat"(Steve) It wouldn't be the first time that Palestinian Arabs manipulated statistics to their own advantage ... Sorry if I gave the impression that I supported Zeev's position. Trust me, there is NOT much that Zeev and I agree on ...

Former Ambassador Yoram Ettinger recently published the results of a detailed population analysis. "An audit of births, deaths, school and voter registration and migration documentation from Israel and the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics...exposes a 66 percent distortion in the current number of West Bank (or, Judea and Samaria) Arabs: 1.55 million and not 2.5 million, as claimed by the Palestinian Authority...Inflated numbers have provided the Palestinians with inflated international foreign aid and inflated water supply by Israel." An accurate assessment of current demographic trends left Ettinger optimistic.

"Israel has the right to at least some of the settlements." (Tim R) Who said? And which ones? Nations have no right whatsoever except those granted by the community of nations. Anything else is for internal consumption, the stuff ceremonial speeches are made of: "Our Inalienable Right to this, our Fundamental Right to that ... " This is what Milosevic used to spout off regularly. It didn't help him much. Lament the fact, whine about it as much as you like, Israel cannot change that. " ... the right to at least some of the settlements, irrespective of what your politicized (and corrupt) UN claims to be international law." (Tim R) Come up with some idea about how to effectively de-politicize and uncorrupt what the entire world claims to be international law. We will then discuss this issue again. Until you do, my position is and will stay that we shall honour the commitments we made when joining the UNO. Or else ... Think Serbia and South Africa. We don't want Israel to be added to the list, do we? " [International law] is just the political will of the ruling - or would be ruling - class which, in the case of Israel AND Serbia, is the powerful coalition of Arab/Muslim nations who force their will on other nations by the politics of fear and oil." (Tim R) Are you really telling me that it is fear of what "the powerful coalition of Arab/Muslim nations" (name some of them) can wreak on the international community - that has led it to help Kosovo gain its independence from Serbia? And to bring Milosevic and his accomplices to justice? And to embargo South Africa? Is that an issue I am supposed to discuss with you? Be serious. I may as well discuss the influence of Saturn on your perception of the world.

"They also can wait for "the Jewish character of Israel to dissipate", in a future not so distant anymore. They have waited for 62 years, they can afford to wait for one or two generations more"(Zeev) Really Zeev? Where have you been all your life? The longer they wait, the worse the deal they will end up with. It has always been so but they and it seems people like you delude themselves that time is on their side. You really must hate them Zeev, otherwise you wouldn't encourage them in their folly ... Just think what they could have got: - Had they accepted Israel's right to exist before 1948 - Had they agreed to recognize Israel right after 1948 - Had they agreed to recognize Israel after 1967 - Had Arafat been more of a visionary and accepted the Taba offer Notice that their options seemed to be worsening as time went on. Go figure Zeev ... "...for equal voting rights in all the Land..."(Zeev) Sure Zeev, they can and always will have the right for equal voting rights in THEIR own country but NOT in Israel. Because THEY are NOT and NEVER will be part of Israel, no matter how much fellows like you will jump up and down to talk of that possibility, OK Zeev?

"Why is it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people?"(Tim R) For 62 years they have been saying that they MUST remove the Jewish character of Israel and make it an Arab state instead. Now, for the sake of peace, they are asked to retract THEIR old policy. And you and people like you are falling over to give them an excuse NOT to renounce their old policies by acknowledging ISRAEL as the only state (as opposed to 13 Arab states) in the world which is for the Jewish people it. Go figure ...

" ... you never stop calling the palestinians 'stateless people'. When did these 'stateless people' have a state of their own?" (A. Zekaria) Never. Then what? The Kurds never had a state of their own - right? "The Kurds are a stateless people ... " See under: WHO ARE THE KURDS? www.factmonster.com/dk/encyclopedia/western-asia-and- the-middle-east.html "Except for a brief period during World War II, during which Slovakia was a protectorate state of Nazi Germany, the Slovak people have been the subjects of stronger political entities, such as the Czechs of the Czechoslovak federation, the Magyars of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the sovereigns of the Habsburg Empire." www.slovakia.org/history.htm As from January 1, 1993, Slovakia is an independent state. Until then the Slovak people was a stateless one. Akram, it helps to know a little bit of history. Those of us who are advocating for a 2-state solution are not doing so because we are palestinians or arabs. We are doing so because, as we see it, it is a simple matter of the survival of our country, no less ! "We must either have a Palestinian state in our neighborhood, or we will become a Palestinian state." Yehoshafat Harkabi (1921-1994), head of Military Intelligence (1955-1959), then professor and director of the Institute of International Relations and ME Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. "Harkabi was the only commander of military intelligence to have had a good command of Arabic, in addition to genuinely professional knowledge of Arab civilization and history, and of Islam." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehoshafat_Harkabi Given your unknown credentials, I think I will stick with Harkabi's views. You aren't surprised, are you? We both know since long that you believe in the Almighty eventually intervening in the state of Israel's affairs - and that I don't.

A country where Palestinian families are thrown out of their houses overnight to be replaced by settlers in the name of religion is indeed living in a parallel universe that Europeans or Americans completely fail to understand.

"Israel Would Never Annex Jenin, Nablus, Gaza And other Palestinian populated areas." (Tim R) I do hope so. It would inevitably bring the Zionist project to a miserable end. "Why would bi-nationalism be inevitable?" (Tim R) "Obama is likely to be the last president to have the option of dealing with the two-state solution" in "Can Obama Broker Middle East Peace?" www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1873859,00.html "Their only chance for bringing happiness for their children is by agreeing to the two state solution by negotiating in good faith with Israel." (Tim R) That's hubris and arrogance. Patronizing. It is not their only chance. They also can wait for "the Jewish character of Israel to dissipate", in a future not so distant anymore. They have waited for 62 years, they can afford to wait for one or two generations more. Israel cannot. Our leaders wouldn't do anyone else a favor by agreeing to negotiate in good faith with the Palestinian moderates before it is too late and we Israelis Jews, given the higher Arab birth rates in the geographic area between the sea and the Jordanian border, are a minority facing a South African-style struggle by an Arab majority - for equal voting rights in all the Land.

...Saying. "Israel could [...] claim that East Jerusalem is a Jewish city and that Arabs have no right to settle there." (Tim R) "Exactly what Israel DOES claim ..."(Zeev) Still avoiding the issue, eh Zeev? But unlike the Arabs in 1948 who ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews, Israel did NOT ethnically cleanse Arabs from East Jerusalem after 1967. Arabs are still allowed to live there yet Arabs are still objecting to Jews settling in East Jerusalem because despite history, they still claim that it should be an exclusively Arab city ? ?Honesty In Debating Is Debating My Central argument, which is - remember? : "Who was majority in any place for any time before any day?(Zeev) No Zeev, that?s NOT what we were debating. We were debating your assertion that Israel?s settlement policy is the impediment to peace. And I reminded you why Israel DID/DOES have the right to at least some of the settlements irrespective of what your politicized (and corrupt) UN claims to be international law. Once again (rehearse it please Zeev) any so called law which is arbitrary and is not exercised equally to ALL is NOT really law. It is just the political will of the ruling class or the would be ruling class which in the case of Israel AND Serbia is the powerful coalition of Arab/Muslim nations who force their will on other nations by the politics of fear and oil ?

"Fatah [...] pays lip service to peace yet they make impossible demands." (Tim R) Nobody can honestly speak about what would actually be their demands until after formal negotiations have been completed or otherwise terminated. Israeli on-going construction in East Jerusalem is not "a demand", it is establishing facts in the ground, the very negation of negotiations. "some leftists claim that Israel is the impediment to peace." (Tim R) Some leftists claim that (not Israel but) the Israeli settlements are an impediment to peace. As long as there are Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the occupation cannot end, and no viable Palestinian state can be established. No Palestinian state, no peace and security for Israel. "Why is it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people?" (Tim R) A state for the Jewish people/nation is the first tenet of Zionism. Only deceitful politicians - coveting the land on which a stateless population is dwelling - are demanding Chairman Abbas to prove himself more Zionist than Pres. Sadat and King Hussein. "No one would have any difficulty acknowledging that Italy is the state for Italian people, that Greece is the state for Greek people or Russia the state for Russian people." (Tim R) In the course of their long history Italy, Greece and Russia have negotiated and signed a lot of peace agreements each with numerous other countries. None of them has ever demanded to be formally recognized as the state for, respectively, Italian/Greek/Russian people. If the Israelis want their country to be and stay "for the Jewish people", it is for them to take care of that, not for anyone else. "Could it be that they still did not give up their 62 year old aim to destroy the state of the Jewish people?" (Tim R) Could it be that what Egypt, Jordan and Syria together failed to do, the Palestinians are planning to do all by themselves? With what? Tanks and jet fighters fuelled with olive oil? Orange juice? Tell me Tim R, I promise not to laugh, how old are you?

... you never stop calling the palestinians 'stateless people'. When did these 'stateless people' have a state of their own? You don't think these questions needs to be part of your thinking as far as the palestinians are concerned ? Those of us who are objecting any kind of 2-state solution are not doing so because they are palestinians or arabs. We are doing so because of their history regarding their intentions towards israel & the jewish people. A simple matter of survival no less ! In fact their intentions are clear and repeatedly stated by them loud and clear. All one needs to listen to them or read their charters of both hamas & fatah ! Once you asked me what Israel has to do with the palestinians ? That is not a question that can be solved by finding an answer or not. If the palestinians have a claim on this land, such a claim must involve jordan that was part of this land ! If jordan refused to accept its responsibility that doesn't mean israel must be blamed.

...Saying. "Israel could [...] claim that East Jerusalem is a Jewish city and that Arabs have no right to settle there." (Tim R) "Exactly what Israel DOES claim ..."(Zeev) Still avoiding the issue, eh Zeev? But unlike the Arabs in 1948 who ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews, Israel did NOT ethnically cleanse Arabs from East Jerusalem after 1967. Arabs are still allowed to live there yet Arabs are still objecting to Jews settling in East Jerusalem because despite history, they still claim that it should be an exclusively Arab city ? ?Honesty In Debating Is Debating My Central argument, which is - remember? : "Who was majority in any place for any time before any day?(Zeev) No Zeev, that?s NOT what we were debating. We were debating your assertion that Israel?s settlement policy is the impediment to peace. And I reminded you why Israel DID/DOES have the right to at least some of the settlements irrespective of what your politicized (and corrupt) UN claims to be international law. Once again (rehearse it please Zeev) any so called law which is arbitrary and is not exercised equally to ALL is NOT really law. It is just the political will of the ruling class or the would be ruling class which in the case of Israel AND Serbia is the powerful coalition of Arab/Muslim nations who force their will on other nations by the politics of fear and oil ?

... Gaza And other Palestinian populated areas. "if they don`t get rid of the settlements, bi-nationalism becomes a reality and the Jewish character of Israel dissipates"(Zeev) So why would bi-nationalism be inevitable? Arabs can go on living in their own population centres forever but they will NEVER become part of Israel, no matter how much they want to hang onto the coat tails of Israel for their own perverse political reasons .... It, IS their choice Zeev. They can either make peace with Israel and have their own state or they can go on as they are if they still dream of destroying Israel. Either way, they will NEVER achieve that objective [Israel's destruction], their only chance for bringing happiness for their children is by agreeing to the two state solution by negotiating in good faith with Israel.

...elected in democratic elections in 2005. "I rather prefer to talk about their leaders"(Zeev) And who did the MAJORITY of Palestinian Arabs vote for? Hamas and Fatah neither of whom are strong proponents of PEACE. Hamas openly rejects peace both by action (suicide bombings and rockets) and intent (open declarations about their intent to destroy Israel). Fatah is a bit more subtle. They pay lip service to peace yet they make impossible demands: 1. They demand their so called Right of Return. 2. They will not compromise on borders and agree land offsets in exchange for more defensible borders than the 1949 armistice lines. So, I don't understand the trend that some leftists are trying to promote; claiming that Israel is the one who is afraid of peace, that Israel is the impediment to peace. Such pronouncements are akin to declarations that the earth is flat ... "I can`t see no reason at all to expect anything more from any of our neighbours..."(Zeev) Yes but I asked you: Can you see any reason why, for the sake of peace, Palestinian Arabs SHOULD NOT acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people/nation? What is it that so hard for them to make a symbolic gesture for peace? After all, no one would have any difficulty to acknowledge that Italy is the state for Italian people or that Greece is the state for Greek people or Russia is the state for Russian people ... So what is it that makes it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people? Could it be that they still did not give up their 62 year old aim to destroy the state of the Jewish people (because it's a NON Arab state)?

...elected in democratic elections in 2005. "I rather prefer to talk about their leaders"(Zeev) And who did the MAJORITY of Palestinian Arabs vote for? Hamas and Fatah neither of whom are strong proponents of PEACE. Hamas openly rejects peace both by action (suicide bombings and rockets) and intent (open declarations about their intent to destroy Israel). Fatah is a bit more subtle. They pay lip service to peace yet they make impossible demands: 1. They demand their so called Right of Return. 2. They will not compromise on borders and agree land offsets in exchange for more defensible borders than the 1949 armistice lines. So, I don't understand the trend that some leftists are trying to promote; claiming that Israel is the one who is afraid of peace, that Israel is the impediment to peace. Such pronouncements are akin to declarations that the earth is flat ... "I can`t see no reason at all to expect anything more from any of our neighbours..."(Zeev) Yes but I asked you: Can you see any reason why, for the sake of peace, Palestinian Arabs SHOULD NOT acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people/nation? What is it that so hard for them to make a symbolic gesture for peace? After all, no one would have any difficulty to acknowledge that Italy is the state for Italian people or that Greece is the state for Greek people or Russia is the state for Russian people ... So what is it that makes it so hard for Palestinian Arabs to acknowledge that Israel is the state for the Jewish people? Could it be that they still did not give up their 62 year old aim to destroy the state of the Jewish people (because it's a NON Arab state)?

"Israel could [...] claim that East Jerusalem is a Jewish city and that Arabs have no right to settle there." (Tim R) Exactly what Israel DOES claim, and, as from June '67, has always claimed. Read Res. 478, of August 1980, which declared (the United States abstaining) that Israel's 1980 Jerusalem Law is null and void while affirming it was a violation of international law. Not one word even suggesting/implying that East Jerusalem is now "an Arab city". Your accusation is baseless. Honesty In Debating Is Debating My Central argument, which is - remember? : "Who was majority in any place for any time before any day - is inded totally irrelevant, perhaps not in your eyes, but most certainly in the eyes of International Law, as Serbia had to learn at great expense in Kosovo." (#108) Debating side issues, like what makes it irrelevant, International Law or Politics, is utterly pointless and a waste of time (2nd try). Irrelevant it was in the Serbian case, it is now in Israel's case too, without distinction of religion. Did I read you correctly? You accept the irrelevancy, you are just whining about the world's unfairness. So do many Serbs, I presume. That's ok with me. Be well. And take care when you cross the street, or ask a grownup to help you.

"As long as the Palestinians demand the right of return and Jeruslam ...." (Jason) In the context of this discussion, there no such a thing as "the Palestinians". You don't seem to know it, but there two kinds of Palestinians, one in full control of Gaza, and recognised by the entire civilized world as a terrorist islamist organisation, while the PLO controls the West Bank, and at its head is someone Pres. GW Bush told us is a "man of peace", in Sep 2006. It is silly, to say the least, to expect these two groups to speak of one voice, and to give up any demand before the start of negotiations. Again: Public declarations and opinion polls cannot come instead of negotiations. "It's only matter of time before Israel commit a genocide." (Jason) If that is what the Israelis want, let it be. Look, it is not the Palestinians' business to prevent an Israeli PM from sitting on the chair left empty in The Hague by Slobodan Milosevic, nor to save Israel from itself. The Palestinians have nothing to lose, we Israelis may lose our state. "Getting ourselves a state was hard, but losing it is easy." Pinhas Sapir (1906-1975), quoted by Amos Elon in his review of Tom Segev's book "1967: And the Country Changed its Face" - in "So misled by the leaders", Haaretz, July 22, 2005. www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=603316# On P.Sapir, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinchas_Sapir

... argument rather than to debate side issues ... "Not only the Arabs. Of all the UN state members, not one has recognized the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem nor the right of the Israelis to settle there.That`s a fact - even if it seems unfair to you"(Zeev) My central argument was that it's unfair for the world to ignore the fact that Jerusalem was majority Jewish for the last 150 years and East Jerusalem had a Jewish population too which was ethnically cleansed by Arabs in 1948. And then, after 1967, after Israel re-conquered East Jerusalem, it is NOT a fair argument to claim that East Jerusalem is an Arab city and to use that argument to forbid Israelis to return to East Jerusalem and settle there ... The fact that the UN accepts such an Arab argument proves my point that the UN is politicised and does not represent the rule of law. Do you want me to prove it? OK, here goes: Israel could follow the example of the Arabs in 1948 (in reverse). Ethnically cleanse all Arabs and then, a few years later, put it's hand on it's heart, claim that East Jerusalem is a Jewish city and that Arabs have no right to settle there... That's the excuse that your UN uses to pretend that by law, Israelis cannot settle in what is now "an Arab city". Like I said Zeev, proper law is above anyone or anything. It should be administered without fear or favour, it favours no one, neither Arab, Jew, Israeli, American or anyone else ... But that's NOT the kind of law that the UN promotes in our day. It promotes the rule of the powerful and the influential based on self interest and the politics of oil ..... That's why small nations like Israel and Serbia don't accept the rulings of the UN. A bit like the slaves did NOT accept that they were destined to be slaves just because their masters said so and the majority agreed with the masters. In the same way as slavery was eventually abolished because men of courage and REAL justice came forward, in the same way, the current tyranny of the UN will be shown to be unjust, all in good time ...

As long as the Palestinians demands the right of return and Jeruslam. Israel right wing will grew stronger and more radical and left will grow weaker. It only matter of time before Israel commit a genicide.

" ... Jews have no right to settle in East Jerusalem? That does NOT seem fair to any reasonable human being ... " (Tim R) 1- Honesty in debating begins with using the right terms. Those to whom the Arabs are denying any right to build and settle in East Jerusalem are not THE Jews but the Israeli nationals, whatever is their religion. 2- Not only the Arabs. Of all the UN state members, not one has recognized the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem nor the right of the Israelis to settle there. That's a fact - even if it seems unfair to you. "Prove that the outcome in Kosovo was in line with 'international law' instead of international politics." (Tim R) Of all the UN state members, not one has claimed that separating Kosovo from Serbia was contrary to the International Law - except Serbia itself. "We Albanians do not want to be part of an arrogant country like Serbia who thinks that everyone has to follow international laws except Serbia itself. Like it or not, Kosova is an independent place and you have no power to do anything. This is the truth. I know it hurts you but you deserve it. Thanks to USA for the great help given to Albanians. Also, thanks to Russia for not supporting Serbia ... " From Afrim Hoxha, an Albanian talkbacker, 17 April 2007. www.b92.net/eng/news/comments.php?nav_id=40722 Do you see now? "Who was majority in any place for any time before any day is irrelevant ..." That was my contention, in #108. Discussing what makes it irrelevant, be it International Law or international politics, is utterly pointless and a waste of time. Kosovo, once the cradle of the Serbian nation and culture, the home of its ancient Orthodox Christian monasteries - has separated from Serbia, and is now an independent place. Like it or not. And Milosevic, who passed away on a chair of infamy, has only brought shame to his once proud and heroic nation.

"It is up to the Palestinian Arabs. Don't fret about the demographic problem: Israel will never make, nor is it obliged to make, a foreign people who have been a historic enemy - into citizens." (Tim R) Don't be so naively optimistic, such a day-dreamer putting the fate of the Jewish state into the hands of the stateless Palestinians. Not that we haven't been warned. "The Israeli settlements are leading the Israelis to their worst nightmare. If they get rid of the settlements, there is the likelihood that a civil war with Jewish settlers will start. If they don't get rid of the settlements, bi-nationalism becomes a reality and the Jewish character of Israel dissipates." In "Israel Can Look Away No Longer", by Sherri Muzher, Jurist Doctor in International and Comparative Law, July 10, 2004. http://usa.mediamonitors.net/Headlines/Israel-Can-Look- Away-No-Longer There is still today a Jewish majority between the sea and the river. When the day comes in a future not so distant, and Israel has failed to separate in time from the Palestinians, and the two-state solution has collapsed, Israel would find itself in an untenable apartheid-like situation. Given the higher Arab birth rates in the geographic area between the sea and the Jordanian border, we shall then inevitably face a South African-style struggle by an Arab majority for equal voting rights in all the Land. As soon as that happens, the state of Israel is finished. "A phenomenon noticeable throughout history, regardless of place or period, is the pursuit by governments of policies contrary to their own interests.' " Barbara Tuchman, historian, twice winner of the Pulitzer Price for General Non-Fiction, in her "March of Folly - From Troy to Vietnam", 1984.

"Peace [will] be the death of [the] Israel right ... " (Jason) I can readily agree with that. The death of its present posture at least. "Most Israelis are heavily against giving up any part of Jerusalem in a peace deal." (Jason) There was a time, not so long ago, when most of the Israelis were heavily against a Palestinian state west of the Jordan river. Remember Dayan's "Better Sharm-el-Sheikh without peace than peace without it" ? "If the Palestinians give these two thing up right away ... " (Jason) No Palestinian can give up anything "right away", in the absence of formal, serious and fair negotiations. Public declarations and opinion polls cannot come instead.

"What we are talking about is Israel and the Palestinian Arabs ... " (Tim R) Yes of course, I noticed. But not exactly: I rather prefer to talk about their leaders. In the context of this debate - about how to end our conflict with the stateless population we took control of 42 years ago - talking about "THE Palestinians" as a whole, which has its own and unique opinion and is expressing it with one voice, as one man, is a serious mistake. Like we had when occupied by foreign military forces, they too have their own moderates and pragmatists, and their own intransigents. On how to end their conflict with us, they are as divided as we Israelis are. "What Israel expected or did NOT expect from Egypt and Jordan is entirely irrelevant." (Tim R) I can't object more strongly to that. What we expected from Egypt and Jordan was peace and acceptance of the existence of our country as a given fact - against occupied land. This is what we negotiated with their representatives, and finally got, I can't see no reason at all to expect anything more from any of our neighbours, the Palestinian state-to-be included. Ps: In my previous post #114, instead of "a definition of country", please read "a definition of our country".

"Peace [will] be the death of [the] Israel right ... " (Jason) I can readily agree with that. The death of its present posture at least. "Most Israelis are heavily against giving up any part of Jerusalem in a peace deal." (Jason) There was a time, not so long ago, when most of the Israelis were heavily against a Palestinian state west of the Jordan river, and returning the Sinai to Egypt. Remember Dayan's "Better Sharm-el-Sheikh without peace than peace without it" ? And Sharon's "Netzarim is as vital to us as is Tel-Aviv"? "If the Palestinians give these two thing up right away ... " (Jason) No Palestinian can give up anything "right away", in the absence of formal, serious and fair negotiations. Public declarations and opinion polls cannot come instead.

Jason, in a way you are right. The Israeli far-right wing is strong because there is no peace. And there can be no peace while the Israeli right is strong. It's one of those chicken-and-egg things. Could there be peace if the Israeli right was not there to prevent it? No way to tell, because the Israel right IS there primarily to prevent it.

"If the Palestinian Arabs would REALLY be interested in peace, they would be willing to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people/nation" (Tim R) "Absurd. We successfully negotiated peace treaties with two of our neighbour states without even thinking about extracting from them such a definition of country"(Zeev) Really? So after 62 years of fighting a war against the Jewish people because they returned to their ancestral homeland and re-established their Jewish state (a NON Arab state), it is too much to ask them, for the sake of peace, to ACCEPT such a state at long last? Why exactly is it so difficult for them to accept a Jewish state? Could it be that they still aim to destroy it and that's why they don't want to accept the Jewish state? By the way, what Israel expected or did NOT expect from Egypt and Jordan is entirely irrelevant. What we are talking about is Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, please stick to the topic Zeev. Furthermore, I also mentioned two other impediments to peace: 1. The Palestinian Arab demand of the so called right of return ... 2. The Palestinian Arab refusal to accept the idea of land offsets in exchange for Israel keeping the large settlement blocs. You did not address those impediments to peace Zeev. Why do you think Abbas has NOT been willing to compromise on the above demands? Don't you think that his refusal to compromise on those issues is the reason there is no peace today, Zeev? "Hamas and our own religious fanatics are not interested in such negotiations.."(Zeev) More propaganda from you Zeev. You are trying to equate Hamas with our "religious fanatics" but there is no comparison ... - Firstly because "our religious fanatics" don't have a policy to go around blowing up Palestinian women and children. Unlike Hamas who openly declare their right to attack Israeli civilians. - "Our religious fanatics" don't go around declaring that Jenin, Nablus and other Palestinian towns have no right to exist. Hamas on the other hand does NOT accept that ANY Jewish towns have a right to exist. - When push comes to shove, "our religious fanatics" are NOT the final arbiters of what happens. When an Israeli government decides to do something, like when they decided to uproot the Gaza settlers, it happens and "our religious fanatics" cannot stop it. Hamas on the other hand clearly can and DOES STOP peace ... ALL THE TIME! Last, but not least, don't fret about the demographic problem Zeev because Israel will never make, nor is it obliged to make, a foreign people who have been a historic enemy into citizens. The final outcome will be (whenever it comes about) is the two state solution. Will it happen sooner? Will it happen later? Who knows ... it is up to the Palestinian Arabs. It will happen when they will decide that the future of their children is more important to them than the destruction of the ONLY Jewish nation in the Middle East ....

""Who was majority in any place for any time before any day is irrelevant ..."(Zeev) So, all the Arabs had to do was to clear East Jerusalem of Jews in 1948 then after 1967 they could claim that since East Jerusalem was settled only by Arabs, Jews have no right to settle there? That does NOT seem fair to any reasonable human being ... "as Serbia had to learn at great expense in Kosovo". That was my contention in #108. You failed to address it"(Zeev) Read again what I said. I said that you are confusing "International law" with "international politics". Now prove to me that the outcome in Kosovo was indeed in line with "international law" instead of international politics. Then prove to me that what is advocated against Israel is in line with "international law" rather than international politics. But be prepared, if you do manage to prove the above, then I will use your proof to show you that the Arabs, Russians, Americans and NATO have acted/do act against international law in their wars against THEIR enemies so Israel would be in good company ....

One the main reason Israel right is so strong is because of the Palestinians demands. Most Israelies are heavly againist give up any part Jeresulam in a peace deal.Most Israelies fear the right of return of Palestinian refugees. If the Palestinians give these two thing up right away .It would weak Israel right and strongth Israel left. Peace be the death of Israel right for the most part.

"Who was majority in any place for any time before any day is irrelevant in the eyes of International Law (as Serbia had to learn at great expense in Kosovo". That was my contention in #108. You failed to address it. A discussion of who establishes International Law and should or can interpret it and how - will not do, and sounds rather like dodging the issue. I offered you the Serbian case as an example. Show its irrelevancy, or present a counter-example. "If the Palestinian Arabs would REALLY be interested in peace, they would be willing to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people/nation" (Tim R) Absurd. We successfully negotiated peace treaties with two of our neighbour states without even thinking about extracting from them such a definition of country. A state for the Jewish people/nation is the first tenet of Zionism. Only deceitful politicians unwilling to end our armed occupation of a stateless population are demanding that the Palestinians choose representatives more Zionist than Pres. Sadat and King Hussein. For a refutation, I can't do better than Haaretz editorialist. Read "Who wants a Jewish state", November 15, 2007. "Such a deal would solve ... " (Tim R) No deal can be struck but in the course of fair and serious negotiations. Hamas and our own religious fanatics are not interested in such negotiations. The current situation is very convenient for them. It only helps them advance their causes. "Time is against us. Demographically, it works for the Palestinians, and politically, in favor of Hamas and the settlers." Ami Ayalon, former head of Israel's internal security service (Shabak), in Dec 22, 2001. "We are running out of time for a Two-state Solution", Akiva Eldar, August 16, 2008. www.fmep.org/analysis/analysis/ we-are-running-out-of-time-for-a-two-state-solution

Really excellent article Bradley - it's time those who don't walk around with their hands over their ears and with a blindfold, shouting ever louder to drown out the real world, which no longer fits their narrow ideology,spoke out - Israel is in danger and the danger is not coming from a bogey man from the outside - the danger is within. Occupation poisoning will bring this beautiful country to its knees, if good men continue to do nothing. Time to stand up and be counted!

' they say peace and safety, suddenly destruction commeth upon them' .

Jason, you say unless the Palestinians agree to give up most of their demands the Israelis will exterminate them all in 10-40 years. Suppose you are right. If Palestinians do agree to a small imitation of a nation, would that save them? What would keep Israel from conquering them again in 10-40 years, and perhaps kill them all anyway?

If the left wings instead push the Palestinians give into Israel demands when came to peace talks. Thier would be peace however because they did not. Cloak is ticking in about ten years time give or take a few decades.Israel kill every Palestinians west bank and gaze strip. Guess peace has not been reach by that to time. Look at how right stronghting if you do not believe me.Palestinians most give up East Jeruslam and Right of return and get state before death finds them.

...Politics. "perhaps not in your eyes, but most certainly in the eyes of International Law ..."(Zeev) It's one thing to establish international laws and another to interpret and administer those laws. Here is a quote outlining how REAL laws should be interpreted and administered: "The rule of law, also called supremacy of law, means that the law is above everyone and it applies to everyone. Whether governor or governed, rulers or ruled, no one is above the law, no one is exempted from the law, and no one can grant exemption to the application of the law. Rule of law is a general legal maxim according to which decisions should be made by applying known principles or laws, without the intervention of discretion in their application.[2] This maxim is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary governance. The word "arbitrary" (from the Latin "arbiter") signifies a judgment made at the discretion of the arbiter, rather than according to the rule of law"(Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law Now here is a question to you Zeev: Can you honestly say that when it comes to Israel and small countries, the laws are interpreted and applied to them in the same manner as to the big powers and the influential power blocs such as Arabs who have oil and an inbuilt majority in the UN comprising of all the Arab and Muslim nations? OF COURSE NOT Zeev, and you would be very brave and deliberately blind to the truth if you would contradict me on that. So, Zeev, please stop your propaganda about so called international law because if the UN would really be interested in applying international law, then everyone would be judged by the same standards including Arabs, Americans, Russians and Israelis but of course that's not what happens in real life is it Zeev? It seems that all those nations and others expect more from Israel and other small nations with fewer resources, than of themselves ... And that's why, no matter how hard Israel tries to compromise and offer peace deals (such as in 1948, 1967, the 1990s, 2000, 2001 and recently), Israel is still the one blamed for lack of progress even though the Palestinian Arabs have now stopped even negotiating. And please STOP pretending that they stopped negotiations because of the settlements. They stopped it because they feel that with Obama, they are in the box seat and that NOW they can dictate terms to Israel. Terms that Israel cannot accept because if they would accept those terms, it would lead to national suicide ... However, if the Palestinian Arabs would REALLY be interested in peace, they would be willing to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people/nation, they would NOT insist on their so called right of return and they would accept border adjustments leaving the larger settlement blocks in Israel's hands in return for which they would get other land offsets. Such a deal would solve the so called problem of the settlements once and for all and peace could break out. But we both know that's not really what Abbas wants, don't we Zeev?

"Jerusalem was majority Jewish for at least 150 years before 1948" (Tim R) This is not half the truth. This is the full truth, but also a truth totally irrelevant. Who was majority in any place for any time before any day - is inded totally irrelevant, perhaps not in your eyes, but most certainly in the eyes of International Law, as Serbia had to learn at great expense in Kosovo. "Kosovo is the cradle of the Serbian nation and culture, the home of its ancient Orthodox Christian monasteries. Serbs can legitimately trace over 1,400 years of presence in the region, ... " See www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/dfasa110706.htm Today, with the help of the international community, Kosovo is a country independent from Serbia, and Milosevic infamously died in The Hague. So you see Tim R, I am not a propagandist. I just know a little bit of history. Go learn some, instead of propagating ideological fantasies. "Israel offered peace to the Arabs in 1948 and even after 1967 when there were no settlements yet." (Tim R) That's true too, and also that I ignored it. On purpose, because I firmly believe in the old Chinese proverb, "When it doesn't work once, try again." And again, and again. We have nothing to loose but our domination over a foreign and stateless people. Which anyway cannot last forever.

One of the greatest unspoken obstacles to a peaceful settlement is this: while many Israelis do not wish to contemplate having Palestinian neighbors as a result of a negotiated "return"; still less do they relish the idea of having Settlers take up residence next door!

comes with peace that sustains the problem. It is also what kept the Apartheid regime in South Africa going, and is one of the things every addict must overcome to become clean and sober.

"Shlomo Gazit and all other Zeevs, none of them came with any solution ... " (A. Zekaria) Totally wrong - as you always are. Read here Gazit's proposal for a solution. " ... an agreement acceptable to the great majority of Palestinian public opinion as a significant achievement and a reasonable solution to their problem. Nothing less than that would be, in Palestinian eyes, a sufficient justification for the Palestinian armed forces waging an all-out campaign against their intransigent factions. But such an agreement can only be achieved between TWO SOVEREIGN PARTIES, Israeli and Palestinian. And it can result only from fair negotiations." Major General (ret.) Shlomo Gazit, first Chief Coordinator of Israeli operations in the territories (1967- 1974), former head of Military Intelligence (1974-1979), and former President of Ben-Gurion University, Beersheva, in the mass circulation daily Maariv, April 4, 2005. www.jewsforajustpeace.com/ "What will happen after that?", you ask. A legitimate question. I never had the opportunity to ask S. Gazit himself, but here is my guess on what he may have answered: In the worst of cases and we are challenged by an hostile Palestinian state, Israel is much better equipped - judging by the past 62 years - to deal with hostile states than we are when confronted with a rebellious stateless population. Time is long past when subjugation of one people by another could lead to peace. What other nations, much more powerful we can ever be, have understood long ago, we, supposedly a clever people, have yet to learn. Now my turn: What do you think would happen after our settlers have got their way and the Two State formula has been rendered totally impraticable?

"Tim R #91, propagandist"(Zeev) "Telling half the truth is one of the prefered ways of cheap propaganda. Anyone would refuse to negotiate over a cake while the other side is busy eating it"(Zeev) You are the one who is telling half truths Zeev. You forgot to mention that Jerusalem was majority Jewish for at least 150 years before 1948 when the Arabs ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of ALL Jews. So when it comes the cake that you are talking about (Jerusalem), you forgot to mention that the Arabs took a giant bite out of it and Israel was/is just trying to get back it's half after they beat back Arab aggression in 1967. By the way, here is another half truth of yours Zeev: In my #94, #95 I talked about how Israel offered peace to the Arabs in 1948 and even after 1967 when there were no settlements yet. You ignored that and decided to talk ONLY about Abbas. But you are wrong even about that because Abbas is setting pre-conditions for peace talks. Yet I recall vividly when he and your ilk were vehemently objecting to what you called Israel's pre-conditions (that the violence must stop). So you see Zeev? You are the one who is te propagandist.

Agnes, having grown up under Apartheid the sidelining of progressive, peace-loving Israelis resonates with my own experience. In South Africa, a large minority of whites were bitterly opposed to Apartheid, and in fact some of the prominent heroes of the anti-Apartheid struggle were white. In my own country there was also a feeling of helplessness sometimes among progressive, egalitarian whites confronting their seeming permanent, if large, minority status in the political framework. But we were far from helpless. The existence of such a sizable block of the privileged class that was actually opposed to the system that perpetuated that privilege, made it more difficult for the Apartheid government to hide its excesses and portray the situation as being other than it was. Its hard to control the movements, access and speech of the very class of people youre sacrificing someone else' freedom and self-determination for,without resorting to tactics that inflame the whole privileged class

Any land evacuated by the IDF will become a base for terrorist assault under Iranian proxy army control. Arab voices of moderation will appear in the Western press alone, while vilification of the Jewish nation in the Arab media and schools will continue. Israelis who dream of "Peace in our Time" should first look for signs of acceptance of the Jewish nation by our Arab neighbors. The recent PA ceremony honoring the homicide bus bomber Dalal Mugrabi once again demonstrates the that only difference between Hamas and the PA is a matter of tactics on how best to destroy the State of Israel.

Any territory vacated by the IDF will become a base of terror against the citizens of Israel with Islamic jihadists supported by Iran in control. Arab voices of moderation apologizing for the murder of innocent Jews will only appear in the Western press, and will quickly be denounced while vitiolic attacks against the Jewish people will continue in the Arabic press and school system inculcating another Arab generation in hate. True peace in the Mid-East will only follow Arab acceptance of a Jewish state in their midst. At the present time, this is but a fool's dream.

"Your belief that divine intervention etc.." Leave the divine intervention for now ! Talk about the human evil which is nearer at home ! Iran etc.. "Shalomo Gasit" and all other Zeevs; none of them came with any solution with exception; israel is an occupier & must end the occupation & give back the land etc... What will happen after that ?! Is nobody's business ! Judging by the past; it is everybody's business ! And you & Shalomo Gasit know that too. But one pretend to be blind & deaf one can't be right in anything !

This article is so totally right and I believe that the only solution to Israel's current problem is to follow the path that Nelson Mandela took in South Africa.

"Abbas refuses even to negotiate with Israel." (Tim R) Telling half the truth is one of the prefered ways of cheap propaganda. Anyone would refuse to negotiate over a cake while the other side is busy eating it. Stop building in the West Bank - including in East-Jerusalem, in other words, stop flouting Security Council resolutions, and see if Abbas still persists in his refusal. "Abbas also said that he could not agree to resume the stalled peace negotiations with Israel as long as construction in West Bank settlements and East Jerusalem continue." in "Abbas: Palestinians will accept only Jerusalem as our capital" Haaretz, 28 jan 2010. www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1145815.html "Following the meeting, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told reporters in Ramallah that Abbas asked Mitchell to 'prevent Israel from taking steps to create facts on the ground in order to turn the negotiations into a series of dictations that go against the American standpoint, as it is presented by President Obama and Senator Mitchell.' " in "US envoy fails to lure Abbas back to Mideast talks", 22 jan 2010. www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3838202,00.html

"Goebbels and Einstein were critical of Jews - can you get the difference of the their 'criticism'?" (17 to Michael #8) Totally absurd. Goebbels was not "critical" of Jews. He was a war criminal. Einstein never killed anyone. Furthermore, he never was "critical of the Jews". You simply don't know what you are talking about. "My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain ... " www.newdemocracyworld.org/Einstein.htm Einstein knew that "the state of Israel" is not synonymous with "the Jewish people". He was an intelligent man. You are not.

"Arabs started killing Jews way back in the 20's & 30's." (Arnold) Start calling things by their proper names, and you will perhaps begin to understand what is going on here ... In the 20's & 30's, not just "Arabs" but Palestinians, started to kill, not just Jews, but Zionists settlers. "The refusal of the Arabs to accept Jews and Israelis ... " (Arnold) Stop seeing Jew-haters everywhere. The Arab Palestinians would have refused to be dispossessed by anyone, even by Scottish Presbyterians or Southern Africa Bushmen. "If we could only turn back the clock ... " (Arnold) If we could only turn back the clock, we would better not allow our own religious fanatics to settle amidst a foreign people, foolishly believing that the stateless population we had just taken control of - would consent to stay forever our silent and obedient subjects.

"The palestinians ask for all Israel & throw the Israelis into the sea." (A. Zekaria) "We in Israel are still unable to internalize three basic things. First, we have not yet freed ourselves from the mindset of an occupier facing the occupied. We are unable to relate to the Palestinians as an independent entity with its own national considerations. Our decision makers, on both the political and the military and intelligence levels, must be constantly reminded that Abu Mazen is no quisling nor collaborator." (Shlomo Gazit) On what the Palestinians are after, Shlomo Gazit seems to hold views very different from yours. Given his credentials (see #74), and on the other hand, your belief that divine intervention will keep Israel from turning into a binational state if the Two-State solution is to become obsolete, - I am sure that no one in his right senses will be surprised to see me sticking with Gazit.

Israel offered peace to the Arabs ever since it's creation in 1948 and in particular: 1. After it's 1967 victory 2. In 2000 Camp David 3. In 2001 Taba 4. Several offers by Olmert in the last few years 5. It even responded positively to the 2002 Saudi offer but wanted to further negotiate aspects of the offer. And what did Israel get in response? - Intransigence - Threats - Ultimatums - Terror - Pre-conditions - No "give" but lots of "take" This brings us to the current situation in which Abbas refuses even to negotiate with Israel. So, my question is this: Which side is the one who seems to be afraid of peace? To me at least the answer seems to be obvious: It's NOT Israel but the Palestinian Arabs are the ones who to try to avoid peace like the plague ... I don't know, is it just me? Or are there some other folk who see it my way?

Israel offered peace to the Arabs ever since it's creation in 1948 and in particular: 1. After it's 1967 victory 2. In 2000 Camp David 3. In 2001 Taba 4. Several offers by Olmert in the last few years 5. It even responded positively to the 2002 Saudi offer but wanted to further negotiate aspects of the offer. And what did Israel get in response? - Intransigence - Threats - Ultimatums - Terror - Pre-conditions - No "give" but lots of "take" This brings us to the current situation in which Abbas refuses even to negotiate with Israel. So, my question is this: Which side is the one who seems to be afraid of peace? To me at least the answer seems to be obvious: It's NOT Israel but the Palestinian Arabs are the ones who to try to avoid peace like the plague ... I don't know, is it just me? Or are there some other folk who see it my way?

Yes indeed by those who closed their eyes & minds to what is going around them ! "For them moderation is a lack of courage and existing under eternal seige is the only viable option for israel and jews" Y.S Aren't you blinding yourself of the facts ? Israel accepted the two states in 1947. Israel singed peace with egypt & jordan. Is that 'accepting the siege' ? The palestinians by 'all or nothing' are the ones who are refusing peace and themselves 'accepted the siege' ! Try anything Yaakov except lying to yourself !

Although I have other reasons not to support the religious right , I cannot call settlement of Judea and Samaria 'land theft' It is merely the will of an ethnicly cleansed people to return to their native patrimony in Judea from which they were cleansed 1,875 years ago.

They can't act like Sadat ! Sadat came to jerusalem "... as a ruler of independent country whose undisputed border marked on the map etc..! Zeev. The difference is obvious ! The palestinians are not 'a ruler' of any 'independent country' & their 'dispute' is to ask for all israel & throw the israelis into the sea. Withe their brothers the Arabs tried to do that in many wars & intifaths. And they still blame Israel for defending itself ! There is a black v white between the truth & lies !

"what happened when Israel left Gaza?" (Lisa) Very simple. Think for yourself - if you know how to - instead of parroting ideological lies. When then-PM Sharon decided to publicly humiliate the man his people had just elected for Chairman by a clear majority ("a still unfeathered chick" - Sharon), and that Israel should withdraw UNILATERALLY from Gaza, in fact offering it on a silver plate to anyone willing to take possession, what happened is what had to happen: Gaza became an Islamist enclave we cannot live with, nor defeat - we who, 42 years ago, knew how to crush three Arab armies in six days. Every folly and its price. This is what happened, Ms Lisa, when Israel left Gaza - unilaterally.

Over thirty years ago I had an interesting conversation while hitch hiking near Jerusalem. The driver couldn't understand why I wanted to stay in America--where everybody hated Jews. He thought me 'dangerously' naive when I told him that in my social circle,and in general, my Jewishness was only an interesting aspect of who I was, not the basis of my associations. We didn't change each others' minds, but what I remember about the conversation was that he, himself, had never been abroad. I fear that while Israel has been waiting, and waiting, for the Palestinian situation to somehow resolve itself-- delaying the day of finally reeling in the leash on the right-wing monster that has grown in the meantime may prove to be also an existential threat.

between criticising the actions of a **state** and those of a **race**. They are entirely different things. The world criticises Sudan continually. It is not because people are anti Sudanese Arab Muslims as a race, it is because they detest a regime that uses ethnic cleansing, killing and rape against minorities. Ditto Serbia in the '80s, the criticism was not racially-motivated against Serbs, it was aimed at a government and chauvinist right wing that bought into invasion, ethnic cleansing and barbaric treatment of occupied people. Ditto Israel. The criticism is of the regime and an extremist right wing who practice land theft and systematic oppression of an occupied minority. Because it has gone on so long now and the views of Israel's leaders remain grotesque, there is a danger that 'Israel' and 'Jew' become synonymous terms of criticism. At last you will have your wish come true. You can then shout 'anti-semite' at the end of every sentence and close your ears to all reality.

Sir, Only minuscule minority of near zero of humanity engaged in consistent blaming of Israel for anything happening in ME, World and their dreams. You belong to the group of haters of Jewish people - which is almost normal for an European. Indeed, Criticism of Israel is NOT anti-semitic per se - however most of the people engaged in it full time - like you - are antisemites. Goebbels and Einstein were critical of Jews - can you get the difference of the their "criticism"?

" ... the Arabs follow their old habits developed when their civilization had power." (Logios) Flawed thinking. Reading you, one could think that Arab states are all democratic countries where the will of the people is heeded and heard by their leaders.

This is nothing new. The seeds were planted in 1967 and they have been cultivated and nurtured ever since by the government that now warns of the dangers of the direction Israel has chosen. Evelyn Gordon and dershowitz are indeed caught in their own bubble of deception. I suppose they sincerely believe their lies. But they have turned around the argument and cast aspersions when they should be reflecting back on them. They have helpe create this world view which dominates the right wing religio/nationalist that have highjacked Judaism and turned it into a tribal cult. They need to believe that they exist in a world that is against them. In a world were laws pertain by divine right to Jews in a way they do not to gentiles. Peace is equated with a danger of assimilation. The likes of Gordon and dershowitz play into this sick world view. For them moderation is a lack of courage and existing under eternal seige is the only viable option for Israel and Jews.

... a good example of one not accepting to take risk of something one learned from past experience ?! Besides, almost half the palestinians, any, are not accepting any peace with israel. Isn't that what makes peace not an easy option & less of reality in the circumstances ? The palestinians maneuver israel not to accept peace with their many core issues. It makes one believe the palestinians have only the destruction of israel their agenda.

I don't believe that the problem is fear of peace. Israeli, as well as Arab behavior, is rooted in old habits and even older ideologies. The Israeli right wing, today a significant majority of the population, is composed of groups adhering to ideas developed much before the present opportunities for peace. The "old right", followers of Jabotinsky, follow his "Iron Wall" (1923) article, postulating that Arab will only accept the Jews when they are suppressed long enough. No other way can work. The Russian newcomers (20% of Israeli Jews) follow their old Soviet habits of brute force solving problems. And the religious right follow their myth of messianic redemption. They prepare the way for the myth to become reality by behaving as if it was reality. Not to be outdone, Hamas and the Arabs also follow their old habits developed when their civilization had power. Its reality is gone, but old habits die hard.

bradley this was a great piece. i would only add that the threat of palestinian nonviolence to the the right, or those that fear peace, has been known for some time. one only has to look at bilin or nihlin on any given friday to see.

How many missiles will it take, Gideon, for you to become a believer? Any person that continues to hit you is not interested in peace. You suffer from some kind of Stockholm syndrome. And while while we're at it, Stockholm suffers from kind of Stockholm syndrome too. No nation survives today that did not put security first.

Whether history 'repeats itself' is a matter of ongoing debate, but Bradley, with whose article I concur, needs only to read the books of 1,2 Maccabees to understand this mentality. He should also ask Barak what does he mean by or refer to as "the historic land of Israel". The Maccabaeans and the Hasmonaeans and their nationallistic/theocratic political entity was always defind by what it was not- it was not a gentile entity. It was not 'the other'. That is why it never integrated, nor sought to integrate into the Ancient Near East- A nation that dwelleth alone. Quite simple and tragic.

Peace is not always the only option and not only for every one. Otherwise every war will be wrong ! There is more in the truth than the article admitted. For that matter this article is short of many realities that the writer ignored,

Just a few facts to supplement Burston's excellent article: Number of buildings permits granted to Jews in Jerusalem (2008): 13,941 (about 20% in Arab neighborhoods of occupied East Jerusalem). Number of building permits granted to East Jerusalem Arabs (to build in Arab neighborhoods only, of course): 400 units. http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWFiles2009.nsf/FilesByRWDocUnidFilename/PSLG-7RMB33-full_report.pdf/$File/full_report.pdf See also, http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092430.html

The illusion that there can be peace will be the death of Israel. After all the wars and waves of terror that have been launched against Israel since 1948, the Israelis should know by now. The bitter reality is that the moment Israel lowers its guard, hostile Arab armies will seize the opportunity. The "Peace Process" is a lure, as shown by the failure of Oslo. Palestinians could have got what they could reasonably want in 2000, but instead they launched a brutal intifada.

Welcome back.

"if they would act like Sadat did ... " (Gene) When on 19 Nov 1977 Sadat came to Jerusalem to speak before the Knesset about his views on how to achieve a comprehensive peace, he was the undisputed ruler of an independent country whose undisputed borders were clearly marked on the map, recognized by the entire international community, and had been beforehand informed by then-PM Begin (through Moshe Dayan) that Israel was prepared to completely withdraw all its armed forces and civilians settlers from the Sinai Peninsula, in exchange for a negotiated Peace Treaty. What President Sadat could do then, no Palestinian Chairman can do today. "We in Israel are still unable to internalize three basic things. First, we have not yet freed ourselves from the mindset of an occupier facing the occupied. We are unable to relate to the Palestinians as an independent entity with its own national considerations. Our decision makers, on both the political and the military and intelligence levels, must be constantly reminded that Abu Mazen is no quisling nor collaborator." Major General (ret.) Shlomo Gazit, first Chief Coordinator of Israeli operations in the territories (1967-1974), and former head of Military Intelligence (1974-1979), in the mass circulation daily Maariv, April 4, 2005. www.jewsforajustpeace.com/

Arabs starting killing Jews way back in the 20's & 30's. The refusal of the Arabs to accept Jews and Israelis is what brought us to this point. Why does Bradley not rewrite his piece with the reverse - giving the arab side of fear of peace. that would have more meaning of why we are here.

I dont think it is the right that wants to see israel as the last jewish ghetto. I believe that is what the world wants. A jewish ghetto in the middle east - as small and as tight as it can be.

On Jan. 31 in this paper Dershowitz called Goldstone a "traitor to his people....and an evil evil man." This is simply a baseless personal attack that sounds very much like Kahane.

I retract. People do not scream anti-semitism EVERY time someone criticises Israel, just a lot of the time and far too much for Israel's good, because it prevents Israel listening to criticism. There you go. Happy now? Are you going to tell off 17 as well for saying 99.9% of criticism of Israel is motivated by anti-semitism and greed for Arab money. Or do you agree with him? Or do you only tell off critics of Israel?

First of all, it was the mistake to have illegals settlements in Gaza. Israel left Gaza? What about the freedom? Did the Palestinians'life changed somehow instead of beeing the big prison? And the peace -in your opinion will cause more terrorism? What about the wars ?

Give it a rest. You said on the second of this month that the "anti-semitic tag" is used "every time someone criticises Israel," so you are in no position to accuse someone else of overstating the case on this issue.

No one is talking about making peace with Hamas, stupid.

No one fears peace. The fear is that the Palestinians will say peace but the terrorism, the rockets will become worse. After all, what happened when Israel left Gaze, left Lebanon? What happened when Israel allowed the PLO to form a pseudo government?

Mr. Burston is right once more. There is one more reason for any Israeli, right, left, or center, to worry about what will happen in the event of a real peace; a catastrophic and bloody civil war is waiting in the wings. The only way out of the impasse may be a tri-state resolution, to wit: 1) A free and democratic Palestine, capital: Al Quds. 2) A free and democratic Israel. capital: Tel Aviv ? 3) A religious Kingdom of Israel composed of Jerusalem and whatever other lands agreed to in a tripartite arrangement. It is a pipe dream I suppose, but the alternatives, however well founded in apparent reality, are the stuff of nightmares. It is not impossible that in the future the democratic states would combine in a Federal, or Confederated Republic of"Canaan" (the choice of names is, at this point, of no importance).

"Sir, I meant you should talk to normal - non antisemitic - gentiles. I regret provoking your vulgar self..." Now, let me see. You said the other day to me that 99.9% of criticism of Israel was motivated by anti-semitism or greed for Arab money. Now, Americans are about the only country left that has a positive view of current Israeli policy, but even there Haaretz reported that a majority don't think Israel seriously wants peace. And as I'm sure you know, the percentage would be much higher if you asked anyone in Europe, even higher than that in Muslim countries. Now, I think even you will agree that most of those people aren't being paid by Arab countries, so by your logic a lot more than half of Americans and the world in general aren't normal. Juat a thought. Do you think it's you who might not be normal? Criticism of Israel is NOT anti-semitic, particularly when there's currently so much to criticise. Deal with it 17.

"... the weekly demonstration ... of Sheikh Jarrah doubled in size. The police backed down on their vow to break up the protest, and the Kahanists barely showed. "If non-violent peace activism scares the right to this extent, there must be a great deal of power in it." More power than a rightist government dreams of! Ref: Civil Rights Movement, USA, 1965 ff.

"If this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state." Millions of Palestinians cannot vote, Israel is an Apartheid state. This Bantustein business is a charade as we saw in RSA of old. Stop your Anslusch and Lebensraum policies, it should be below you.

A moderate, light policy runs against a natural tendency to invest extravagantly in defending against even minor threats to our national security (the reverse of our systematic tendency to "lowball," i.e., to undercompensate for, or underprice, risk in our banking system or the environment). This partly reflects a general, ancient view of the "night watchman" state, involved not in internal regulation but in security. It is partly because terrorism seems a much more immediate and horrifying prospect than financial collapse, climate change, or threats to food security and is more directly linked to loss of life (even if the other issues ultimately may kill many more people). And our culture puts a very high value on life (though a higher value on the lives of our own citizens than on those of other nationals). We would prefer, therefore, to believe that any war in which we engage is a vital threat to our very existence?in which case the odds of victory are irrelevant and any sacrifice is justified. And there must be a defined end. It would be difficult for a president to argue that we should sacrifice lives without winning in order to prevent something worse (although we build dams when we can't control the flow of water and employ a police force when we can't end crime).

... are linked ... "It was characteristic for the `Allgerman' ideology to have a radical dualistic separation of the world in good and evil. The evil ones - these were the inner enemies (inside Germany), social democrats, liberals, Jews, ethnic minorities, and then the resentful, envious neighbours, who blocked the expansionist tendencies of the empire. Paranoia mixed in a strange way with lust for aggression. "Surrounded by enemies: this was our situation right from the beginning. And we suffered from this like no other country. Surrounded by enemies, this will be our situation in the future. And this is our fortune", Hasse (the president of the `All-German Union') said in 1907. It was this sense of paranoia, that the `All-German Union' shared with the power elites of the Kaiser-Wilhelm-era, which became the root cause for the attitude to accept war not only as something unavoidable, but actually to long for war." (from history book)

Gene"For if they would act like Sadat did in his later years then even Jerusalem would not present the unsolvable problem" 1-please Gene, which planet you come from. 2-Sadat got back all occupied land from Israel, would you guarantee this to Palestinian Dictators...?

Unfortunately, I agree with every word. The delusional views of the right (most of the country) and the subsequent hunting down of everything that reeks of not being in line with (un)official government policy, will one day become the death of this country. A country that could offer the world so many good things.

"The Israeli court , which is world recognized as the most judiciary capable and fair ." Sources please, because this is just funny.

Sovereignty of the Democractic Jewish State , existential threats that are maliciously and out of bad faith disguised as peace and threat to peace.

well said. Let's remember to nail the faces to this one, before they blame you for speaking up... the company begins with Gore - Clinton runs through George W. Bush and at the moment ends with Tzipi.

The Messiah Jesus Christ will arrive soon. He will take care of everything and everyone will live happily ever after as promised just like in a fairy tale. Regards from the small boy with five loaves and two fish.

I know!

The title of this article says it all...in a nutshell. Unless Israel takes the necessary steps towards peace NOW, they will not survive.

Israelis fear each other ..... orthodox Jews, secular Jews, gays, Palestinian Israelis, Haridim, liberal Jews, settlers that react with violence, Jews for peace, etc. They have a government leadership that panders to some of the most extreme factions. If there ever was a time to practice the age-old Judaic values of truth, justice and care for those least able to help themselves, this is the time. Diversity will remain and grow regardless of the resistance from fearful groups within Israel. Communications are immediate, international and accessible by the world. There is a growing disdain of actions that are directed towards destabilization; that punish whole communities for the actions of a few; that oppress and suppress; that deny human rights; and that leverage fears of the people. Israel can and should adapt to the realities of a changing world. Failure to do so will forever cripple Israel and further lower the world's esteem for Israel.

You happen to be from a nation like none other in the world. Does the legitimacy of Israel come from man or from G-d? What does the Bible say about the ancient boundry? Think about it. Is it men who you are afraid of, who lead you to divide the land which you shouldn't divide? G-d is way more terrifying than humans ever could be. If you're going to be afraid, make sure your fear should be well placed.

beautifully put - so sadly true We are scared to death of peace & addicted to war. The road has gotten rougher - so we need to work all that much harder

Ahmadinijad goes on TV and tells the public Iran has accepted the IAEA's deal to have Russia and France enrich Iran's Low Enriched Uranium to the 20% necessary for the Tehran Research Reactor and return it as fuel rods for that reactor. This is ignored in Haaretz? Why is this something that must be censored Mr. Burston? Afraid of peace breaking out?

The only real question is whether Jews in Israel are ready to accept militarism as a new part of their identity. Soldiers are not heroes in Judaism, just a tragedy. How can you trade a Rabbi Akiba, a Maimonides, a Spinoza, a Freud, an Einstein, with military heroes and their tragic tales of victories through weapons? Men of Peace and Wisdom don't mix with men of war and fear.

What an excellent insight into the Big Picture. However, the Big Question: What is the long-term plan for the Israeli leadership? There appears to be only two options ? a one-state solution whereby all Palestinians become citizens of the new state or the two-state solution whereby Israelis and Palestinians live side-by-side in two sovereign nations. The one-state solution appears to be anathema to the Israelis as it is recognized that eventually Palestinians will outnumber Jews and Israel will cease to exist as a Jewish state. One would think that the Israelis would do all they could to avoid this outcome, yet they have accelerated their expansion in the West Bank lately, making the two-state solution all but impossible. So, how does the Israeli leadership think that these short-term gains will play out in the future? Do they apply their minds to the situation in ten, twenty, fifty years or are they sticking their collective heads in the sand and somehow hoping for a good outcome?

If things weren't going to be okay, I would tell you. When have I ever been wrong? Hey, check out the Pakistan Morning Show on Live Leak! There's a hottie News Lady that kisses a Live Cobra two times and you will be amazed!

And nothing left out. The fact that even Barak seems to have grasped it at last worried me.

and leave this mess called Israel alone.

Just a great article. Nothing else to say.

Sir, I meant you should talk to normal - non antisemitic - gentiles. I regret provoking your vulgar self...

its really curious...not once in his wonderfully eloquent diatribe did he mention a few facts. Things like israels historical and present legitimacy, or the UN sponsored 1947 partition plan, rejected by arabs and accepted by israel, or the total rejectionism of the arabs and palestinians of the jewish right to live in peace in the jewish state...or the suicidal violence and death culture of the pals, or that the grand mufti sided with hitler and planned to kill all the jews..or buses being blown to bits, or rockets raining down on a SOVEREIGN WORLD recognized COUNTRY. I see ZERO mention of any of that brad...maybe it was an oversight eh? to everyone here slapping brad on the back, I have one question; does that brown colour come off your tongue?

I wish the world would see more of Israelis like Bradley Burston, and less of Israeli settlers expelling entire Palestinian families of their homes only because they're not Jews, an act which seems apalling to everyone in the world, Jews included. Unhappily these days, more and more people in Europe lose sight of the fact that there are still some good people in israel, willing to make peace with the neighbor rIther than colonize its land.

The possibility of peace does not depend on the Israeli rightists or leftists (since vast majority of Israelis are neither) but exclusively on Palestinian dictators. For if they would act like Sadat did in his later years then even Jerusalem would not present the unsolvable problem

"Sir, Why do you think antisemites need "campaign against misuse of the word anti-semite"? Talk to the normal people - none of them is unhappy with the usage of the terminology.

YES AND NO

Excellent article, completely true and an expression of many many Zionist Jews world wide who see Israel's doom coming from its own actions. Under Netanyahu etal Israel is doomed to fail, it's as simple as that.

Fear of peace process ia natural case of frustation, fear of war is the big disgrace that will let another loses like 73.

anti Arab acts . The Israeli court , which is world recognized as the most judiciary capable and fair . And if that court , that is much more often rules against Jewish claims , determinate the validity of ownership , it must be respected . Anarchism is not a way to fairness .

This is already implemented as: Take a country - not necessarily yours - divide it in half and keep one part. Take the other part, divide it in half, keep one part and add it to what you had. Take whatever was left, divide it in half, keep one part and add it to what you had. ... Take another country ...

peace is possible,when you treat others as you would want to be treated.its simple.but how do you prepare for nuclear war?in a small country such as israel i see very few survivors,if any.i dont think any sane person muslim jew or christian would see that as an option.do you think iran are suicidal as a nation?live and let live.

So is the choice between extremist religeous factions of Jews or religeous extremist factions of Arabs then? Or do 'normal'middle of the road secular broad minded Jews ore Arabs have any hope in this region.?..

My late father taught us this proverb you quote. "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still," might well apply to Mr. Burston and his like-minded followers.

"It all comes down to belief. It comes down to the kind of country the believer wants Israel to be. And for that reason, there is a civil war going on for Israel's soul." - Bradley Burston What 'civil war' Mr. Burston? There is only one side and it has won. Those opposed to the psychotic right have lost. They have lost the will to resist. They have absolutely no influence or power in Israel. Game over.

Guts, peace takes guts, vision, and a whole new approach. Take the country, divide it in two, east to west. Israel gets one half, the Palestinians the other, Draw lots, who cares. All illegally seized land is included. Both get land, water, no outposts, no blocks, one common border. Ridiculous, of course. But one has to take drastic steps. Continuing to go on as you are, expecting different results, is a sure sign of insanity. G*d show you the way.

... and as usual, well said!

Un fortunately, if we exclude a miracle, you are right as sad as it is. as to me I came to the same conclutons and left, living modestly in France forgetting all about religion, tradition and crazy nationalizm.

Peace for Israel and Jews is an neverending dream - only. All the urge and measure to be accepted by the others did fail in the long run. the reason is simple. "The world" needs always a scapegoat. And "jews" are a wonderfool tool for it - being since the beginning of time the witness of ONEGODONLY. Even in times where instead of GD "money and "security"" is being the center of everything jews are always blamed. Just open your eyes and look everywhere. Even if jews do something "good" like in Haiti, they are blamed for example doing it just for the theft of organs..... Please read the wonderful work of LION FEUCHTWANGE JEW SUESS and you could understand it.... all the best for all of us yours in apprecation for all real PEACE sse hu

It seems to me that it is actually the two state solution that wishes to preserve the Jewish Ghetto.

Scary but true.

arrive every day on our beaches from our friendly neighbors. I will never forget the day I ran to join my colleagues in the Shaare Zedek ER when a bomb went off in Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda fruit and vegetable market. We treated 55 wounded arriving in 10-15 minutes, while another 100 wounded went to Hadassah and Bikur Holim. Bradley should have been there. Then he would not agonize over the fact that he is not living in a model society admired by Europe-- and saturated with innocent Jewish blood.

In spite of all the horrors we see, we should still keep up hoping perhaps just because we are still alive. look at it straight, if we don't want to live in a closed jewish gheto controlled by rabinnical court within contested berders, we must first of all find a way to obtain real democracy based on elections of Knesset consisted of elected representatives of demographicaly defined circonscription numerically balanced. This will break the takeover of all instances by non elected arbitrarily party selected legislators. Only then can we realy treat our main problems. AND MOST IMPORTANT? BREAKING THE TWO STATES CONCEPTION WHICH WILL CREATE THE GREAT GHETTO, AND CREATE THE HOLOLY LAND STATE AS A CITIZENS STATE OF VARIOUS ORIGINES AND FAITH

Only when Israel becomes a belief-based state, will there be peace-real peace. Thank God the way the present(Religious)Jewish birth rate is progressing this will be probable in just one generation.

Sir, Why do you think antisemites need "campaign against misuse of the word anti-semite"? Talk to the normal people - none of them is unhappy with the usage of the terminology.

There is room for 2-states if the will was there to create them. See the Geneva Accord for a blueprint to resolving the conflict.

Unfortunately Bradley, Israel is too far down the slope to avoid a very bad future for Israel. There is absolutely no one in Israel that has BOTH the political will and the military might to fix the major problems that now exist because of very bad decisions in the past. There is no usable space to build Palestine and no way to make space. So what will **YOU** do with millions of very angry people? It is too late to repent for the gross injustice Israel has done to the Arabs, so what is Israel going to do to minimize the negative consequences? I never see anyone face up to that reality. More killing won't work, it will just make Israel's future even more negative. Maybe it is time to move to a country that won't be a war zone forever. Israeli have created a real mess for themselves with no viable solution and virtually no one realizes just how bad things are - if they did, they would be leaving.

It's a lot to ask of the Palestinians, actually, that they should settle with the West Bank and Ghaza, and abstain from right of return. But if they do, it looks like one of two possible ways ahead. So we would all have to be more than grateful The alternative, as Ehud pointed out would have to be an equal and democratic state from the river to the sea. How much hope does it raise that Ehud actually said this? Which alternative would be least un-realistic?

Non-violent protest is the only imaginable path. It will not be easy, and there will be victims, and it will take courage, but there is no other choice. It is the only way to implode the messianic delusions.

The current clowns in charge of Israel are blind and shortsighted. It will take a true jew to lead the Israelis to the true 'promised land'. There is no one in sight. Until Israel smartens up, killing and suffering will continue everywhere. Military attacks and violence are justified. Counter attacks are justified. Anything goes. Innocent civilians are easy targets. It's war.

Dershowitz's critique of the Goldstone report is extremely well argued and correct. Comparing him to Kahane for his article in the JPost is not fair. I would urge your readers to actually take a look at Dershowitz's arguments before rushing to conclusions of their own.

Great article, Brad and everything you say is true. Above all you identify the main threat to Israel as an increasing tendency for Israelis to turn in upon themselves, only hear their own voice, and fail to see themslves through others' eyes. Reaction to Goldstone is a classic case. One of the biggest reasons for this is comprehensive misuse of the word anti-semite. There are real anti-semites out there, people who genuinely think Jews are innately worse than other people. However, the term has gradually become a way of Israelis closing their ears to criticism of Israel. It's so easy to do. Someone criticises you, you just shout anti-semite back. Instantly anything they say becomes wrong and can be ignored. It's much easier than listening to criticism and making changes because of criticism. However, it also means that Israel is walking blind into the future, unable to benefit from all the helfpul criticism that might stop it walking over a cliff one day.

"Just as I was clueless as to why the Knesset was to vote Wednesday on a bill that would make aiding asylum seekers fleeing African genocide, granting them shelter, medical care, food, a crime subject to up to 20 years in prison." Fantastic piece Bradley, but this short paragragh needs an article in itself. I was/am shocked and appalled about the way Israel, a country built by refugees, and in which the majority of the population cares about their welfare, still continues to treat African's seeking refuge here. Perhaps a focus for the upcoming weeks?

Bradley,this is one heck of an article, i hope the talkback people will read it and truely UNDERSTAND it ,who knows in the near future we will have the so long for peace, well done.

I am not afraid to say I love Israel. And I think this article perfectly expresses my fears and hopes for Israel. I am not in Israel right now. But I hope that a new movement will soon grow; not a movement of right or left, but a movement of peace and humanity which is not driven by the wish to clear its conscience or a fear of violence, but by the brave acceptance of its light and dark sides and a deep profound pursuit of positivity and good faith.

If Israel does not survive as a Jewish homeland it will be not only the right who are to blame but also the great swathe of Israelis who have become so politically apathetic. The Israelis I know are so determined to live a "normal" life -work, vacations abroad, possibly the expat lifestyle in the US - that they appear to be deliberately ignoring what is happening. Partly, of course, this is because they feel they can change nothing but also because so long as they can make themselves believe that their lives are like those of their counterparts elsewhere, they have achieved their personal goal. What will happen if bombs start falling on TA and its environs is another matter. But for the moment apathy reigns supreme.

There is a proverb that a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. I suspect that any amount of argument will not move the people Mr. Burstein is speaking of; they KNOW THE TRUTH.

right on the mark man.