Haaretz exclusive: Olmert's plan for peace with the Palestinians

"And we all know it takes a true farmer to grow something in the desert" is what you said gil. But the truth is all it takes is water and those farms are getting water from the West Bank , bet they would not get the same water in Palestinians hands so of course they wouldnt do as well. Let me guess part of the land that Israel wanted to keep was all of the well sites in the west bank........ Bingo....no wonder Abbas didnt want to trade

establish effective farms when settlers can walk up and burn their olive trees with the IAF (Israeli Assault Force) just looking the other way untill the owners of the trees come out to save them. To farm you need to get fertilizer in and your produce to market .........imposible with so mnany road blocks . Lets see Israeli farmers make a go of it under these conditions

Johnboy's overflowing verbiage about Jordan's alleged treaty obligation to attack Israel in 1967 under a mutual defence pact with Egypt presupposes that Israel was the aggressor against Egypt. The view that Israel was the aggressor in 1967 has no legitimacy whatsoever. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Between June and November 1967 draft UN resolutions in both the Security Council and General Assembly condemning Israel over the 1967 Arab-Israeli war were defeated or withdrawn for lack of support six times. Draft resolutions demanding that Israel withdraw its forces unilaterally from territories it captured in that war were defeated or withdrawn four times.

Abbas didn't respond yet. Now would be an opportune time for him to respond, publicly with his own map. And he can show where the chunnels would be for remote settlements like Ariel and the chunnel for the Hebron-Gaza route. And his map might even consider water sources. Since the Israeli side has gone public, no reason for the PA side not to do so, too.

""Giving Abu Mazen the map was conditioned upon signing a comprehensive and final agreement with the Palestinians so it would not be used as an 'opening position' in future negotiations the Palestinians sought to conduct."" But Abu Mazen cannot sign a comprehensive and final agreement now can he?How could he?It's not only the map.It's about consensus among Palestinians like Hamas who consider him a traitor for even talking to Israel... The agreement exists Ibrahim and it's called the Geneva Accord.It's got maps and a full resolution of this conflict.Anyone including Abu Mazen can access it on the internet.All he needs to do is to publicly declare that he agrees with it.Or negotiate around it.But he can't can he? http://www.geneva-accord.org/

You post a great deal. Most of them are full of false information and give the impression your main objective is to be an Israeli propagandist. The Aluf Benn articles is untrue. Abbas was prepared to accept the OImert offer. In 2009, Mr Olmert offered generously to Mahmoud Abbas and it was the best offer Abbas or Arafat had ever been proffered. He did not offer return of Palestinian refugees to Israel, but he proposed a real breakthrough. The myth is that Abbas rejected the offer. In fact, Abbas said with that offer (which was 93%of the West Bank and all of Gaza) "we can have peace in 2 days." The Palestinians were ecstatic and so was the EU. The Quartet agreed, and requested Israel make the offer binding. It never did. And that was the end of it.

Now that Olmert's offer has been made public, with map. There is no reason Abbas cannot make a public counter-proposal with his own map. The Maaleh Adumin finger is still mostly open land that Israel wants to assure Palestine is not viable. That will not be part of the PA proposal in all likelihood. And something of East Jerusalem will be included. Maybe Abbas can include some access tunnels for places like Ariel. And a Hebron-Gaza Chunnel, deep under the Negev.

"CJ a pathetic legalist, cannot care less about American wars of annexation. The important point for him is that there is a pact between the parts" Important for the 'parts' too. "Will be the same with the west bank? Maybe yes maybe not. Obviously Israel is not interest in annexation. The status quo is not bad at all." Illegal. "No Palestinian state, no Israel annexation, but military control. " Occupation. People have a right to resist it. More death. "Since the West Bank does not belong to Palestine because it has never existed settlers are sitting in a non-country land." UNSC says otherwise.

And, not having achieved a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resorting to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. After having refered it to the Security Council on numerous occasions. After Israel fired the first salvos....Skip to article 51.

... to the Jews as an everlasting covenant!

JB:"How odd, then, that everyone says that "the Jews" agreed to Res 181..... because, surely, according to your thesis that is completely untrue UNLESS Begin and Shamir also agreed to it. Please explain, Peter......" Begin and Shamir ultimately submitted to the will of the side that accepted Res 181. The fact that Irgun and Stern gang were integrated into the IDF was fortunate indeed for Israel. It was by no means a guaranteed outcome as the Atalena incident would testify. On the other hand to argue that Hamas will eventually be happy with a Palestine very much smaller than their Charter calls for is a very big call. But even if they do eventually submit to the higher authority of the PA, we can be certain that Hezbollah and Iran never will.

between consumer demand for water and agricultural demand. They are both long words. After all ADSD only two days ago referred to the "International court" that dealt with the Pinochet case in the UK as opposed to a domestic "kangaroo" court, not understanding that the House of Lords is as domestic to the UK as fish and chips.

i: "an american water engineer in israel said the following: the whole of the kinneret can be replaced by the price of a couple of f15s every year." i: "he means that would be the price in desal water." Yeah, and I have a very nice bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you. Cheap. One owner. He works for a company that sells desalination plants, does he? Maybe you should go and ask a salesman for McDonnell Douglas (or is that Boeing?) for his views. I suspect he'll tell you that, no matter what it may cost, at least the F-15 can actually do what its supporters claim it can do......

It was annexed after a pact. Lets translate it. It was stolen and annexed after a pact between, the United States and Mexican traitors. CJ a pathetic legalist, cannot care less about American wars of annexation. The important point for him is that there is a pact between the parts Will be the same with the west bank? Maybe yes maybe not. Obviously Israel is not interest in annexation. The status quo is not bad at all. No Palestinian state, no Israel annexation, but military control. Since the West Bank does not belong to Palestine because it has never existed, settlers are sitting in a non-country land. The final status will be defined in negotiations, and who knows ...maybe Israel will find finally the "Mexican traitors" to sell parts of the west bank to Israel. Maybe they will exchange it fo Israel territories, In short the fate of borders are to be decided yet.

e: "syria and jordan were obligated to have peaceful relations as members of the arab league.yet syria attacked jordan in september 1970." I've been talking about MUTUAL-DEFENSE PACTS, and the legal consequence known as "casus foederis", and erez makes a laughably puny retort by pointing out that Syria and Jordan were both members of the same quaint arab country club when they nearly came to blows over Black September. Do you even know that the terms "armed attack" and "armed conflict" have real legal definitions, and aren't there merely for you to mould to your whims?

I'd love to hear what you know about palestinians. That must be worth something. As you DO defend Israel, you should at least know something about palestinians right ? Knowing the other side is always a step to the good direction. Can't wait !!!!

"The Emirates have become attractive tourist venues with the world`s most luxurious hotels with many swimming pools each. Where else is the water from if not from desalination plants?" Of course it's from desalination plants - at a price that luxury hotels can afford, but not farmers who need be competitive.

"Stop wasting your time and energy with the so-called "anti israelis" and speak with palestinians ! but have you ever meet any in your life ?" YOU aren't worthwhile. Others are. " or are you yourself anti palestinian ? probably so. Think about it..." I don't spend hours a day denigrating Palestinians, dummy. Think about THAT!

thats right.when the various princely states of italy signing ever changing treaties known more by their short shelf life then to any sense of honour. that is the middle east johnboy.

i paraphrase. glad you think so johnboy.

an american water engineer in israel said the following: the whole of the kinneret can be replaced by the price of a couple of f15s every year. he means that would be the price in desal water. seems a little unlikely but water will become cheaper through advanced desal technology.

Stop wasting your time and energy with the so-called "anti israelis" and speak with palestinians ! but have you ever meet any in your life ? or are you yourself anti palestinian ? probably so. Think about it...

no says johnboy. the kineret is very important and that is why we keep the syrians away from the lake. johnboy we have advanced technology in this respect.we drip feed crops and so are continuing to make the desert bloom. some crops like cotton which need a great deal of water have been stopped but the desert is not making inroads. looking to the future we can and will (through HIS help) make desal far cheaper then it is today.and we would need th ekinneret less.

or saddam invading kuwait all members of the arab league signed as solemnly as any treaty. basically johnboy you are way out on a limb. look at the middle east.the behaviour is medieval.you might as well expect th ecountries fighting the thirty years war of 1618-1648 to keep to treaties.

These two clowns simply cannot imagine what Israeli water technologies offer now and into the future as they develop during periods of water shortage -- not only for Israel, but for half of the world's countries. There is hope, johnboy, in technology, like I've been saying. But, you have no imagination -- just a propensity to spew negative crap about Israel in as many dimensions as your unimaginative anti-Israeli brain can fathom.

the saudis have stopped growing wheat a long time ago.too expensive. but you are right.the persian gulf produces huge quantities of desalinised water.

the thought that arab states keep their word to each other is quaint.syria and jordan were obligated to have peaceful relations as members of the arab league.yet syria attacked jordan in september 1970.

johnboy that is a bunch of illogical thoughts. let me be more clear.had king hussein had an inkling of the trouble he was bringing on himself he would have broken as many treaties as necessary. it was june 1967 and the youngish king was excited by the war and the chance the arabs would finally defeat israel.so he attacked, far more important the king was silly enough to place an egyptian general in charge of his armed forces.there was no chance to back down.

CJ: "None of it goes to agriculture in any desert region." I'm looking back over my posts, and I see nowhere where I ever claimed that it did. Indeed (and unlike our friend SDHD) I was careful not to claim that desalinated water is used for agriculture. I merely pointed out that it can (and I am correct, it can) be used to reduce the amount of water drawn from the Kinneret. Because (and, again, unlike SDHD) I am well aware of the difference between "domestic water use" and "agricultural water use". Just as I am (again, in contrast to SDHD) aware that desalination plants produce "drinking water", not "grey water". It's a very expensive business, so you use it to buy votes, not to grow spuds.

Five long fingers going back and forth into the west bank, and the status of East Jerusalem is unclear. The northern west bank close to the green line is some of the most fertile land in Palestine. I think the Geneva map is about as far as any Pal is going to go - Neve Yaacov, Gilo block, Maale Aduumin (the 700 acre built up area not the 50,000 acres that have been fenced off), Betar Illit. That's it.

Saudia Arabia has become a major world supplier of wheat. The Emirates have become attractive tourist venues with the world's most luxurious hotels with many swimming pools each. Where else is the water from if not from desalination plants?

CJ: "SDHD De-salination water for irrigation? AMAZING!!" SDHD: "Absolutely. How stupid are you?" Errr, SDHD, do you actually bother to read your own link? It talks about how the desalination plant "produces around 13% of the country's domestic consumer demand" You **do** understand that there is a difference between "consumer demand" and "agricultural demand"? You **do** know that, don't you?

"The UN peacekeeping force resided on the Egyptian side of the border. When Egypt told them to leave, they were perfectly willing to stay instead on the Israeli side of the border. An egyptian attack against Israel with the UN camped on the border was not likely at all. Israel refused to accept the UN force...." Egypt blockaded the Straits of Tirhan to Israeli shipping. Egypt, as you say, told the peacekeepers who were there BY TREATY to leave. Egypt amassed 80-100,000 soldiers and 1000 tanks on Israel's border. Nasser said he would destroy Israel through radio broadcasts. Give us a bloody break. Egypt started that war.

"SDHD De-salination water for irrigation? AMAZING!!" Absolutely. How stupid are you?

needs. None of it goes to agriculture in any desert region.

"Building in any disputed land in Israel is totally legal." The disputed land is NOT IN Israel.

Q: Is Israel drawing too much water from the Kinneret A: Yes. Q: Why is it doing that? A: To Make The Deserts Bloom. Q: Can the deserts bloom without water from the Kinneret? A: No, they will revert to desert. Q: Can the desalination plants prevent that from happening? A: No, they can DELAY the collapse, but they can't replace the amount of water that is drawn from the Kinneret. Q: So are those agribusinesses sustainable? A: No, because (a) they can't survive without the Kinneret, and (b) the Kinneret can't survive that pumping and (c) the desalination plants don't produce enough to break that deadlock. CONCLUSION: the desalination plants are a palliative, not a cure, because they don't FUNDAMENTALLY alter the equation. Which is this: Israel is trying to "make deserts bloom", and it has to kill the Kinneret to do that.

"Many were forced, others were encouraged to `return` to Israel by the GOI or its agents" The government of Israel must have put out one hell of a travel brochure to get hundreds of thousands of Jews to leave their countries without their possessions, money, and property rights.

R: "What Happens to the Salt From De-salination Plants?" The zionists throw a pinch of it over their shoulder every time they babble on with their nonsense about "making the deserts bloom". That's why Israel needs a LOT of salt....

PW: "Did you read the fineprint at the bottom of that contract Johnboy? 'All Green line deals with Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Islamic Jihad et al will have to be negotiated separately, no assurances given.' " You do know that when Res 181 was passed that Ben-Gurion's gang of happy campers accepted it, while Begin's and Shimir's militants rejected it? It's true, Peter: both Irgun and Stern Gang loudly and publically rejected the deal that the Jewish Agency accepted. How odd, then, that everyone says that "the Jews" agreed to Res 181..... because, surely, according to your thesis that is completely untrue UNLESS Begin and Shamir also agreed to it. Please explain, Peter......

JB:"...because Israel CAN crystalize its current gains tomorrow; all it needs to do is accept the Saudi Plan, and then everything up to the Green Line is hers for ever and ever more." Did you read the fineprint at the bottom of that contract Johnboy? "All Green line deals with Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Islamic Jihad et al will have to be negotiated separately, no assurances given."

The UN peacekeeping force resided on the Egyptian side of the border. When Egypt told them to leave, they were perfectly willing to stay instead on the Israeli side of the border. An egyptian attack against Israel with the UN camped on the border was not likely at all. Israel refused to accept the UN force.... Israel wanted a war. Now it is time, for Israel to pull back to the pre-1967 borders and be happy they got more out of the 47 Partition they were alloted. Shalom.

land was stolen, you are completely wrong. Just educated yourself on history and you'll find out that most of the land in disputed land were purchased at a high price from sellers' own will. Building in any disputed land in Israel is totally legal. I am for peace and peace is to coexist. Arabs must get used that Israel is here to stay for ever.

"You forgot about the 700,000 Jews forced from the Arab countries in the late 40s." In response to???

"could anyone imagine a U.S president could anyone imagine a U.S president proposing to give away parts of texas and california to the mexicans,the next day he would be put on trial for high treason and a few days later he would be hanging from the gallows" Indeed. Seeing as how those territories were LEGALLY annexed. By treaties.

///the plant produces around 13% of the country's domestic consumer demand /// AMAZING!!

Because it ISN'T a solution.

"The Land of Israel belongs to The Jews " Uh huh. What land has ever been legally annexed to Israel? By treaty or agreement with who? Date?

Olmert is history! Not present! The PA do NOT want PEACE except all the PIECES that make up ISRAEL.

I take your best land, and give you stinking desert. That's a deal. Anyone want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn?

J: "(all of which constitute acts of war)" And not a one on your list is an act of war... 1) Nasser said he was closing the strait to Israeli shipping WHERE IT ENTERED EGPYPTIAN TERRITORIAL WATERS. He was perfectly entitled to do that, seeing as how he was the sovereign 'n' all... 2) UN peacekeeping force always stay AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNTRY THAT HOSTS THEM. Remove that consent, and the peacekeepers *must* leave. REMOVING that consent is not an "act of war", but an assertion of "sovereignty".... 3) The Sinai is Egyptian territory, and he was the sovereign; he can move troops whereever he wanted WITHIN his own sovereign soil, and if that violates an agreement then all he has done is VIOLATED AN AGREEMENT, not START A WAR. Israel started the Six Day War, Jonathon. I can even give you the exact time: 7:45am, June 5, 1967.

e: "johnboy for your information hussein bitterly regretted keeping to the treaty you are so keen in upholding.he has said it was the worst decision of his life." SIGNING that treaty was the worst decision he ever made. But once he did sign it he was obligated under it. THAT'S WHY HE OPENED FIRE EVEN THOUGH HE KNEW THE CONSEQUENCES. *sheesh* I understand that Israelis believe that treaties are just rough guidlines. No big deal. But out in the real world signing a treaty is important, because for responsible countries - just like responsible people - their word is their bond. Yeah, a stunning concept for a zionist come to grips with, I know... e: "european nations have kept to and broken treaties according to their self interest." Here's a thought: get the IDF to launch itself against the UK, and as it is going the Biffo on Britain it can tell the other NATO countries to butt out because it's not their fight. Give it a try, and let me know how it turns out.

Israel. This criminal would have destroyed Israel single handed. I wonder if Bibi is showing much more sense than Olmert.

"If they want to claim that Hebron is disputed territory, then so is Tel Aviv." This would be a good time for you to confirm your astounding assertion ... by reading the Hamas Charter. I can give you a Google Link to it, if you need help.

Every time Yerushalayim is called Al Quds the speaker only demonstrates the prominence and precedence of the Jewish Temple in Eretz Yisroel.

Sorry Akram, that was the Egyptian strategy. I realize that it does not support your paranoid fantasies, but that is what was intended. The plan was to grab enough of Sinai to allow Egypt to open the canal and hang onto it until a cease fire was arranged. Typically the Egyptian Army was not up to the second part of the operation where the script ran out and the IDF ran in.

"Mark Licoln Nixon helped the zionist in 73 was because the zionist told kissenger that they would dump a dirty bomb in the nile which would contaminate not only egypt but the whole med if he did not resupply them...." - he wasn't going to And what voice in your head told you that twaddle?

roughly btw 250-500,000 palestinians fled and some expelled as a result of Arab agression against Israel. Secondly their decendants are not factored into any equation and certainly will not be able to return to Israel. Its a mute point and the sooner the Palestinians realize this and move on the sooner peace can be achieved. Its this sense of entitlement that is hindering any final agreement.

You're suggesting that Palestinians exchange something that is theirs for something else that is theirs.

"The Egyptian strategy (1973) was sound" ML. The Egyptians have nothing to do with the 'sound policy' ! It was one man's strategy ! And lost his life ! The Arab are never ever wanted peace. And not only with Israel. They hate peace even among themselves ! Look at Iraq & Syria today ! History is full of Arab killing each other from the very first time when Muhammad in vain tried to unite them ! They split themselves between Shiites & Sunni to this day ! Those who trust Arabs & defend them on the ground of humanity, needs his empty heads to be examined !

the zionist told kissenger that they would dump a dirty bomb in the nile which would contaminate not only egypt but the whole med if he did not resupply them....

every educated jew , moslem and christian know that israel is one the biggest lie in the history of man kind.

The Egyptian strategy in 1973 was sound, and it's attack plan well prepared and executed. The field performance of the army was typical. Had Egypt actually intended to roll into Israel the Israeli strategy would have been excellent. The road net would channelize the Egyptian forces allowing them to be defeated in detail as they arrived while being reduced by airpower on the way to the main line of resistance. The Yom Kippur War had huge importance. It shocked Israel breeding great insecurity, it was the last big war between Israel and Arab nations, and it decided the issue of Israel's survival. The cost was horrible for Israel. The Yom Kippur War also initiated the decline and disappearance of the Israeli left by discrediting the Labor Party's defense credibility. Given the diplomatic consequences of Israel striking first against Egypt in the Six Day War, the Meir government probably did the right thing by being prudent. Even Nixon was compelled to help Israel.

They should ask for full citizenship of the so called state of Israel. The Palestinians will be the majority in 30 years and will take control of the whole thing without firing a single bullet.

The plan has great merit and should be applied to Jerusalem. Give Israel the even streets, Palestine the odd and the Christians can have those that happen to be prime numbers. Every 7 years the pattern can shift one. Makes as much sense to me as the map.

"Western Palestine is to be a patchwork of Palestinian and Israeli territory with endless opportunities for tension. This is not an offer, it is unworkable.

Many were forced, others were encouraged to 'return' to Israel by the GOI or its agents. Whichever, that is not an issue for the Palestinians or PA - they didn't force anyone out of Morocco or Egypt or anywhere else. If Israel has a claim, it needs to take it up with the governments responsible or via the international courts. The only refugee issue involved in the Final Status Agreement is the 715,000 Palestinians and their descendants.

This is NOT a palestinian issue. Ask arab countries !!! Israel stole palestinian land. Israelis want the world to understand their pains and sufferings but israelis feel NO pity for the palestinians. Isreal is responsible for the palestinian tragedy. Palestinians are not responsible for jewish issues.

There is a good example of how it could work in the Geneva Accord report. From memory, the communications link would be a cutting or tunnel in places to go under Israeli roads. It would be fenced both sides, with no access into or from Israel, unless maybe a designated border crossing point under Israeli control. The Palestine police would be responsible for the security along the road, including both ends. The Israeli police would be responsible for the perimeter. It sounded practical. A few cctv cameras along the perimeter and it would be easy enough to monitor, it would not be any great length..

The Koran ! The first vicious book written against the jews and mentioned the jews by name.

So Johnboy, when Egypt blockaded the Straits of Tiran, expelled the UN peacekeeping force and moved thousands of troops into the Sinai demilitarized zone (all of which constitute acts of war), was not Jordan, its "treaty partner" then complicit in these acts of war, and therefore liable for any reprecussions? The artillery barrages that Jordan unleashed against Israel before Israel launched its legitimate military response were a further provocation which justified the subsequent thrashing that the Jordanian forces endured.

Just read Olmert Megillah !

You forgot about the 700,000 Jews forced from the Arab countries in the late 40s.

keeping to the treaty you are so keen in upholding.he has said it was the worst decision of his life. johnboy you leave out self interest. read palmerston "we have no permanent friends we have permanent interests". european nations have kept to and broken treaties according to their self interest.

If there was going to be any corridor between 2 halves of an arab entity whatever forn it might take it cannot be connected by a simple highway that is THEORETICALLY Israel supposed to have soverignty over but in reality it has nothing to do with it and will probably in reality from going anywhere near it without invitation. Any corridor must be a tunnel and Israel must have border police of its own at both side. That means that terroists can't get out their car and into Israel because its underground & the Israeli border police are a symbol of the fact this tunnel belongs to Israel.

Nice picture let them play to the doctor one with each other.

Hmmmmm. Abbas was suppose to agree and sign on the dotted line...then and only then, would he be allowed a copy of the map? The Palestinian challenge, in a nutshell, is to turn the negotiations into something closely resembling two EQUAL parties. The Israeli position, as evidenced by these odd negotiating tactics, is to insure the Palestinians remain subservient...

no point on what ifs and whether golda should have acted differently. it would be wonderful to have the casualties of 1973 whole and with us. you have more animosity for israel then all the palestinians put together.

I'm checking the water also. We haven't had a drop for over 2 weeks. Meanwhile, our neighbours in Gilo and Har Gilo can wash their cars and water their cars with comfort. Is their water ever cut off, or do they have a regular supply?

envelopes would have had to be singular and very slim indeed.

If you have issues with Jordan ask Jordan ! not the palestinians. How many israelis were kicked out of the WB by Jordan by the way ? Shall we talk about the hundreds of thousands of palestinians who got kicked out of their houses in Jerusalem, Haifa, Yaffa etc etc etc etc etc ? i think Israel got paid back and much more right ? expansion is a terrible thing...you tend to want more and more.

Israel's desert blooms thanks to a disproportionate distribution of water to the Palestinians. The desert blooms in the Arabian gulf also, thanks to desalination plants. Israel is too mean to set up the desalination process but prefers to steal water from the Palestinians instead.

... how many brown envelops were given by Abbas to Olmert ?

SDHD: "Such a clown." Maybe I'm wrong, and Israel isn't drawing down the Kinneret at a profligate and totally unsustainable rate. Better look again.... Yep, those pipelines are still there. Yep, the Kinneret is still way, way down. Gosh! Maybe those two things are related? Maybe Israelis are using all that water for - oh, I dunno - swimming pools and suchlike....

"Hamas has not amended its charter. Fatah has not amended its charter. Likud has not amended its charter. Great. They will ALL have to be amended at the time of the Final Status Agreement." That wasn't the deal, cummings. You present Palestinian promises as though they are viable. They promised to amend the charter, and didn't. You act as though it's no big deal. I guess not keeping promises really isn't a big deal if you are dishonest.

e: "so johnboy excused the jordanian attack on israel in 1967 when it lost the west bank on account of the fact it was an ally of egypt." You really are a slow little fellow, aren't you? Jordan went to war in 1967 because it was obliged BY TREATY to come to the assistance of Egypt. That's how self-defense pacts work, erez, and it works the same way when Arab countries sign them as it does when European countries sign onto one and call it "NATO". An attack on one is an attack on all, and that the Israelis knew full well. e: "jordan`s loyalty to egypt is laudable" Yep, as slow as..... It wasn't a matter of LOYALTY, erez; it was a TREATY OBLIGATION. Self-defense pacts don't work if they don't create obligations - not "loyalty" - and a particulary nasty aggressor can't warn you to stay out of the fight; you are involved the moment that aggressor starts throwing his punches at your treaty partner.

"Hamas has not amended its charter. Fatah has not amended its charter. Likud has not amended its charter. Great. They will ALL have to be amended at the time of the Final Status Agreement. The Palestinian Charter was already to have been amended. Again, you talk about what the Palestinians have promised. I point out that their promises mean nothing, and you come up with lame excuses. That's par for the course with you.

"Building on revendicated palestinian is called "imposing facts" Jordan kicking every single Jew out of those territories imposed facts, didn't it?

"Thought I`d better take another look at Google Earth, just to be sure.... Yep, I can still see the pipeline running down from the Kinneret to those "blooming deserts" Open your myopic, anti-Israeli eyes a little wider and look at the desalinization plant too. One was offered to the Palestinians. Oh, yeah, they never pursued it.

Quite funny how the Palestinians keep parroting how much they want peace with Israel and to settle this conflict. Yet when confronted with an actual blueprint from Israel about a serious "realistic" solution to make peace they do not respond. Olmert gave Abbas a Map with a detailed plan not something drawn up on napkin and yet Abbas does not respond. Why? Simple the palestinians have no intention of dropping their fantasy demands return of every so called refugee, all territories captured in 1967 and complete control of E. jerusalem. Lets not mention that he has not prepared his citizens that peace will entail compromises including dropping some of their unrealistic demands. The Palestinians pulled this same nonesense in 2000 and now again 2008. When they are confronted with serious offers they dont have the balls to counter or accept.

FYI i'm palestinian. Building on revendicated palestinian is called "imposing facts" Keeping palestinian out of certain WB area is called "imposing facts" Closing borders, setting check points and emprisoning people is called "imposing facts" Occupation is called "imposing facts" Israelis might want peace but they don't want to pay the price. That's the problem harzion

Hamas has not amended its charter. Fatah has not amended its charter. Likud has not amended its charter. Great. They will ALL have to be amended at the time of the Final Status Agreement, as all are incompatible with it. What's the rush, there is no Final Status agreement on the table? Is Bibi ready to lead the way and remove Israel's claim to Eretz Israel from his one? No? So why would Abbas be tripping over Haniyeh in their haste to change their ones? You always bring the same set of one-sided demands to the party, couched in the same pejorative terms. You need facts and logic to win arguments SDHD, facts and logic.

FYI i'm palestinian. Building on revendicated palestinian is called "imposing facts" Keeping palestinian out of certain WB area is called "imposing facts" Closing borders, setting check points and emprisoning people is called "imposing facts" Occupation is called "imposing facts" Israelis might want peace but they don't want to pay the price. That's the problem harzion

Listen harzion i am palestinian and i know israelis who want peace. Now israelis should understand they cannot have peace without removing settlements.

SDHD: "A shame that Israel-hating buffoons are unaware of the modern agricultural methods Jews brought with them and developed in Israel." Thought I'd better take another look at Google Earth, just to be sure.... Yep, I can still see the pipeline running down from the Kinneret to those "blooming deserts" and, yep, I can still see that the shores of Lake Kinneret are way, way, way, way down on what they should normally be. Gosh! I wonder if those two are in any way related?

Charter this, charter that !! do you think palestinians care about charters ? palestinians need to be freed from occupation, live on their own land and do NOT need advice from people in San Diego or God knows where. Look at Israel's settlements policy since 40 years. Isn't that a charter of its own ? isn't that Likoud's electoral program ? They're taking away palestinian land bit by bit. Would YOU defend yourself ? of course you would !! But of course YOU KNOW...from San Diego ! as you're not part of the problem, perhaps you should at least try to be objective, keep your moral for yourself and stop insulting palestinians. Many thanks,

Mark has a point.Olmert was irrelevent from the time investigation of his corruption started seriously. He was a liar and the worst PM in Israels history.In fact he did alot of damage by shooting off his mouth about existance or non existance of Nuclear weapons while visiting Europe. Olmert the consumate liar was hagging Abbas in December on 2008 and with a straight face repeated few time on TV camera watch" No, No, Peace will come this year (2008)" Who believed Olmerts loksh.I don't think Abaas nor none of Israeli and Palestinina public. I don't understnd why Abbas ddn't react and said nothing!!! In retrospect,I don't think Abbas or any other PA lleader will sign any agreement with Israel.,not even if all WB and Gaza are evacuated by Israel to 1967 borders.They will still insist of the Right of rerurn for 5 million Arabs to Israel.Hence end of Jewish State. Any PA leader which will forgoe the "Right of Return"will be assasinated within days.Iran Islamists dictate end of Jews.

Charter this, charter that !! do you think palestinians care about charters ? palestinians need to be free from occupation, live on their own land and do NOT need advice from people in San Diego or God knows where. Look at Israel's settlements policy since 40 years. Isn't that a charter of its own ? isn't that Likoud's electoral program ? They're taking away palestinian land bit by bit. Would YOU defend yourself ? of course you would !! But of course YOU KNOW...from San Diego ! as you're not part of the problem, perhaps you should at least try to be objective, keep your moral for yourself and stop insulting palestinians. Many thanks,

i: "total rubbish.we lost 2700 of our very young soldiers in october 1973.you do not know our history.in addition thousands were wounded." And did Golda Meir consider that bit o' biffo was even a remote possibility when: (a) Sadat said (1971) that he was willing to make peace under the Jarring Plan and (b) Golda Meir told him to piss off? Answer: No, she considered it utterly inconceivable that Sadat would do anything other than sulk in the corner. WHAMMER-JAMMER. BIFF. BANG. THUMP. After which Sadat returned with pretty much the same deal, and it **STILL** took all the arm-twisting that Carter could muster before Begin agreed to gave up those Sinai settlements. Slow learners, these Israelis. 2,700 dead, and every single one of them avoidable; all that was required was an Israeli PM who wasn't blinded by greed, stupidity, and thuggishness. Maybe one will come along one day.....

'israel wants security.were we sure of that israeli ideas would surprise you with their friendliness.' That is an encouraging view Avi. Both sides have important priorities and red lines and security is obviously key for Israel. It's chicken and egg though. N Ireland had some parallels, e..g. similar, long-running (supposedly) ethnic-religious-nationalist confrontation. The IRA had to disarm before the final agreement, but that did not ensure security, any more than any of their other pledges did. They could no doubt re-arm tomorrow and start again. What has enabled peace is the agreement itself. Both sides got enough out of it to be reasonably content and the people found they much preferred peace, law and order (so far at least). Point being that real security is not just words on a bit of paper but practical solutions on the ground. I'm sure it can be done, though Hamas will need a good slap around the head by its international donors.

Israel offers to much as usual. This more fair offer will be rejected by a people who really don't want peace, but want to destroy Israel. Israel makes repeated attempts at peace by giving land a real asset, for a piece of paper that will not be honored, it just seems nuts to me. As we all have seen with Gaza any land relinquished will be used as a base to attack Israel. As I've stated before the key to peace must be clear defined consequences (actions that be taken by Israel) when violations occur. Israel must have the right to defined military action that are harsh and overwhelming or it will not work. Overwhelming power is the only language that is respected by its enemies.

no we dont.we want peace with them.come to israel and see for yourself.talk to our people and read our newspapers.you would understand far better.

multi headed who most often is harzion but takes on the form of old testament myth figures. hence yair, itzhik, erez, avi, yirmiyahu, zevelun are all manifestations. The old testament is rather long so he could address you in several hundred names if he so chooses. Just so that you don't think there are several people with silly arguments. It is just the one. another clue is his posts are generally short and often a little sarcastic. first appeared as Zadok the Priest.Google it under haaretz. His posts are legion! http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=+site:haaretz.com+Zadok+the+Priest+haaretz&ei=XykqS5q7Gp6hjAfex8SZBw&sa=X&oi=nshc&resnum=1&ct=more-results&ved=0CAoQ2AQ

to give away parts of texas and california to the mexicans,the next day he would be put on trial for high treason and a few days later he would be hanging from the gallows.

"Those photos also show something else that is very clearly man-made i.e. the pipeline feeding water FROM Lake Kinneret TO those areas." http://www.water-technology.net/projects/israel/ Such a clown.

context" you misread israel.the personalities do not matter.it is the electorate in israel that makes the decisions.

all of israel wants to exchange the palestinian towns and villages for the settlements. as to the narrowness of the waist that is an exchange israel thinks is in its favour.swings and roundabouts.there would be no threat should we be able to control the hills of judea.as israel intends.

"Why can`t Jews live in Palestine? Others here have asked. Abbas said previously that any Jews that remained would receive the same right as Arabs did in Israel" The Palestinians also said they recognize Israel. Oh, wait... They never amended their charter. They said they would. Cummings lies on behalf of the Palestinians. Charming.

not true.when egypt moved seven divisions into sinai in june 1967 israel had to attack or keep its armed forces on standby for a prolonged period. as far as the west bank is concerned let us leave that decision to the israeli electorate.they paid the price for the wars.

"No, actually, all it takes is someone who is willing to be very profligate with Other People`s Water." A shame that Israel-hating buffoons are unaware of the modern agricultural methods Jews brought with them and developed in Israel. Ever hear of drip irrigation or has your brain dripped too much basic understanding?

Israelis cannot negotiate for their own sake. Taba was lost because of this too. On the Syria border- Israel should reject the June 4th 1967 lines automatically- Israel is entitled to more. As for the Olmert Plan- thank God he is out of office. It seems the only thing he can negotiate is how to line his own pocket- at that many Israeli PM's are quite adept.

...that blueish-greenish lace-work around the main WB settlements... ...fascinating how the Pals would conduct normal lives trapped in bits-and-pieces of their own territory... ...obviously Olmert risks the impossible, not only in map-making, but also in the way he has conducted his whole life...

"Funny how often individuals mistake the term `return land back` with `giving land back`. These Palestinian territories were occupied in 1967, vastly colonized in contravention of international law and human rights." Until 1948, BOTH Jews AND Arabs lived in the territories. Egypt captured Gaza. Jordan captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Every single Jew was kicked out of those territories. Israel captured the territories 19 years later. Jews were able to reclaim their properties and move back in. Explain how giving all of the land to the Palestinians is either "returning" it or "giving it back." 1) It was never exclusively the Palestinians' land. 2) It was captured from Egypt and Jordan. What is in contravention in international law for Jews to have reclaimed their properties and developed them if the land never belonged exclusively to the Palestinians in the first place.

to face twelve divisions of egyptians with three divisions of its own.with the added problem that israel was not aware of where the main punch was to come from. there was no main punch.the egyptians streamed over the canal in vast human waves.

a myth.the bar lev line was manned with three hundred middle aged soldiers from the jerusalem brigade.little combat experience between them.

nothing to do with greed.israel wants security.were we sure of that israeli ideas would surprise you with their friendliness. i agree the fingers of land look unseemly but let the palestinians negotiate instead of giving us the finger.

On the map, I don't understand how it could possibly be acceptable to the Pals/world to incorporate these settlements and others nearby into Israel. It looks obviously ridiculous, a number of fingers stretching deep, half way into Palestine. Second point, not sure why Pals would be happy with bits of desert in exchange for choice plots of land adjacent to their E Jerusalem capital. Not surprised Abbas didn't respond!

Fine ! that's understood. Now a large majority of palestinians live in the west bank. If the 500 000 settlers do not want to get palestinian citizenship, they can move elsewhere. Israel wants to impose facts on the ground to the palestinians by force.

when the warring populations are separated.as they have been in cyprus.to that end an exchange of towns and villages is the best way forward. one more thing to remember.it is not particular politicians in israel that matter.our opponents have to convince the people of israel.they call the shots.

"Israel launched in 1967 another offensive war, for one reason alone: expanding its territory." - John Israel attacked in 1967, but NOT to expand it's territory. The situation was created by Soviet Disinformation which led Egypt and Syria to believe Israel was going to attack them. Nasser in particular was bellicose and provocative. Israel did not appreciate that the actions of Egypt were essentially defensive and decided that Egypt was likely to attack. Israel mobilized but Egypt did not attack. The cost of the mobilization was crushing, but PM Eshkol delayed going to war as long as possible. The goal was to disarm the offensive capability of Egypt and Syria, clear their forces from Israel's borders. Jordan joined the war after Israel attacked Egypt and Syria. Israel halted at the most defensible lines available. The goal was not conquest. Indeed, there had been no thought given to what to do with the occupied territory. The initial presumption was to trade it for peace.

not odd at all. the idea is to protect the population living on the coastal plain.that can only be done by making sure there is only one fighting force between the sea and the jordan river.that is what the idf wants. the hills of judea control the region.israel cannot afford to see others sitting on those hills.

'so damned by association is that it r cummings?' Your words, not mine Harzion. Israel's foreign ministry is at great pains to point out - correctly - the military vulnerability of Israel's 'narrow waist'. Your overseas defence attaches give the same presentation and show the same slide in countries like mine. Having sat through it, I would be rather fed up to find that, while a 10 mile width is not acceptable at one point, a 7 mile width - once you start giving away the Triangle and Umm el Fahm - is. That is why I seek clarification and reference from you, as it sounds most unlikely. Do you think Lieberman actually considered the strategic context here? Sure he is keen to get rid of Arab citizens, but that is in his standard racist context. And anyway he is not exactly the brightest bulb in the room.

No hasbara can change that fact. And even Jordan attacked Israel without provocation, that still does not entitle Israel to a square inch of Westbank or Golan territory.

No israel, No Palestine. One State Solution is the best for all. One Man, One Vote, Equality for all inhabitants. Equal Pay for Equal Work, Equal Water Rights. No Apartheid, No Segregation...A Very True Secular Democracy. Let us call it :?State of Holy Land?.

multi headed who most often is harzion but takes on the form of old testament myth figures. hence yair, itzhik, erez, yirmiyahu, zevelun are all manifestations. The old testament is rather long so he could address you in several hundred names if he so chooses. Just so that you don't think there are several people with silly arguments. It is just the one. another clue is his posts are generally short and often a little sarcastic. first appeared as Zadok the Priest.Google it under haaretz. His posts are legion!

"total rubbish.we lost 2700 of our very young soldiers in october 1973.you do not know our history.in addition thousands were wounded." - itzhik And the nation was traumatized. The easy victories brought by the first strikes in 1956 and 1967 had caused a hubris that crashed as crushing forces poured into the Golan and punched through the Bar Lev Line. Israel was changed forever by the Yom Kippur War.

also he is yirmiyahu yair and zevelun and about any other old testament myth figure he can think of.

the IDF actually thinks. It is odd and counter-intuitive though to my lowly military brain. Do you perchance have a reference for this IDF view? I have never heard it or seen it written anywhere.

because that would then have been the new opening position in future talks.israel would have given and received nothing in return abbas could then have made a proposal that would suit him,he did not.

Egypt was massing troops on the border in preparation for an attack. Israel simply is too small to risk a cross border attack---look what happened in 1973 (the Yom Kippur war). From Wikipedia on the 1967 war, as you seem to have forgotten the actual facts: "Following numerous border clashes between Israel and its Arab neighbours, particularly Syria, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967.[8] The peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957, following a British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt which was launched during the Suez Crisis.[9] Egypt amassed 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border[10] and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong support from other Arab countries." And lets not forget that Nasser publicly stated that he planned to push "The Jews" into the sea.

were the palestinians to accept a land exchange? I didn't say it would. It is well-established that both sides agree to land swops in principle and that is the only way it can work. But that doesn't mean that the PA HAS to agree with any and every proffered land swop idea. They clearly don't agree. Why do you think Abbas offered to exchange 2.6% of Palestine, while Olmert wanted 6.4%? If you take the 'five fingers' of land I referred to out of the equation, you will find that you have just about arrived at the PA's figure. It tells you that the PA can't accept the scale of territorial incursions into Palestine that Olmert wanted. The compromise will go something like: Ma'aleh Adumim town ceded to Israel? Oh OK then, just the town. Big wodge of land east of MA within security barrier ceded to Israel? No chance, don't get greedy.

quite so sam.but history has moved on and israel now has the vast majority of jews living here.we have to deal with matters as they now stand.

so damned by association is that it r cummings?

on the contrary r cummings the idf is very keen to see the palestinian villages and towns in israel ceded to the palestinian authority. the problem is that the palestinians do not want to be included in the palestinain authority.they are very happy where they are under israeli jurisdiction.

also he is yirmiyahu yair and zevelun and about any other old testament myth figure he can think of.

and that is the stuff of your debate? so johnboy excused the jordanian attack on israel in 1967 when it lost the west bank on account of the fact it was an ally of egypt. jordan's loyalty to egypt is laudable but you will excuse us for refusing to be victims of this inter arab loyalty.

'abbas did not respond or make a counter offer, that speaks volumes.' Read it again. "Giving Abu Mazen the map was conditioned upon signing a comprehensive and final agreement with the Palestinians so it would not be used as an 'opening position'... Ultimately, when Abu Mazen did not give his consent to a final and complete agreement, the map was not given to him." So basically Abbas was shown the Israeli demand, told it was non-negotiable and he had to agree or Olmert would take his ball back. That's not a 'negotiation', that's dictated terms from the people the world believes have stolen the land. There is not a snowball's chance that Abbas could have got PLO approval for the map as it stands. It would have passed leadership on a plate to Hamas. There has to be some flexibility here. Abbas said various maps had passed between them so it may be that Olmert was not able to agree a compromise. (Abbas offered 2.6% and Olmert wanted 6.4% so there HAS to be a half-way house surely?).

What was Olmert trying to do? Judea and Samaria are Israel's liberated historic homeland. He had no business horse trading the Land of Israel with the wolves. It is time Israel's leaders know the GOD of Israel and the Land of Israel. GOD did not give and restore the Land of Israel to Israel for it to give it away to the pagans.

would be an exchange of arab towns and villages for the israeli settlements. the palestinians in israel reject an exchange because they would rather be ruled by israel.

And for the war being defensive: true, for Israels neighbours. Israel launched in 1967 another offensive war, for one reason alone: expanding its territory.

'why not exchange all palestinian towns and villages in israel proper for the settlements. the palestinians would get umm al fahm jet kfar qassem taibeh tira and wadi ara.' That is along the lines of Lieberman's plan. The obvious objection to it is a security one. Israel has a very narrow waist at Tel Aviv/Gush Dan. By giving away the Triangle and so on, it would make more of Israel even narrower and harder to defend. Can't see the IDF buying that one.

Olmert. The Mischief Maker, More than silly,foolish & incompetent as a P.M. & sad to say as a human being too. We all saw how he behaved towards his own brother when he was in dire straits & urgently wanted help. He simply brushed him off with lame platitudes. Now.What answer did he expect to get from Abbas,who like Hamas & all the circle of haters round about want nothing less than to see Olmart & the rest facing the sea ! Not one iota to the Arabs from our Ancient/Modern Israel. Think in terms of 'peace' in a hundred to 2 hundred years from now,and stop running helter-skelter to the abyss like blind mice !

The Olmert plan is no more workable than the 1947 UN partition plan. There are not enough police in Israel or Palestine to secure those puddle of chicken guts boarders.

Look at what he did to Gaza and the mess he and Sharon brought to Israel. A WB PLO state will be overrun by hamas in a matetr of weeks. From the map he intended, or any other WB map, no inch of Israeli territory is safe from hamas missiles. The same argument has been peddled since Rabin. That Israel is more secure with an agreement than without. Isrel i smore secure with less land. Israel is more secure with less settlements. But, Israel is less secure. It' population has been under fire since Oslo. And creating Hamasistan will not give it greater security.

that israel would ever suffer a reverse" total rubbish.we lost 2700 of our very young soldiers in october 1973.you do not know our history.in addition thousands were wounded. your dislike johnboy blinds you.

and how about exchanging the hundreds of palestinian villages that were fully or partly erased from the map and replaced by jewish ones ? there were palestinians here before you.

The land Olmert was offering in the South Hebron hills and Wilderness is not of any real value. Sure, you can irrigate it if there's water. But there isn't enough to go round 11 million people and a population that is increasing considerably through immigration/aliyah. Kinneret is shrinking and the water table is sinking. The days are numbered for commercial farming in the Jordan Valley, it's too water-intensive (yes, even with drip irrigation). Ditto the northern Negev and this 150 sq km of Wilderness. The barely-populated Lachish salient (big dent to the west of Hebron/Beit Awwa) would be a more feasible parcel of land to swop. The barrier wall/fence is hard up against 8 Arab towns and villages there so it would be a welcome easing. Israel will sure need to come up with a better offer on this one.

e: "june 1967 artillery and mortar fire was directed by jordan on israel." Casus foederis. Look it up: it's the reason why nations sign "self-defense pacts". Egypt and Jordan had just such a pact, and so when Israel went to war with Egypt it did so knowing it was going to war with both. e: "we warned them to stop." And Germany warned Britain and France in 1939, erez. Too bad for Germany, but Britain/France had self-defense pacts with Poland. Casus foederis. e: "they did not." Casus foederis. To attack one is to attack both, and so Jordan was already at war the moment the IDF attacked Egypt. e: "we took back the jewish homeland." Whoop-de-do. So when are you going to proclaim sovereignty over it, erez? After all, it's been 42 years now. Still can't find a pen that works, heh? I can lend you mine, if that helps.....

I agree with you about the "five finger" being totally ludicrous. But look at some of the other nonsense going on nearer the Green Line: 1) Qalqilyah is sandwiched between Tzofim and Alfei Menashe; Abbas would have no choice but to tell the Israelis that they can't have both. 2) The twin roads leading back from Ariel through Elkana and Beit Aryeh entrap a triangle of Palestinian territory; Abbas can't possibly accept that. 3) What on earth is that road heading south of Beit Aryeh doing/going? 4) The Latrun salient is all Israeli; is that counted in the "5%" that Israel is annexing from the Pals, or is it excluded from the calculations? 5) There is a little cut-off triangle of land betweem Givat Ze'ev and Nataf; were we supposed to miss that fact? Man, what a shocker!

You are doing a great job as a newspaper. We had all forgotten how things ended what w/the Gaza war, Shalit, the new American administration, but exactly, Abbas did not respond and Olmert had these maps. This I remember. What is the use of regretting Gush Katif? What's done is done. I was in Israel in 2007, and I saw amazing photographs of the whole debacle at the Te-Aviv Museum of Art. Never will I forget. Good luck to the present Rosh Hamemshalah.

The zionist mind simply can not conceive that Israel will ever suffer a reverse. Never. So they are perfectly content to snatch territory by force and simply hunker down on it, assuming that if they hunker down long enough the other side will eventually have to throw in the towel. But what if the other side throws down the gauntlet? And, furthermore, what if they win? Israel can end up losing the lost i.,e. losing everything that it has spent long decades hunkering down on, only to be rudely reduced to a rump state within the Partition Line in the blink of an eye. This is why Israel is running a terrible risk through this monumental act of hubris, and it is made all the more inexplicable because Israel CAN crystalize its current gains tomorrow; all it needs to do is accept the Saudi Plan, and then everything up to the Green Line is hers for ever and ever more. Too greedy. Too stupid. Too thuggish.

Just look at this one! If you ever wondered why Abbas can't accept any plan that allows Israel to annex: Kedumim Ariel Ma'aleh Adumim Efrat then all it takes is one glance at that proposed map to understand why. It's not JUST the territory that those settlements occupy, it's the long trail of "access roads" that run behind them, and which serve the purpose (quite intentionally) of slicin' 'n' dicing up the West Bank. Come on, be honest: how can you look at that map and not blush?

june 1967 artillery and mortar fire was directed by jordan on israel.we warned them to stop.they did not.we took back the jewish homeland.

how would you know that?there is a big peace camp in israel.the israeli population are not dumb.they want peace.

he made an offer.why did abbas not make a counter offer?

to accept a land exchange?you seem to have convinced yourself you know what is better for them?dont they have a vote?

beyond the green line" not according to the author of resolution 242 lord caradon.

r cummings that is somewhat far fetched. the whole area is under our control and our wishes would not be entirely ignored.

is the importance of there being one fighting force between the sea and the jordan.israel can be the only military force in the area.

that speaks volumes.

in israel proper for the settlements. the palestinians would get umm al fahm jet kfar qassem taibeh tira and wadi ara. we would take the major settlements in return. what coulld be easier? why is this solution being ignored.

Based on irreversible pan-Islamist and pan-Arabist dogma, the conflict relates to Arab refusal to accept the "existence" of a sovereign Jewish state in what they consider Allah-given Arab-Islamic land (Dar-ul-Islam). No amount of territorial concessions by Israel can lead to any lasting coexistence that will alter the above reality. On the contrary, by making Israel more vulnerable and Arabs more hostile, such concessions can only encourage more bloody wars. Pursuing so-called "Palestinian" leaders will not change anything, since they are only surrogates of above pan-Islamist (Hamas) and pan-Arabist (Fatah) dogma. Both Hamas and Fatah covenants are just another confirmation of such realty.

"Giving Abu Mazen the map was conditioned upon signing a comprehensive and final agreement with the Palestinians...when Abu Mazen did not give his consent to a final and complete agreement, the map was not given to him." What sort of crock is that? "We won't let you see the deal you're agreeing to unless you agree to the deal first."

Others here have asked. Abbas said previously that any Jews that remained would receive the same right as Arabs did in Israel - which rather suggests that there is not an objection in PRINCIPLE to Jewish settlements remaining. There are two obvious hurdles. One is settlement size. A Jewish-only settlement would have to be large enough to support its own services - a senior school, a hospital, a panoply of administrative services, etc., because the Israeli civil administration won't be there to do it. That means settlements of 5,000 or more people. This is underlined by the security issue - the Pal security forces cannot be expected to run 24/7 security on 100+ settlements, not without thousands more gendarmes. The other issue is that many of the smaller settlements are too lawless, whether because they acquired land by keeping the rightful owners off it for 7 years or because they beat up on the locals and the olive trees. No government would thank Israel for that legacy.

... do you turn it over to them? When every educated Jew, Moslem and Christian know that the The Land of Israel belongs to The Jews why do Israeli governments flirt with national suicide? Why is every government so lacking in courage, dignity and common sense? Why try so hard to please the very countries that murdered our brethren not long ago? That the Olmert government was a disaster is well established. That the current governments policies violate the very principals it was elected to uphold are obvious. Would Obama agree to turn over New York City' Chinatown to China because the residents there are ethnic Chinese and speak Mandarin? Will London cede part of itself to Pakistan? Paris to Yemen? Israel is a lion that has convinced itself it is a mouse. The People of Israel deserve better. The government must be worthy of the governed.

If you start from the standpoint of international law and UN decisions, Israel has NO valid legal claim to ANY land beyond the Green Line. Even the USA and George Bush recognised that. So it doesn't really matter a cuss what emotional-historical-religious-ethnic-realtor attachment the nationalist right claims to it nor how stridently it refuses to leave it, the final settlement will look something like Olmert was proposing. Live with it. Olmert asked for too much. E J'sem on that map is Israeli. No chance at all. The 5 long Israeli 'fingers' sticking into Palestine go too far and disrupt Pal communication arteries and district administration. For clarity, they are: Emmanuel/Kedumim, Ariel/Barkan, Ma'aleh Adumim/Kfar Adumim, Givat Ze'ev/Beit Horon and Efrata/Migdal Oz. No self-respecting non-Israeli would buy that map as it stands, the 5-finger border is a bit too silly, but it would not need all that much adjustment to be a feasible solution.

Giving up areas that have been worked since 1948. Lush agricultural fields that were once desert. Land that cost blood sweat and tears. Quoting the Hermit; According to the map proposed by Olmert, which is being made public here for the first time, the future border between Israel and the Gaza Strip would be adjacent to kibbutzim and moshavim such as Be'eri, Kissufim and Nir Oz, whose fields would be given to the Palestinians. Unquote. No wonder he was fired. I do know that area well. Some of the finest agricultural land. Producing food. I wonder what PM Netanyahu and the new team have in mind. Good day from snowy Swiss Alps.

There will be no peace until all the occupied lands will return to their rightful owners and all the refugees return to their homes.

The bizarre thing is that Zionists seem to think the 'disputed territory' gambit only works one way. They think they can reject the pre-1967 ceasefire lines as borders, while keeping all the territory and then grab more to the east of the green line. It doesn't seem to occur to them that if they're rejecting the borders recognised by the international community then basically they have no recignised state at all. If they want to claim that Hebron is disputed territory, then so is Tel Aviv.

since abbas did not accept the offer, the palestinians now have start new negotiations with netanyahu. the palestinians have never accepted any peace plan offered to them. that is just a fact. there is no doubt that abbas had hoped that obama would impose a draconian settlement on israel. he had miscalculated. israel is not a bana republic. your claim about israeli coalition issues disregards the blaring fact that hamas rules gaza and would take over the west bank if not for the presence of the idf and help to pa from the u.s.

Mr Benn or is that Mr Bean? Are you aware that Olmert is no longer PM of ISRAEL?

I doubt even you would have ratified or supported any Olmert offer in 2008. Part of any negotiation is judging the ability of your opposite number being able to deliver. By early 2008, the writing for Olmert was on the wall and he'd been judged wanting by the Israeli public. And Livni was already challenging him for Kadima party leadership. The Knesset would never have ratified the offer had Abbas said "yes" and you know it. Shas would have walked as they threatened multiple times during 2007 and 2008 any time any hint was made of nearing an agreement. And if Shas walked, the coalition would have collapsed.

There won't be ANY "Palestinian" state- not here in OUR land.

Olmert offered the Palestinians a state sliced up like Swiss cheese. How generous of him. Yet the right-wingers here think that was too much? Israel should never have built the damned settlements in the first place. If you ask me, there should be no territorial exchange...any settlements beyond the green line have to go. Period. The Palestinians already lost nearly 80% of the original homeland to the Jewish State, yet the Jewish State still asks them for more.

The offer is a joke. Normal smooth borders. Israel has some serious mental health issues if it thinks that this map makes sense. One solution. 67 borders and a lot of Jews as Palestinian citizens.

"Arabs could have set up a Palestinian state anytime from 1949-67.....they didn`t. Why not? Where they busy ? Maybe they were watching American baseball games on cable TV, huh ?" It would have been illegal and not recognized. http://wp.me/pDB7k-jA "Israel has as much right to land in the West Bank as Palestinians do." http://wp.me/pDB7k-il

The points expressed regarding the suitability of Gaza land for farming miss a fundamental point - irrigation. The irrigation of the current agricultural land in the Negev depends on water transferred from Galilee in the north via canal, will equal water rights be transferred with the land to Gaza?, if not Ombre is quite correct. Water rights and supply is a primary concern in both Gaza and the West Bank for agriculture - that is some fundamental information which hopefully clarifies some ignorance.

war? Care to provide? Meanwhile as UNSC resolution after UNSC resolutions says, "it is inadmissible to acquire territory by war/force" Simple reason being, the civilian inhabitants might not have voted for the regime in power when war was waged. In fact they might not have been able to vote at all.

In a very short period of time the civilised world have now come to realise that disengagement from Gaza has not made Israel any safer. Hamas at least have been honest telling the world of their intentions and have now made it quite clear the eradication of the State of Israel through violence. No peace until all of Israel is back in the hands of the Palestinian people. Not like Abbas who is a total waste of time, he is a great dilly-dallier and a lier. The world leaders including the good for nothing UN assumption is that both the Hamas and Abbas will turnout to be moderates and make peace with Israel . We all know that assumption is the mother of all balls ups . It's in the Palestinian silent Charter it's in their speaches the majority overwelmingly support violence knowing very well that when ever Israel realiates there will always be a Goldstone to help them.

http://wp.me/pDB7k-il Prove it wrong.

Why wouldpalestinian trade land in Jerusalem for a desert? This is a joke! It's like telling someone to trade land in New York City for land in the great basin desert in Arizona which is basically unsustainable to live on? Israel thinks that the world doesn't know what its up to and that is very sad.

JS: "No, nature does NOT draw clear lines like that - it`s man-made. The Palestinians get the same land that Israelis have turned arable." Those photos also show something else that is very clearly man-made i.e. the pipeline feeding water FROM Lake Kinneret TO those areas. A pipeline that has no equivalent on the Egyptian side, because the Sinai has no equivalent water source to draw from. Mind you, those same photos will show you something else that is man-made i.e the dangerously low levels of Lake Kinneret. Levels so low that Israel runs a very real risk of turning that freshwater lake into a salty brine. But zionists never seem to want to talk about that as they go twaddling on about making the deserts bloom yadda yadda yadda.... There is no Hebrew word for "sustainable", I take it?

you and your palestinian friends will always blame the jews, regardless of what happens.

in all of israel's history, olmert was the worse prime minister.

G: "And we all know it takes a true farmer to grow something in the desert" No, actually, all it takes is someone who is willing to be very profligate with Other People's Water.

Can we get our facts here ? NOT ONE SINGLE ARAB state recognized the 1949-67 armistice lines as a 'border.' They were a temporary 'cease-fire' line, until the Arabs could wipe out the Jews. Arabs could have set up a Palestinian state anytime from 1949-67.....they didn't. Why not? Where they busy ? Maybe they were watching American baseball games on cable TV, huh ? Israel has as much right to land in the West Bank as Palestinians do. Even HAARETZ' Ze'ev Schiff said land swaps should not be given as they rewarded aggression over the decades. Them's the facts, folks !!

It was a perfect offer. Palestinians inded, have the right to reject, however, they will hardly get better offers, and that is something that they should consider. The UN will not give them anything based in whatever they think are their rights. To materialize any right of self determination in any piece of territory they have to negotiate realistically about borders. Therefore it was not wise to reject that offer, that even improved Israel proposals in Taba. Rejecting means the prolongation of the status quo, which means more Israel settlements. Facts are facts

Once the elections became scheduled, Olmert could have offered the moon and all the stars and the entirety of the West Bank and Gaza and Jerusalem and it would have been irrelevant. Actually once the elections were hinted at because of the corruption allegations. The Knesset would not have endorsed the offer, ever. Abbas knew this. Olmert made himself irrelevant. Netanyahu was elected as the ultimate not-Olmert, just as Obama was elected as the ultimate not-Bush.

Omber And we all know it takes a true farmer to grow something in the desert http://www.ynet.co.il/PicServer2/03072003/293938/1_a.jpg

Nothing like more lies and distortions to warp peoples' opinions, and Ombre is just another liar. But don't believe me, look for yourself at any satellite photo of southern Israel. The Israel-Egyptian border clearly stands out. Why? Because Israeli agriculture on one side, and Egyptian desert on the other side. No, nature does NOT draw clear lines like that - it's man-made. The Palestinians get the same land that Israelis have turned arable. Ombre, go learn something about fertility of agricultural land before you post an ignorant talkback.

How come the 48 borders were not good enough in 48 ? Could have avoided one helleva lot of fighting since. The basic trend is the more we give or offer - the more they want. How come everything they want must be "Jew free" - a step beyond apartheid ? What is missing is any desire for peace - in this environment any compromise or jesture will only fuel radicalism and breed more terror. Now is not the time for chesed rather gevura.

Funny how often individuals mistake the term 'return land back' with 'giving land back'. These Palestinian territories were occupied in 1967, vastly colonized in contravention of international law and human rights. Let's admit the truth here, these are lands that Olmert intended 'to return to the rightful owners'. We all know most agree in this forum.

"Palestinians would be crazy to swap the fertile land of the West Bank for the hot desert of Gaza." Exactly when was it the Palestinian's land to swap? You think they owned all of it or something? Did they also own the Jewish Quarter, which happened to be in East Jerusalem? For them to swap something, A) They need to have owned it to begin with. B) It helps a whole lot to be in possession of what you're willing to swap.

It appears that Olmert made a genuine effort to swap land and make peace with the Palestinians, lot more than the farce of a settlement freeze offered by Bibi and his settler/thug FM, but in your eyes this is a "disgusting" offer. Why disgusting, because it is not100% biased in favor of Israel or because Israel should not give back a square meter of the homeland? What is your problem? Oh and with regards to you calling Abbas a terror leader, I think Israel has plenty of Palestinian civilian blood on it's hands.

how easy it is for a money monger to give up the livlihood of kibbutz and moshav farmers.the occupied west bank is populated by those of olmert and likud persuasion,the entrenched,the chosen,the darlings of the realitors,builing companies and a myriad of government generated job holders,the longest scam in jewish history.

The official borders are those of 47-49, the occupied territory outside is just that, outside. But as a compromise between back to those borders and the current status of illegal occupation the 49-67 borders are quite accepted as a compromise in the real world outside right-wing nutcase fairyland on both sides, be it the jewish settler-fanclub or Hamas.

No matter what the offer or concession from Israel, Abbas can only come up with excuses not to enter into fair and serious negotiations.

Gaza is not a hot desert. Before Israel totally withdrew from Gaza, Jews who lived there had a thriving agricultural economy. And if the West Bank is so fertile, why can the Arabs not develop an agricultural industry? And if getting out of "occupied" land, taken legally in a defensive war, would lead to peace, then why as Sderot bombed after Israel pulled out of Gaza? Your ignorance is showing.

Palestinians would be crazy to swap the fertile land of the West Bank for the hot desert of Gaza. If Abbas accepted this bad deal, he should resign. Just get out of the land occupied in 1967. End of story.

olmert will not be dealing any land no more. all those israeli barriers will be broken and gone. no one will ask you no more if you are israeli or arab. no one will even remember israel. the terrorist fake jewish state. he will destroy israeli nuclear weapons.

"that Israel would receive American financial aid to develop the Negev and Galilee to absorb some of those settlers" comment on this like that it will cause inflation? why are all the banks on the west including agents who work for your inventor ignoring the fact that non-debt financial aid boost development? will we one day realize that if we printed free financial aids we would need to work like maybe one hour per day? what do you think yisrael? why is your boss toruring the whole globe? why is cocaine witch calling on democracy if we all know that it is economy that reflects the order of society? no one needs a rite to vote if ruler know how to print money to the slaves. democracy with debt based banking free market system is the most corrupt system or no? i bet you know this very well.

or...instead of trying to continuously change the rules...how about we do what we said we'd do and had agreed to do?...NO COVETING AND STEALING OTHERS' LAND!

Who cares what they talked about; Olmert wants the leftist newspapers to save him from jail, so he leaks details of his disgusting plan, and Abbas is realizing he made a huge mistake not taking the "deal," so he is trying to pretend that what Olmert promised him means something. Let them both disappear.

as we always said, the Pals don't want a state next to Israel. They want a state which includes all of Israel. Don't you get it, Olmert?

Palestinians are saying they are not willing to give in their "rights" to Jerusalem, although they have no such rights. If this article is correct, Olmert in contrary, was willing to give in the ancient Jewish capital Hevron, to which Jews have all rights. What a shame! Hopefully Bibi is not Olmert.