Land of paradoxes

Look, the Arabics do not want a Palestine State, do they? If they truely wanted a State, this would've been accomplished a generation ago - with Israel's help!! No, what the Arabics want is nihilism - they only want to kill and destroy first Israel, then everything and anybody else. This is why I call them cockroaches!! Arabic cockroaches. Don Saar, drdonzi@crocker.com

I agree! Israel's Arabics are a disloyal 5th column and should be expelled to Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Saudi, etc. Especially disloyal are the Arabic MKs! Don Saar, drdonzi@crocker.com

Deport the Arab occupiers back to Arabia!

So, what have the Palestinians gained since 1948, when they and their brothers thought they could win ALL the land? Or in any of the other wars, intifadas, etc? What have they gained? More suffering and more misery. There were no checkpoints or wall before the intifada. The palestinians have brought 99% of the hardship they endure upon themselves, because of their intractability. They have created most of their own suffering. They now sit with a looming civil war, because even their own people can not get along. Don't blame the Israelis for that infighting. The Pals have a failed society, which is their own fault.

It is erroneous to think there is only a territorial dispute between Israel and its neighbors. In reality, the two sides can not be compared, their societies are too fundamentally different. In Israel, free enterprise and independent thinking are held common and protected by law. In the Arab countries there is repressive tribal consciousness. Even if Israel would put its national borders exactly where the Arabs want them, there still would be neither peace nor justice. Israel can do just a little to help the Arabs change, but the Jews should in any case not be blamed for the Arabs' self-inflicted hardships. With a lot of hard work, it would take another century, several generations, before the Arab nations might gain the freedom Western countries enjoy today. Until then, they will be counted among the poorest economies on Earth, who are - in and of themselves - a danger to peace and an obstacle to justice.

The UN resolution 242 states that no acquisition of land by war is allowed. This is what Israel is trying to do, that is annexing Palestinian land under the pretext of withdrawing from large areas of the West Bank. Israel is hoping that the the annexation will be overlooked, and so the Palestininan people will be portrayed as the obstacle to peace. The withdrawal has to be complete and the only condition Israel has the right to impose is that security operations will be carried out as necessary.

they, Israel would not have made any move toward the Old city for fear of making it a three front war (Israel hardly made a move for the old city even when they WERE fighting Jordan). In the end, Israel won and wound up with alot more land then they had dreamed of only six days earlier. But keep in mind that it was Jordan, Egypt and Syria who lost the land, not the Palestinians, who could easily have been granted citizenship in these countries, and wouldn't have had a homeland regardless of the outcome of the war. The war in 1973: This one, the arabs almost had Israel, but Israel prevailed again, and this time Egypt got smart and talked peace... anyway... the point is that it is indeed the arabs who attempted to acquire land by force in the first place... if history had gone differently, and Israel had lost would the Palestinians still insist on the pre-67 lines? I submit that they would not... but if we want to go by the resolution wouldn't that be fair?

"SC 224 and 338 speak of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force." The writer of this comment may well be correct, but they seem to overlook the fact that it wasn't Israel's idea in the first place to start any of the three wars that they had to fight, and that it was initially the arabs who attempted to acquire the territory by force... War in 1948: The partition split the land into two states, it was the palestinians and arabs that decided that this was not enough, not the Israelis. Israel won and kept only half of Jerusalem. The rest went to Jordan, Egypt, and Syria (who by the way still refuse to give their Palestinian "brethren" citizenship). The war in 1967: Egypt was the aggressor boasting of its ability to destroy Israel and kick the jews into the sea, as well as keeping a hefty number of tanks and millitary personnel at the Egyptian-Israeli border. Egypt enticed Syria to participate and the war broke out... Israel asked Jordan to stay out of it... and had

ANOTHER HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF 1948 & 1967 The real paradox is how both the Israeli and Palestinian leaders seem to benefit from being enemies on the same land, while, the whole region suffers the dire consequences. For instance, if someone from the outside were to view the larger picture. They could surmise that because of the marginalization of the Palestinian people by the state of Israel, Syria, and the Palestinian Authority. A country such as Lebanon, whom did not confiscate, nor colonize, the holy land, became a nation traumatized and brutalized by: 1.The Palestinian Militant groups trained and supported by either the Israeli Mossad, CIA and/or Syrian Secret Police. 2.The Israeli "Defense" Forces, How can it be a defense force when it invaded and occupied a sovereign country for 22 years ? 3.The Syrian Military, which made an agreement called the "red-line agreement" with Israel and the USA to enter Lebanon and do as it pleased for 30 yrs.

Peace is not a matter of 'believing' in something but rather an expression of who you are as a community. Peace has for centuries been the recipe for the survival of the Jewish People. But, when attacked, Israel will hit back. In contrast, Arabs have a tradition of tribal wars. From that cultural perspective, they relate to Israel as if it were yet another tribe to fight against. That is why they refuse to talk about peace - a hudna, a limited cease-fire, is all they can offer. The Arabs do not understand that their society's weakness comes from the clans who jealously fight one another. The Arabs lose their wars against the West because they lack unity and lag behind in technology. The Arabs tell themselves that Israel is what makes them weak. Then they fight again and lose some more. The Arab failures are entirely home-made. Sorry for the bad news, but you cannot blame Israel for the stubborn mentality with which the Arabs refuse to correct their short-comings.

This is not a withdrawal from "most" of the West Bank, it is the theft of most of the West Bank. Not just the land and water table behind the wall, but they're the Jordan Valley as well. Not unlike the Jews of Warsaw the Palestinians will be beseiged from all sides, shot at like fish in a barrel, and starved into submission. This will be done slowly over time and Israel will plead self-defense all the way.

For the Arab side, the object of negotiatioins is to achieve the victory that cannot be achieved by military means. Whatever agreement is signed, the Arabs will say that 1)it was not good enough to their side, and 2)too good to the Israeli side. Unless, of course, Israel signs an agreement to shoot all Israelis in the head, and then implements it. Look at what they now say about Oslo: we wuz robbed, but also, we would accept the Palestinian state envisioned by Oslo, if Oslo were still on the table, only it isn't. If Oslo were still on the table, we would be against it as "not good enough." And, really, that's only the beginning of their perversity. There's still decades of "what kind of state will it be" convoluted posturing to go through.

The "90%" figure sounds reasonable at first but when you draw it on a map it is clearly unviable The bits Israel wants to keep, as reported widely including in Haaretz, are : - East Jerusalem - 30% of the Palestinian economy, twice as large as the second largest Pal city - The Jordan valley - the most fertile farmland in the country, would result in the west bank being completely encircled by Israel - Ariel - sits on top of 75% of the west banks water. Plus Maale Aduumin - the wall annexes a land area 10 times larger than the actual built up area of the settlement, cutting the west bank almost completely in two. That is the real practical reason why Pals do not accept the Allon Plan / convergence / realignment / whatever it is called this week.

A border is only a border if those on either side agree it is.

its creating a large jail, but if you are all criminals....

One illegality upon another for the past 40 yrs. Israel in the days immediately following the 6 Day War was clear that the West Bank would be returned and that all parts were negotiable. Very soon thereafter their colonist project began in full swing and they knew that this would form their border. Zionism has always been a movement based on the premise of take what you can when you can and when you find the moment most advantageious. if complaints come later, just say, the facts have been created and they can do nothing about it. Facts become facts and whatever was taken or expanded, certainly in the WB, becomes the border.

Just finish Arafat's Security Wall!! This will define the strategic parameters for Israel. All the rest is bullshit. Don Saar, drdonzi@crocker.com

I must be hitting the nail on the head. Non of the Arabist, writing is this column, is ready to counter my conclusions!

No Palestinian in his right mind could accept Olmert's plan for unilateral and illegal Israeli annexation of the choicest bits of the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem. SC 224 and 338 speak of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force. That's why Israel cannot be allowed to retain any of the occupied territories by force. Israeli aggression cannot be rewarded with Palestinian land and water.

NO PARADOX SIMPLY FREE 100% THE WEST BANK AND EVERYBODY WILL AGREE!

Benn is another fantasizer. The Palestinians are not ready to accept Israel. This is their basic underlying position. They do not want a two- state solution. They want an end to the Jewish state solution. They want that more than they want anything for themselves.

What is so strange about it? That the Arab world created a hoax nation, its tool and stick to beat on Israel by proxy, and eventually to `conquer or bring her to her knees` in stages. That after so many years, so much conning and deception, and so many innocent lives lost for nothing, the world including Israel had accepted the hoax as real, except its own creator. That the creator of the hoax will do anything possible not to allow its tool to loose the `teary, oppressed victim status` before the tool achieved its full goals. That the Arab world will have its pride and honor very dangerously shaken, and a helluva price to pay from its street masses, had the peace occur with Israel playing a major role and holding her health and security in her own hands. That they will always say and do the opposite, because it is the opposite they dream upon Israel. Just the years beginning with Oslo, through Roadmap and Gaza withdrawal, until today will justify the above. What is so strange?

So what if Israel gives all the land to the Arabs except the '67 borders? 5 Arab nations went to war w/Israel over land much smaller than that. It wont keep neither the Quassam rockets from being lauched from Gaza, nor the Arab news media from referring to Israel as "The Occupation."

I would say a causal observer of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would not fail to see the Palestinians are being forced to accept in 2006 what they didn't even have to reject in 1947 (the UN Partitioning plan). Now we have to remember that rejecting this partitioning plan was the cause of what the Palestinians call their 'Nakba', or calamity. To accept Israel's offer today, without a return of the refugees, without any gains that would justify that historical decision, would amount to an acceptance of defeat. Now in a culture in which every defeat is portrayed as a great victory, how do you explain that to your people? What was the suffering all for? This is why they will continue to say the opposite, looking for thousand excuses NOT TO END THIS CONFLICT!!!!

Golda Meir was cheered for her anti-Palestinian remarks. Arafat was cheered for the same one-sided rmks. For a change, for a new starts 1. Both sides can inventory their own mistakes from the past, including all crimes commited against the opposite side 2. Both sides can develop initiatives which consider the rehabiliation and compensation of the opposite side. From now, it can be a no-no to talk about 1. Our holy rights 2. Our holy square inches 3. Our pain 4. Our religion 5. Our Scriptures What a frustration that intelligent people can not see the caricature nature of these hostilities.

... of why the Palestinians are opposed to convergence. Namely the Apartheid Wall. Israel wants to create facts on the ground and build this evil wall to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state (Israel says it is to prevent attacks failing to grasp that while the Wall is built on stolen land it is merely justifying attacks). Israel is acting as if they are doing something praiseworthy by evacuating the settlements when in fact all it is doing is collectively punishing the Palestinians. So Israel can go ahead with its convergence plan all it likes but until it has returned to its 1967 border it won't achieve nor deserve peace - regardless of the lies it tells about peace efforts

the usa 40% is wonderful try looking at world wide turnout snd if its more than 65% its a fix!!

This editorial is non sense. Israel is very welcome to leave West Bank and Gaza competly, and to build a fense exactly on the 1967 borders UP TO THE SKY. However, it is unacceptable for Israel to leave Isolated parts of the west Bank, to keep Jerusalem, to keep the Jordan Valley, to keep control of Palestinian borders, and to keep control of all Palestinain resources. This is exactly creating large jale. That is not the way to bring peace. That is escaping from peace.

I am somebody and i dont believe Israel's wish for peace ... ask yourself how many Palestinian civilians were killed in the past week alone. Peaceful indeed. and how a state in which the majority of the population does not vote can be democratic is beyond my simple mind.

The Palestinians now hate Oslo. Except for Arafat, everyone is blamed for the Oslo disaster. Abbas, who devoted his life to the Palestinian cause (and loot, but this is a universal ME practice, and will include Hamas, given the opportunity) is now reviled as a "policeman for Israel." The Palestinians demand a peace deal that will cost Israel, but not cost them. It will never, ever, ever, ever happen.

In order to impose the surrender terms on Israel, as described above, your side will have to win a war. Sorry, but the UN, Arab League, Soviet Union, USA, EU, Iran, etc are not going to pull a win out of a hat for you.

If you guys may forgive me, I will say: give Israel kisses instead of kicks. They will sure kiss you back. that achieved, why should you need tanks, missiles, nukes and the like, neither you nor Israel.

Once again Aluf Benn demonstrated his demagoguery by confusing the issues at stake. The Arabs are not against Israel's withdrawal from the occupied land. What they are against is the partial withdrawal which Israel is trying to deceive the world into believing that its done its part of the bargain while maintaining a stranglehold on the life of millions of Palestinians as is the case in Gaza today. I don't know any Palestinians who would miss the Israeli army or the settlers once they are out of our face but the question here is that we want them out once and for all from every inch of the land they occupied. Not some of it but all of it then we can all stand on the top of the mountain and shout good riddance.

I have been reading these comments on Ha'Aretz for a long time, and it keeps striking me that there are virtually NO comments that are EVER impartial. Every single one is either PRO ISRAEL ...or PRO ARAB. So I am wondering, is G-D on one side or the other as well? OR, is it just possible that this paper, which I happen to think is great, chooses not to publish impartial comments?

"They are here, they belong here and they shall have a state on their land or Israel will never know peace." Yaakov, when in history have the palesintinas EVER shown they were capable of peace?? Why on earth should israel think they are capable of peace now and give them close range to all of our cities for their rockets when they STILL shoot rockets at us and say they want our destruction!!!! HOW IS THAT PEACE!?!?!

You need to believe what you write in order to justify Israel's occupation. In other words, my daddy was here before your daddy and I have the Bible to prove it. So? You don't belong here. you have no claim here? We see you as nothing but ahmeds come lately, as squatters who are occupying our land from which wee have beenn physically absent for two millenia. (yes, I know your argument:"there were always Jews....)Its pointless. The fact is that there is a people who define themselves as palestinian. They exist. They live and lived on this land. I do not go to you and ask you to define for them who is a Palestinian. They are here, they belong here and they shall have a state on their land or Israel will never know peace. Its that simply. It has nothing to do with bibilical promise or who was where first. Unless you apply the Biblical model and annihilate them as a command of God.

You said Bolton is the answer : I say Of course ! no need for ADL or AIPAC interference in major Foreign policies anymore. Hell take care of everything ;)

Actually John Bolton is the only one prepared to exposure the money and corrupt control exerted by Muslim and Arab states to prevent Israel ever being treated fairly. If the UN was run by Israel do you think 'zionism is rascism' or any of the 100 or so anti-semitic resolutions against Israel would have been passed ???? your argument turns in on itself!

The paradox of the Palestinians and the arabs more widely is that they are always split into many divergent views, but principally two factions, the total rejectionists and the factions who will seek accommodation via the two state compromise. Whilst the PA does not have universal or at least majority consensus, the paradox of whsat israel does wil always be opposd significantly by one faction for political domination or othe expedient reasons. Paradoxically Israel has to work towards assisting the PA and other factions to achieve a Unitary and Dominant Authority in Gaza and the west bank not forgetting the wider Arab league countries if possible. This will assist qassams , convergence and other immediate cross border issues generally.

Someone that believes that Eastern European ethnic Ashkenazim had the right to steal Palestine from the native population on the basis of an etymological relationship between the word "Jew" and the word "Judea" would by the same reasoning argue that the Irish have the right to ethnically cleanse and steal Rome because the Irish mostly practice the Roman Catholic religion, which contains the word "Roman" in its name. Zionist ideology is so extreme that it is practically psychotic, and any Zionist or supporter of Zionism should be denaturalized and treated as a dangerous psychopath. Yet, in the paradoxes of modern politics, those that cling to the psychosis of Zionism are considered rational and moderate while Palestinians are extremists for simply wanting returned what was stolen from them by fanatic Europeans.

ISrale isnt run by an internationally renown terrorist organization. Israel doesnt initiate war on a daily basis with rockets and claim it wants peace. The world is fed up with hamas, not israel. Only the arabs are losing credibility by voting in to powere one of the biggest terrorist organizations on earth.

In the time of the Balfour declaration, to establish a home for Jews in Palestine, the initiative was secular, and it was rejected by the Muslim Palestinian leaders. To many Israelis are now guided by their Orthodoxy. More and more Palestinians side with Sunni/Wahhabi extremism. Orthodox oppenents will not be good partners for peace. Only Openminded secular majorities will make peace.

It is wonderful how a seemingly educated and erudite writer can swoon himself into a justification based on a fabrication founded on an interpretation. It is remarkable how the Sullivans and Franzens make this into a one-sided story. Facts may be used only to support their position. Any other facts are,therefore, lies. Happily, most people know that Palestine was a Roman renaming of a Jewish place. Most people know that those who today are called Palestinians have been on this land for less time than have the Jews. Most people know that Jewish history in the region is older than Arab or Palestinian and most people know that it is a convenience of political argument only to have decided that 1967 is the start of all history. The 1967 borders were not with Palestine. They were post war armistice lines. All the bleating about nothing less than the 1967 borders are the hollow cries of a people who started a conflict, lost, and have ever since demanded restoration of the status quo ante.

There is no paradox, but there is a forked tongue. Muslim speak in English the political correctness that leftists want to hear, while praising terror and the Muslim right to Israel and the World. Settlers have never been the problem except to the Phased Plan for the destruction of Israel and self-hating Jews. As the onslaughts of accusations against Jews of Racism and Apartheid, Muslim nations do not allow a Jew to live on their land. They are intolerant racist and totally apartheid in their shallow Muslim verses infidel religious ideology. Palestininians have always been the knife close to the vest for Global Jihad. First the Saturday people, then the Sunday People. To withdraw means to submit to Islam and Muslim terror tactics and exposes Israel to the next multi-national, multi-front war for its extinction, which Muslims have lost again and again.

I am flabbargasted. Nobody wants to touch the real problem. The Palestinian leadership doesn't want peace. The Hamas ans also the Fatah are scared out of their wits to have the responsibility of satisfying the palestinian population. The promisses to wipe out Israel are unatainable and the leadership is very much aware of it. But that what they propagate, with the help of the iranian president. {They always need help}. How they are going to compete for any achivement with an economy of 100 billion? And an army the best in the world!!! Olmert is right! Get the hell out of there!!!

Palestinians never trusted israel when it made it seem like their dismantling some of the colonies only in order to hold onto and expand the largest blocs as anything but a ruse-a feigned commitment to end their occupation of Palestine.Their positions along the Jordan Valley would be kept part of sovereign Israel and over 200,000 Palestinians would be landlocked,cut off from those in other parts of the WB.And Israel again seemed to find no contradiction in the fact that although they demanded the Palestinians not bring up the right of return issue,they demanded that their would be no discussion on the Temple Mount issue, so central to the Palestinians,indeed the entire Muslim world. Benn simply bypasses the connexion between Israel's actions in Gaza and the rise and election of Hamas. He apparently feels Israel had no part to play in this phenomenon, that it was nothing but an inherent rejectionism on the part of Palestinians. This is Benns myopia rather than an objective analysis.

Paradox indeed. Such sour grapes for Aluf Benn. More harking back to this "generous offer" plan they tried to sell us on the Barak dictate. Israel dictates and the Palestinians are menat to obey and be satisfied with the generous portions being offered. Israel leaves unilaterally from a demographic nightmare that was unfeasible rom the start. A drain on personel and treasure. That's Gaza. No co-ordnation with palestinians on how to cooperate on development, but pretty much keeping Gaza as a cage with the zookeeper, not in the cage but on its periphery pretty much still in control. Palestinians have been saying since 1967, along with most of the international community I might add, that they referred to the borders of pre June 6, 1967 en toto, not with Israel taking 10% here or 12% there unilaterally in order to preserve her colonisation of Palestine with a serious a expanded blocs cutting into the heart of Palestine.

Nobody has to 'believe' Israel's wish for peace. All can see that Israel is a free and democratic nation since 1948. There's no martial law in the Jewish State, like in Syria; women may openly drive their car, in contrast with Saudi-Arabia law. Everybody in the world can see that Israel has peaceful intentions. Everybody that is, except for some Arab countries which are not free themselves. Interestingly, these same countries keep attacking Israel. Perhaps they are the ones who must check their real intention? What you see is what you believe!

An explanation for the paradox 1. Two rival nationalisms develop in conflict, not accord. 2. Changing perception of self interest. Originally Arabs chose not to recognise Israel, this because they wanted to destroy it. Then they wanted to use restraint on it expanding borders, to allow itself licence to attack with no risk. Thus it's initial post 67 position. Then they found a use in the continuance of occupation anyhow, to pose a second state solution. To establish a Palestinian identity the world could recognise (thus peace with Egypt and Jordan alone, to prepare for the PLO and Oslo). Once they had this, their interest moved to perpetuation of occupation, because they see this as leading to de-legitimising Israel and thus a unitary state (once US support is lost to Israel). Hamas poses an alternative, an Israel withdrawal to 67 borders (without a formal mutual recognition peace, allowing Palestinian sovereignty without a peace with Israel).

Any Palestinian who 'negotiates' away any of the non-negotiable positions will be assasinated by his people, and will surely start a huge civil war. That's why Arafat was not killed by his people. What are these absolute positions, you ask? They include withdrawal from every holy square centimeter of all lands occupied in 1967. An Israeli prime minister who negotiates away every square centimeter of all lands occupied in 1967 may very well be targeted also for a Rabin-like assasination by Israeili fanatics, but the democratic institutions in Israel will, at the end of the day, compel the withdrawal, if that's what the Israeli government determines But everyone knows, including all the Palestinian supporters in this forum, that the Palestinians will never agree to leaving behind even a square centimeter. That's their rhetoric, and they believe in it in a very passionate way, publicly and privately. So there can be no negotiations on that, as Hamas rightly says.

Dismantle the settlements in the West Bank, bring the settlers home, draw the final borders, declare a Palestinian state in Gaza and West Bank, leave it to those freaks Hamas to turn it into a greater mess--and wash your hands with the Palestinians once and for all. If the Israeli left wants, they can live in the new Palestinian state and do good to their hearts content. It's convenient that now the Arabs are resisting the very thing they claim they want: an end to the occupation. Truth is, they want perpetual war and the eventual destruction of the state of Israel. All their other demands are just distractions from this one main objective.

If you have but one eye how can you see the whole picture?

And you complain about "TWISTING REALITIES IS THE NAME OF THE ARTICLE" LOL. "The Palestinians have always asked for peace talks and negociations, and Israel has always refused" Right talks, no action just talks. Well guess what that don't cut it anymore. We talked, we agreed to certain conditions and you have refused to fulfill any of those. "The Palestinians are "begging" for negociations not out of weakness, but of out keenness to stop politicians and the military make yet another strategic mistake that will only prolong the conflict and escalate it further." Escalate, how? You are doing everything you can to murder us already. You are going to have fulfill your obligations, and then you will have to compromise. Otherwise there can be no peace. We ask for nothing more than your side fulfilling its obligations. After a dozen years we DEMAND it!

"If Israel wants to draw a new border and bring the settlers back into its territory, it has to do so by itself." By all mean Aluf Benn. The more settlers you bring home and the more land you give up unilateral, the merrier. Nobody is stopping you. I think it's a great idea and should be implemented as soon as possible, now then when you have left as much land as you care to before final negotiations. Then you can sit down with Mahmoud Abbas or whom ever is Chairman of the PLO, "the sole legitimate representative of the palestinian people, at that time and discuss war reperations, the right of return for the refugees and the sharing of Jerusalem etc. But first give up as much land as YOU care to and bring as many settlers home as YOU can muster. I can't see anybody being against that, but if you think you can set borders unilaterally then you are just kidding yourself. Free Palestine!

Secondly, the demand of the Palestinians and the international community, including the Arabs, is clear: a total complete end to the occupation. A full total complete pull out to the 1967 borders. Evacuating Itamar, Elon Moreh and Psgaot and some other unknown scattered hardly inhabited outposts, while leving the 6 big blocks of settlements (and the expansion work continues), is not an option and is not compiance with 242 in any way. ALL SETTLEMENTS built illegally on stolen occupied land post 1967 must be dismantled to the last, and troops pulling back to the 1967 borders. Very simple and square. Anything short than that is devious political manoeuvering and a total waste of time and opportunity. The Palestinians will not buy it, and the international community will not buy it. The EU has made this position clear only last week! This is what zionist leaders and army chiefs need to understand in a crystal clear manner. Stop playing games. Do the right thing.

With due respect to writer Aluf Benn whom I have read a number of articles, I must say this article is completely off the mark and does in many ways twist some of the facts. Firstly, the Arabs, that's us, do not want negociations, because they are in need of hand shakes and photos. The Palestinians have always asked for peace talks and negociations, and Israel has always refused and kept repeating its slogan "there is no partner to tall to" !!! What Arabs are saying is that unilateralism is dangerous and does not lead to peace and security, certainly not in the medium and long term. Unilateral actions by successive zionist leaders have meant failure upon failure and increased tension and bloodshed. In actual fact, the pull out from Gaza is the best proof! The Palestinians are "begging" for negociations not out of weakness, but of out keenness to stop politicians and the military make yet another strategic mistake that will only prolong the conflict and escalate it further.

Aluf Benn assumes that his readers lack intelligence,or at least good memory.He just raises all kind of points without getting into details,and without explaining what lies behind each point. The first paradox he refers to somehow reflects a superficial analysis.Everyone knows that in the convergence plan,Israel is not withdrawing from all of the territories it occupied in 1967,and will retain a large area including Jerusalem.Israel will also retain the aquifiers and much of the fertile areas.Palestinian co-operation with this plan will be seen as aquiescence. Second paradox:Israel is willing to evacuate 70,000 from West Bank settlments, and then settle them in other settlements that are west of the wall.They are just moved from one settlement to another.It only serves Israeli PR. Third paradox:Israeli left only supports Israeli interests.They are not angels and their sympathy with the Palestinians stems purely from utalitarian reasons and not from human or universal principles.

I know my history , thank you very much. i know too many painful details of so many Royal traitors doing secret deals on Private Yachts too. I agree entirely with you the UN is a big Joke and nothing else. It is Just a tool in the US and israel Hands to use it for their own interets and now that we have john Bolton in there , There is no hope in hell to expect anything better from It .

242 calls for territories, not for the whole territory. In addition it calls for Arabs to end violence. So implementing it would be something like Olmert's plan with no Arab violence. In any event, UN resolutions should have no effect on Israel as it is an illegitimate immoral organisation run by dictatorships and rascits. The UN should have been abolished along time ago ...

If you did 100 times of lying, even if in the 101st you tell the truth, people wont't believe what you said. That's why Israel has to fulfill its intention for peace by action, action and action, not by killing, killing, and killing (kids). You need to reverse 100 times of lying by 100 times of actions. After that, probably people would start to believe Israel and its real intention for PEACE. In the hand of Rabin, Israel almost had the credibility that the world wanted from Israel. UNFORTUNATELY, NOT TODAY.

the UN should insist ,like it normally does, that UN resolution 242 and 194 are implemented and no one gets a preferencial treatments . No one should be more equal than others (borrowing Orwell's words ) (and the rest of the Resolutions for that matter ) http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html

We are in a fight.Its a Tug of War. We are both holding onto the rope and pulling as hard as we can. But we can never win. We can only not lose. But if we let go,what will happen? They will fall on their backsides. People in the Middle East always want to win.Even at the cost of not winning. There is a win win situation here but not too many people are looking for it.

...is that in trying to save itself, Israel is ultimately going to destroy itself - by holding onto dozens of settlements (as Olmert plans to do).