@red - if Israel enter into serious political discussions with Palestinians over occupied Palestinian lands it gets the Palestinians credibility, then people start to sympathise with the Palestinian cause and expectations rise of a just and fair political solution in the region.
I don't think Israeli politicians want to give up anything to the Palestinians, if they did I kinda think it might have happened before now. If the USA wanted the Israelis to give the Palestinians anything I kinda think it might have happened by now.
At least the masses think the politicians are trying their best and that is what is important.

The barrier to a peace deal is not the United States. It's the dreams of certain Israelis to keep all of virtually all of the West Bank and, more so, the dreams of certain Palestinians for the destruction of Israel. America can't stop either, really.

Something may come out of these talks, but probably not. Even though the West Bank has never been quieter throughout the whole of the occupation than it is today, we are reaching a point with the settlement construction where a viable Palestinian state will be completely impossible. A collection of autonomous Palestinian enclaves in the Judean hills is not an acceptable long-term solution no matter how much Netanyahu-types want it to be, so a few decades down the road Israel will face a much more serious crisis and more isolation than it would have had if it had allowed an independent Palestine based on 1967 lines now. But it may already be too late.

"Disputed area" is a lie. It's not under dispute to Israel, in who's territory the land exists and in which they have the legal right to build.

As for the barrier to peace....it goes something like this: Israel comes to the table, as they have in the past, and agree to give up some land for peace. Palistinians say Israel should be wiped from the face of the earth bring loud cheers from the region...and then the Palestinians launch a few random rockets into Israeli neighborhoods, which causes Israel to respond force-for-force. The region, which calls Israel out as a bad actor, turns a blind eye to Plaestinian terrorism, and in fact supplies them with weapons. So Israel has learned by the blood of innocents that Paletinians do not negotiate honestly.

How am I doing so far?

"It's the dreams of certain Israelis to keep all of virtually all of the West Bank " You mean to keep it's land...does your country give up land? Has Texas gone back to Mexico yet, or parts of California? Why is Israel the only country on earth that is forced to give up it's lands? It's such an odd thing, really...Why doesn't an Arab coutnry give land to the Palestinians?

"occupied Palestinian lands" No such thing exists. You can not occupy a fictional region. what are teh borders of the fantasy country?

Krellin - I fear I must disagree with you. Israel was land stolen from Palestine underthe British Mandate and Palestine deserves to have land they can call their own. The Brits overstepped their boundaries and if the US had any fucking balls, we'd step in and make it happen. But the US is to afraid of "God's chosen people" to do shit about it. I say bullshit. Give Palestine a homeland and make the holiest of holy cities a neutral state (like D.C. which belongs to no US state).

But then, that makes fucking sense and common fucking sense eludes politicians.

Israel was a land stolen, but it's certainly not the Israelis' fault that the land was stolen, and they should not be forced to give up more than is necessary for the Palestinians to create a stable state. Jerusalem should remain in Israel and a new Palestinian state should be either under strict arms limitations or completely demilitarized because, whether you like it or not, the Palestinians are sending rockets into Israel daily, and those that are sending the rockets want Israel gone, not parted slightly.

D.C. is not a neutral state between two countries, nor have Virginia and Maryland been proud to call each other enemies for thousands of years. If they are going to neutralize Jerusalem, they are going to end up splitting it east and west. And I guarantee you Israel wants to keep the tourism so they'll be taking west.

The reasonable solution is to partition Israel, allowing Israel to become the Jewish state that they wish to be while giving the Palestinians their own state. It works for both sides *as long as* the two don't fight further. That's critical.

That said, for those of you that think this is all Israel's fault, you're deluding yourselves. The Palestinians and the rest of the Arab nations have caused just as much harm toward the Jewish people and impeded the peace process just as much as the Israelis have. If you can't see that, you shouldn't be in this conversation.

Palestinian freedom fighters/terrorists send home mode or really poor missiles into Israeli territory. Israel retaliates using the latest and greatest they have gotten from the US and Britain and wipe out all kinds of infrastructure with serious overkill, forcing Palestine to do some more lame rockets that do next to know significant damage.

If Israel quit going for overkill and quit trying to rule all of the middle east (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Arab-Israeli_War) and would return what they took from Palestine in the first Arab-Israeli War, ther might be a chance for peace. But Israel is determined to see Palestine wiped out. Period. There are radical elements in Palestine who want Israel gone, but they aren't the leadership of Palestine whereas the leaders of Israel would rather wipe them off the face of the map and would probably nuke 'em but they want the land useable.

Of course Israel wants to see Palestine wiped out - THEY SEND ROCKETS INTO ISRAEL. I don't care how good the rockets are, they are rockets. You can't just say "oh, whatever, they're nice people on the inside" when they are resorting to terrorism.

I'm not defending Israel, Draug. I'm just saying that there are TWO sides to this debate and both sides have equal presence and both sides need to be listened to closely.

Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula. And don't tell me the United States wasn't behind that war. That was Israel playing to the desires of its two saviors at the time, the US and Britain. The west wanted the Suez Canal. Simple as that. Don't pretend Israel did that on their own.

Sorry, UK, not US ^

They returned it under threat from the US and Russia. Britain and France helped Israel take it to begin with. Honestly, Israel has been an agressor ever since they got the backing of Britain.

So I will tell you the US wasn't behind that war. They were the one's forced the return. It's one of the rare times during that time frame where we were on the side of Russia and against Britain.

Israel is an aggressor. HAs been since the Nazi's did their shit and totally changed them from pacifist to a "Fuck the world! We are God's chosen!" nation.

Draug - I agree that Palestine needs it's own land. That wasnt' the question of the OP.

History is history - Palestine lost it's land and now has none, and not one single country in the world has stepped in and said "Go back to XYZ date in time and give them land according to these old lines". To do so would be ludicrous. Again...shall we give back Texas to Mexico? I think not.

So *today*, there is a border that is drawn and agreed to by all nations (or at least none are willing to fight for it otherwise), and there are borders that Israel has expanded to through wars - acquiring additional lands when attacked by neighbors, and setting up conquered lands as defensive expansion - which is OK with me -- you shouldn't have attacked them.

So given the reality of today - not the reality of 1948 - Israel has a border. Palastine likes to lob rockets are Israeli citizens. Israel has been to the table a number of times and offered land (Dayton Accord was one, I think), and the response by Palestine is to lob more rockets.

Is Israel perfectly clean? Of course not...but they are only doing what *any* nation would do. As a former marine, if the Mexicans starting demanding Texas back and were lobbing rockets in to Texan cities, killing civilians, would you, as a former Marine, have killed Mexicans in defense of your nations land?

"Palestinian freedom fighters/terrorists send home mode or really poor missiles into Israeli territory. Israel retaliates using the latest and greatest they have gotten from the US and Britain and wipe out all kinds of infrastructure with serious overkill, forcing Palestine to do some more lame rockets that do next to know significant damage."

EXACTLY as the US government does when it fights wars. How many tens or hundreds of thousands have died in the Middle East since 9/11?

I think both sides are as bad as one another.

As a drunk man once said to me on the topic - 'I don't see why we don't just nuke it then give it to the Cornish.'

Israel does so without regard for civilian casualties, though. I expect more *as a Marine* from the US and her allies. I deplore true civilian casualties. When a village hides terrorists and supports them, wipe out the village. But whent he terrorists are holdign the village hostage and hiding among them, you do targetted strikes. Israel takes a missile lobbed from one village as an excuse to cross a border into another country and wipe out an airfield claiming the other country supplied it. That is a no go in my book. It would be like Cuba launching a junk Iraqi-type missile at Guantanamo and, even though the cold war has ended, we go and strike a Russian ship or a Chinese base or even wipe out Havana. The world would be up in arms, yet this is *exactly* the kind of over reaction Israel is known for.

Palestine does so without regard for civi casualities as well . As you point out, their rockets are shit - i.e. no guidance, no telling where they will land.

But it seems to me, Draug, you recently advocating leveling fucking Afghanistan and Iraq, etc, instead of all this precise, pansy careful targetting shit, right?

Let's face it - we are just "playing at war" in IRaw and Afghanistan (at the cost of US lives, mind you). We could have gone in an *obliterated * those countries and saved lives in the long run by inflicting more civi causalities....do you agree with that sentiment?

I just +1'd krellin... god I need a shower.

bo - you will find that you +1 me more often than you like...you say that often, as do many around here. It's because I use logic and consistent application of principle, guided by history and experience, to formulate my stance on an issue...not emotion. :)

By the way....the shower thing....was that invite???? ;P

Welcome back, krellin. I knew the real you was in there somewhere.

I'm going to draw a crazy analogy here, but Israel/Palestine is a bit like Detroit versus The Suburbs/The State. Detroit is a city with self-inflicted wounds, that go back to the 1968 race riots and Mayor Coleman Young - the most racially divisive mayor I've ever heard of (with the exception of perhaps that douchebag from New Orleans).

The city is desperate, and needs the help ($$$) of the suburbs and the State, but unfortunately, every time a suburbanite goes downtown, they risk getting mugged. Every time the state steps in and tries to alleviate some debt (say take over Belle Isle - lease it from the city and make it a state park) they get accused of being "whitey" comin' in to steal the cities assetts.

Everytime the villians (suburbs/State) try to make peace and invest and help out - they get punched in the nose by a city council that sees everyone as a racist trying to steal the city - they do this openly in the press - it's astounding. Council is Palestine, suing for peace, demanding help, and then lobbing a missile every time help is offered.

The suburbs, that need Detroit to thrive so that they can do better...pull their business out of Detroit - further harming the city - while they wait for someone else to take the punches and fix the city, before they move back in.

No win - a war based on history instead of the here and now.

Only way to fix it is a third party - Federal bankruptcy - the lose-lose solution. Only, I'm not sure who the 3rd party is in Israel / Palestine?

http://www.webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?viewthread=1039467#1039467

See the following for a great example of what krellin considers logic, history, and experience.

Israel has killed many times more Palestinians than the palestinians have killed Israelis. Yet somehow both sides are as bad as each other? Sorry, but I'm just not buying that.

Ow please mendax, that's *not* an argument, even though I've heard it many times..

It's really *quite* possible that one side is simply *smarter* than the other and avoids getting killed.

Is this what we're measuring wars by? Whoever killed the least people is the moral victor? Please.

Israel is like Detroit .... wtf.
Go throw stones at the moon you clown.

Nigee, you fucking 'tard, did you even read what was written? It's the same conflict - two belligerent parties pointing fingers and saying the other must move first... you DO know what an analogy is, don't you?

About 500,000 Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel's 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Palestinians want to establish their state in those areas, as well as the Gaza Strip.

The settlements are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.

For whatever reason, they are clearly not as bad as each other. Both sides are bad, but there's difference between the two in terms of military power, and Israel's willingness to overreact is both well documented and truly horrific.

hey krellin, how many polar bears does it take to make detroit more like Palestine?