There was a time, and it wasnt that long ago, that the enemies of Israel (roughly, its neighbors) could potentially overwhelm the country. This would have spelled the end of the country. It is for this reason that our nation overlooked the accumulation of nuclear material, the production of nuclear weapons and certain militaristic behavoirs of Israel. No person of conscience would or could even suggested during that time that anything less was in the interest of Israel. (Note: The 82nd and the 101 are the units charged with patrolling the UN mandated DMZ between Egypt and Israel).

Fast forward 25 years, and the situation on the ground has changed. The walled in 'enclaves' that the Palestinians live in is remeniscent of the Warsaw Ghetto. The forced and continuing annexation of occupied territory proceeds at a rapid pace. Israel, no longer in danger from its neighbors militarily, is creating problems where none need exist.

To be Pro-Israel means you want to see a successful, thriving, peaceful nation that exists in harmony with its neighbors, feeds it populace and is a proud and productive member of the world community. I believe that once a lasting peace in Israel is established, that it will become the natural banking, business and tourism hub of the Middle East. Support for any nation should not be unqualified and I dont think that blind acquiescence to the desires and activities that Israel currently engages in is good for the US, or Israel.

I am not Jewish, but I have sufficient Jewish heritage to have made me subject to Hitler's race laws. But human rights dont stop because of race, religion or border. Once Israel decides to win the peace and stop fighting the war, I believe the world will be a better place.

William Diaz:

Fast forward 25 years, and the situation on the ground has changed. The walled in 'enclaves' that the Palestinians live in is remeniscent of the Warsaw Ghetto. The forced and continuing annexation of occupied territory proceeds at a rapid pace. Israel, no longer in danger from its neighbors militarily, is creating problems where none need exist.

How does the unilateral witdrawal of Israel from Gaza and the forceable removal of jewish settlers (including the bulldozing of their houses similar to what was done to the families of palestinian militants in the past) fit into your thesis of "continuing annexation of occupied territory"? Also there's been the recent rumors of the possibility of Golan being returned to Syria, although only time will tell if anything will come of that.

As an aside, keep in mind that "occupied territory" has been used frequently by many arab leaders and militant groups to refer to the entirety of the state of Israel, knowing that most of the west would interpret that to mean only lands captured during in 1967.

William Diaz:

To be Pro-Israel means you want to see a successful, thriving, peaceful nation that exists in harmony with its neighbors, feeds it populace and is a proud and productive member of the world community. I believe that once a lasting peace in Israel is established, that it will become the natural banking, business and tourism hub of the Middle East. Support for any nation should not be unqualified and I dont think that blind acquiescence to the desires and activities that Israel currently engages in is good for the US, or Israel.

Where is the room to compromise and create lasting peace if Israel is negotiating with regimes dominated by Hamas and Hezbollah which are groups dedicated to the goals of eliminating all non-arab control of the region and killing every jew on the planet respectively? It's tough to find common ground with someone who's unwilling to compromise on the issue of whether or not you deserve to continue to draw breath.

"Where is the room to compromise and create lasting peace if Israel is negotiating with regimes dominated by Hamas and Hezbollah which are groups dedicated to the goals of eliminating all non-arab control of the region and killing every jew on the planet respectively? It's tough to find common ground with someone who's unwilling to compromise on the issue of whether or not you deserve to continue to draw breath."

Maybe somebody should have thought about this before going about re-inventing Israel last century? Surely someone looked into this possiblity? I know when there is a good possiblity of being I don't shove my fist into a hornet's nest.

Maybe somebody should have thought about this before going about re-inventing Israel last century? Surely someone looked into this possiblity? I know when there is a good possiblity of being stung I don't shove my fist into a hornet's nest.

gotta start proof-reading LOL!

"Maybe somebody should have thought about this before going about re-inventing Israel last century? Surely someone looked into this possiblity? I know when there is a good possiblity of being I don't shove my fist into a hornet's nest."

Statements like this are a waste of time. They offer no solutions. The biggest problem facing Israel and the Middle East isn't who bombed which neighborhood last week, its the fact that neither side wants to let go of the past and start fresh. And I'm not just talking about WW2, but the fact that Israel has been attacked since its inception, which tends to make the people a little paranoid. No one in America has any idea what it's like to live with the knowledge that your neighboring states want to destroy you. And I'm well aware of the regions history, and that the Palestinians do have some legitimate issues. And so what? Do they think they are the only people who ever had this happen to them? Most of the countries in Europe were invaded and occupied at one time or another, pretty frequently if you study history, and muslims have done their fair share of invading and occupying other countries as well. It's the way of the world. Better to deal with the situation as it is TODAY than do that ridiculous "gee, maybe they shouldn't have done that" whining. It accomplishes nothing.

Right, the biggest problem facing Israel and the Middle East is not who bombed which neighborhood last week, but nor is it that Israel has been attacked since its inception. The biggest problem is religious inspired hatred and racism, which compels people to devalue the lives of others, and allows them to commit atrocities they might otherwise avoid.

I agree- a fresh start is needed. How do you feel about one state, call it either Israel or Palestine, which is a democratic state for all of its citizens, which covers the entirety of historic Palestine, includes all the people living there, and bases none of it’s laws upon religion?

Israel has been attacked since its inception but as well... israel has been attacking Palestinians since its inception. Both sides have legitimate claims to the land but both sides have also used obfuscation of the truth in the creation of their nationalistic ideologies. Statements such as "Massada will never fall again" are perfect examples of this.The archeological evidence from Massada and the historical evidence from the surrounding area during the time of "the fall" cast doubt , at the very least, on the commonly held view of who the occupants of massada really were at the time of the fall. Yet this slogan is used to promote jewish national pride and the sentiment that "we will never surrender", just like the "heroes" of massada. I wish to point out that there exists this kind of inlammatory rhetoric used to promote nationalism and lend credence to right to land claims on both sides of the dispute. Until and unless national identity becomes divorced from adversarial foundations there is no hope for a solution, be it 2 state or otherwise.

How do you feel about one state, call it either Israel or Palestine, which is a democratic state for all of its citizens, which covers the entirety of historic Palestine, includes all the people living there,

As long as we're going to redraw national boundaries, why limit ourselves to Israel and Palestine? Egypt and Jordan are right there too.

and bases none of it’s laws upon religion?

As long as we're going to dictate that the laws for their country and decide that their religion is without influence, are we also going to do the same thing for Israel's various neighbors?

With those neighbors as examples I suspect the Israel Jews aren't going to want to live in an Arabic country. Many of them or their parents already have experience with that.

We are not redrawing borders in the Israel Palestine conflict since Israel still has neglected to declare what its borders are. It also lacks a constitution. Given that Egypt and Jordan are not occupying anyone’s land, why redraw their borders? It is a strange idea…what merit does it offer?

Yes, I would prefer it to be the case that religion plays no part in deciding the laws of any nation. Wouldn’t you?

Many Jews have suffered in Arabic lands. They have at other times found refuge in Arab lands from persecution. They suffered persecution in European and Russia. They suffered more than anything in Germany.

But how do you feel about one state, call it what you will, which is a democratic state for all its citizens, which covers the entirety of historic Palestine, and includes all the people living there?

And I'm well aware of the regions history, and that the Palestinians do have some legitimate issues. And so what? Do they think they are the only people who ever had this happen to them?

So I guess you're saying: Two wrongs make a right.

Given that Egypt and Jordan are not occupying anyone’s land, why redraw their borders? It is a strange idea…what merit does it offer?

It's an attempt to re-draw national borders according to the ethnicity (and one suspects, culture) of the people who live there.

Israel wants to remain a Jewish state, in no small part because of that suffering you mentioned. According to wiki... "95% of Jordan's population are Arabs. Jordanian Arabs make 55% of the population and a large portion of the population (approximately 40%) are of Palestinian extraction".

Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip before 1967 and I suspect there were fewer calls to make it a country then. It's a better match.

Yes, I would prefer it to be the case that religion plays no part in deciding the laws of any nation. Wouldn’t you?

I would. But if we can't do that in Iraq then it's a non-starter to try it in other countries, excepting perhaps our own. Nor do I see why Israel should be at the top of that list.

But how do you feel about one state, call it what you will, which is a democratic state for all its citizens, which covers the entirety of historic Palestine, and includes all the people living there?

Something like half the citizens would want it to be a Jewish state, the other half would want it to be an Arabic state. They have a history of trying to kill each other, and zero trust of each other. I think it'd be a mess and we'd end up with something akin to Yugoslavia or Iraq.

"Do they think they are the only people who ever had this happen to them?"

Be sure to remember this when someone is forcing you to the ground ready to fuck you in the ass and I'll stand by as say, "why can't you just bend over and take it and quit complaining?" Right or wrong, this is what the Palestinian's think has happened to them. How long would you struggle?

Maybe we should say, on such and such date the entire region will be razed to the ground, salted and scorched so nobody get's it? So better make plans to get the hell out.

But that would still be screwing over the people were there pre-inception more. Everybody wants ot believe they are special and/or the victims. The Israelis generally seem to me to think they are both. And they would certainly never share a single state with anyone in the region on anything that remotely resembles equal footing. We've already seen this.

If someone proposed creating the state of Israel today, most people would think it was a F'd up thing to do. The only reason it flew back then was because it was still possible at that time to keep most people in the dark about these sorts of dealings due to the lack of communication technology we possess today. You would never see anything like that happen now. People wouldn't stand for it. I hope it was worth it.

And they would certainly never share a single state with anyone in the region on anything that remotely resembles equal footing.

With good reason. I'd say we're long past the point where they've proven they need their own country.

But if we look outside the region, they already do. It's called the United States.

If someone proposed creating the state of Israel today, most people would think it was a F'd up thing to do. The only reason it flew back then was because it was still possible at that time to keep most people in the dark about these sorts of dealings due to the lack of communication technology we possess today.

Israel isn't something cooked up by the Western powers and inflicted on the Middle East. We knew very well that it's creation would lead to problems, which is why Brittan (the occupying power at the time) tried to prevent it.

You would never see anything like that happen now. People wouldn't stand for it.

We do see things like this all the time. People didn't want to stand for the break up of Yugoslavia, it happened anyway. The Kurds may very well end up with their own country as well.

Where is the room to compromise and create lasting peace if Israel is negotiating with regimes dominated by Hamas and Hezbollah which are groups dedicated to the goals of eliminating all non-arab control of the region and killing every jew on the planet respectively?

==============================­===

I know these issues seem monolithic, but the IRA eventually morphed into Sein Fenn in Northern Ireland. In some ways this is a similar situation. It took many years but I bet it was worth it.

It didn't help, however, that the world encouraged Palestine to have democratic elections and when they did and voted in the Hamas party, the world said "no way" and immediately punished Palestine for being a little too democratic.

It didn't help, however, that the world encouraged Palestine to have democratic elections and when they did and voted in the Hamas party, the world said "no way" and immediately punished Palestine for being a little too democratic.

Hamas ran (and won) as a group of moderates who were going to clean up Palestinian politics. "The World" supplies the bulk of the Pal's budget.

Good so far, but Hamas also has a wing that runs around murdering Jews, and part of their charter calls for their extermination or something like that.

It is unrealistic to expect Israel to fund or otherwise raise money to support the murder of Jews, and it is fair for the World to tell Hamas we won't either.

At that point we didn't tell Hamas that we wouldn't have anything to do with them. We told them to choose. Are they a group of moderates or bomb throwing radicals? They made up their minds, and that was that.