Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support.

Click here to help us keep going

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Will there be peace if Palestinians lay down their arms?

The world expects millions of people in Gaza and the West Bank to happily and quietly live under occupation. While laying down arms is a positive step towards peace, it is not enough to end this conflict.

Written with Dr. Marc Gopin

In the past few weeks the pro-Israel pundits have been recycling an argument that runs as follows:

If Palestinians were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel.

This argument is based on two false assumptions about Palestinians. The first statement is based on the false assumption that the only impediment to peace is Palestinian violence, and the second is based on the assumption that the Palestinians’ main goal is to eradicate the Jews. The argument also rests on the false premise that Israelis are completely peaceful. Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish answered this argument in one of his poems.

The accusation is that I hate Jews.
It’s not comfortable that they show me as a devil
and an enemy of Israel.
I am not a lover of Israel, of course.
I have no reason to be. But I don’t hate Jews

I will continue to humanize even the enemy
The first teacher who taught me Hebrew was a Jew.
The first love affair in my life was with a Jewish girl.
The first judge who sent me to prison was a Jewish woman.
So from the beginning, I didn’t see Jews as devils or angels,
but as human beings.

Many Palestinians share Mahmoud Darwish’s opinion. They don’t hate Jews. They live, work and maintain friendships with Jews and Israelis, and have had good and bad experiences. But the argument is a cheap scare tactic. It demonizes Palestinians and equates them with Nazis. This kind of fear is counterproductive, and fuels the conflict rather than offers constructive solutions.

We – Marc and Aziz – have been working together for six years. Marc is Jewish, Aziz is Palestinian. Neither of us believes for a moment that one of us is waiting to kill the other.

Screenshot of Al Qassam Brigade video

Screenshot of Al Qassam Brigade video

On a political level, this statement is false because Palestinians in the West Bank did, in fact, lay down their weapons. Moreover, they use their weapons to protect Israel.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has recognized Israel. President Mahmoud Abbas in a recent interview with Al-Mayadeen News (Arabic) declared that the armed struggle is over and he is opposed to rockets, armed resistance and any kind of fighting against Israel. The Palestinian police are instructed to arrest anyone who plots an attack on Israel. They have been doing so for the last nine years, since Abbas took office. According to Israeli security officials, Abbas succeeded in stopping suicide bombings after taking office.

Abbas has focused on building infrastructure for a Palestinian state. He has worked for a negotiated settlement with Israel. Both former President Shimon Peres and former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called Abbas a true partner for peace.

Abbas was elected by Palestinians on the agenda of creating a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders next to an Israeli state. But so far he has failed in his mission. So, the assumption that when Palestinians lay down their weapons, peace will prevail is far from the truth and ignores the underlying issues of the conflict and the occupation: territorial conflict, struggle over resources, and lack of political will.

The vast majority of Palestinians supported the peace process and supported President Abbas’ UN bid for statehood on the 1967 borders, giving Israel 78 percent of the land Palestinians view as their homeland.

The U.S has also lost hope in the peace process, with its envoy Martin Indyk calling it dead. Abbas finds himself in a tough place. How can he continue to justify the existence of the Palestinian Authority? Can the political structure in the West Bank survive people’s anger and frustration? Even as Gaza is being attacked, the PLO finds itself unable to offer any solutions, and is, in many ways, irrelevant. The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank has no vision to offer the Palestinian people.

A protester holding a poster with Nelson Mandela's portrait, during a demonstration in the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, December 7, 2013. The demonstration marked four years to the Popular Struggle in Nabi Saleh, while commemorating the killing of Mustafa Tamimi and Rushdi Tamimi by Israeli army forces, and twenty six years since the first Intifada.

A protester holding a poster with Nelson Mandela’s portrait, during a demonstration in the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, December 7, 2013. The demonstration marked four years of the popular struggle in Nabi Saleh, while commemorating the killing of Mustafa Tamimi and Rushdi Tamimi by Israeli army forces, and 26 years since the First Intifada (photo: Activestills)

The irony of Israel’s argument is that Hamas is using a similar concept. Hamas’ argument goes like this: The PLO’s recognition of Israel and renouncement of armed struggle has achieved nothing. The PLO has laid down its arms, and still there is no peace. Hamas argues that its violent 2012 confrontation with Israel was able to achieve more than PLO diplomacy and negotiations have achieved. The reason Hamas is able to gain support nowadays is Abbas’ failure to achieve peace with Israel through negotiations. 

Palestinians find themselves today between a rock and hard place. They know they have no chance of winning with armed struggle. They also know that negotiations are unlikely to lead to an agreement (at least not with the current Israeli government). Even non-violent initiatives like the BDS movement and weekly village protests against the West Bank wall are quickly accused of being anti-Semitic. It is absurd that Palestinians are expected to ask Israel, “What form of protest should we stage that you find acceptable and not anti-Semitic?” Many Palestinians feel that the world is blind to their grievances and aspirations for freedom.

So, let’s set the record straight. Palestinians are not Nazis. Palestinians, like everyone else in the world, seek freedom, recognition of their national identity, and an end to the occupation. They long for peace and reconciliation, and are exhausted by this never-ending conflict and pain.

It is ridiculous for the world to expect millions of people in Gaza and the West Bank to happily and quietly live under occupation. While laying down arms is a positive step towards peace, it is not enough to end this conflict. There must be a clear vision that ends the occupation and guarantees security and freedom for all.

Marc Gopin is the James Laue Professor of World Religions, Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution at George Mason University in Washington D.C. He is also the co-founder of MEJDI Tours.

Related:
Reward activism and diplomacy, not violence
Mandela: I was inspired by Begin’s struggle against the British
As Palestinian frustration grows, young man considers armed struggle

Newsletter banner 6 -540

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. CigarButNoNice

      “It is ridiculous for the world to expect millions of people in Gaza and the West Bank to happily and quietly live under occupation.”

      I can only agree. Occupying another nation’s land is certainly not the way to go. The Arabs illegally occupying Judea and Samaria and Gaza will have to leave for the sake of a just peace, relinquishing the Jewish land they’re stealing in favor of any one of 20+ Arab states they so choose.

      Reply to Comment
      • acuteobserver

        “The Arabs illegally occupying Judea and Samaria and Gaza will have to leave for the sake of a just peace, relinquishing the Jewish land they’re stealing in favor of any one of 20+ Arab states they so choose.”

        You know, there are medications available to help you overcome such delusional ideations. There is only one appropriate word out there to describe this Jewish-supremacist concept: Lebensraum.

        Reply to Comment
    2. Richard

      This article obscures the real issue with a smattering of anecdotal and historical observations that don’t really answer the relevant question. Israel doesn’t want to re-settle Gaza. Israel wishes Gazans would build a productive society on their own territory. If Hamas gave up its rockets, kept its light arms, and stopped digging tunnels, Gaza would have this opportunity tomorrow. End of story. The war began and continues because Hamas wants more from Israel than anyone, even on the left, is willing to openly admit, and certainly more than Israel can afford to give and remain a safe country. That’s why we get obscure nonsense about “aspirations for freedom” and other similar platitudes in articles like this.

      Reply to Comment
        • Richard

          Map is not accurate – the “Palestine” part includes mostly areas that were never owned privately by Palestinians in the modern sense of private ownership. A lot of public land, a lot of desert. Try finding a non-propaganda map.

          Reply to Comment
      • Goldmarx

        “Israel doesn’t want to re-settle Gaza.” Tell that to Knesset Deputy MK Moshe Feiglin. He has called for the total ethnic cleansing of Gaza, dumping all Gazans into the Sinai, and resettling Gaza with Israeli Jews.

        Reply to Comment
    3. David

      The reality is that conflict and war engender hatred. Peace promotes reconciliation. Do some Palestinians hate Jews? I presume so, particularly when the Jews they see represent oppression. Do some Jews hate Arabs? Just read the the rantings of that Steven Plaut moron. The only way to even begin to reduce the hatred is to end the occupation. The PA has alreadyrecognized Israel. Hamas waffles but with recognized boundaries will either come around or be diminished into the dustbin of obscurity.
      The singular reality is that for any reconciliation to take place the occupation must end. Nobody loves an oppressor.

      Reply to Comment
      • CigarButNoNice

        “Do some Palestinians hate Jews?”

        All of the Arab colonists in the Land of Israel hate the Jews, for the simple reason that the Jews stand in their way of appropriating that which they desire.

        “The only way to even begin to reduce the hatred is to end the occupation.”

        I agree. The Arabs need to abandon their occupation of Jewish land.

        “Nobody loves an oppressor.”

        True that. I don’t love the Arab oppressors who wish to conquer the Land of Israel, loot its rich cities we’ve built on a former desert, kill all the Jewish men and rape the Jewish women for concubines. Arab imperialist aggressors out!

        Reply to Comment
    4. Leo

      Thank you for this piece.
      Amazed at how moderate this article is. On the other hand, it is also very vague.

      I do not claim to know anything from the Palestinian political side.

      It seems obvious to me as an Israeli that our government does not want any serious negotiation.

      There were periods of relative calm that were unused or used precisely to sabotage the negotiations.

      Maybe the article was written for the Israeli who believes that whatever is Palestinian is evil. This kind of Israeli does not want to think. Unfortunately I have to say that I happen to know some of them. I cannot tell whether they feel this way because they do not dare hope something else (if not for themselves then for their children).

      IMHO: I sincerely doubt that Hamas rockets will achieve anything.

      Disarming won’t achieve anything either but there is a significant difference in my opinion.(So the symmetry in the article about Hamas’ thinking and our government’s thinking is wrong for another reason that apparently both of them ignore.)

      Here is MHO:
      Disarming won’t achieve anything if not followed by carefully designed nonviolent movements with carefully designed goals. Carefully designed means precisely that the means are carefully designed to meet well agreed upon goals.

      So very concretely, while I am convinced that the Gaza massacre is wrong and must end immediately, I believe that Palestinians should resort to nonviolent movements to implement what is now world consensus. Two states, with 1949 borders. Nothing less nothing more. Even though there is a resolution to this effect, the right of return is not a consensus even among nations and will never be accepted by the state of Israel. Thus it has absolutely no chance to be implemented anytime soon. Demanding the right of return will automatically convince 99% of Israelis that Palestinians want to destroy the state of Israel and that this is their true goal.

      Anyway now the priority is to end the massacre as soon as possible.

      Thank you for the words of Mahmoud Darwish.

      Reply to Comment
      • Eliza

        Leo – Are you aware of the non-violent protesting by Palestinians in the West Bank and the response of the IDF to these non-violent protests?

        Non-violence in the West Bank has, so far, little to show except the continuation of Jewish only settlements and the deaths, arrests of Palestinians. You say that Hamas has achieved nothing, but what has the PA actually achieved? Absolutely zero.

        Yes, the massacre should stop as soon as possible. But I do have some sympathy for the viewpoint, that after so many Palestinian deaths in Gaza in the current Israeli assault (not to forget the previous assaults in the last 5 or 6 years) and the probability of another military assault by Israel in the coming years, (the grass will grow again) that a ceasefire cannot come into being until there is a UN enforced or policed removal of the siege on Gaza.

        Its the Palestinians’ call – but there is no way an obedient, servile unarmed Palestinian people will get liberty or human rights whilst they reside anywhere within ‘Greater’ Israel. Freedom from occupation or oppressors never comes cheap.

        The only hope is that Israel suffers enough pain from BDS and from seeing their young soldiers die to bring about a change in Israeli thinking – the occupation has to extract too high a price. Not a nice thought to see the only way as significantly increased Israeli suffering – but I see no other way.

        Reply to Comment
        • BOOZ

          Eliza :
          You failed to read an important half-sentence in Leo’s post. I am hinting at “carefully designed goals”.

          And talking about BDS, they support the contrary of “carefully designed goal” by advocating “international law” as a blanket claim without ever acknowledging how it was determined nor specifying the extent of RoR.

          Absent these clarification, BDS and young men being killed will re-inforce the “Massada complex-not create trust in the Israeli public opinion.

          As far as I am concerned , Omar Barghouti is someone I would never trust.

          Reply to Comment
          • Eliza

            Booz – I did notice the reference to ‘carefully designed goals’ but did not attach too much significance to it. Let me say that I am not a big fan of ‘carefully designed goals’; life is always too messy for that. I would always prefer a broad goal – in this case the achievement of Palestinian human and civil rights. The exact or carefully designed form that this may take is of lesser importance. That is, whether it be by a one or two solution is not critical. Would you have the entire BDS movement (a broad movement with sometimes strange bedfellows) cease all activity until there is precise agreement on the extent, if any of ROR? Of course you would, that will keep these activists busy chattering away for another decade or so while Israel tightens its hold on the remaining land in the West Bank.

            I do not hold out any hope of Israeli ‘trust’ being of any significance. Israel has done fine so far in terms of its economy and land/settlements. You think too well of me if you think that I would ever put any value on Israeli ‘trust’. I think it has to be Israeli fear; real fear not the self-indulgent pretend fear we witness. And that can only come into being with Israeli soldier deaths and/or economic pain via BDS. As I said, not a nice opinion to hold.

            Finally real fear will dispel the ‘massada complex’ pretty quick.

            Reply to Comment
          • Leo

            Two comments for Eliza — thanks to Booz, I understood something right about your point — so I reply here to the questions you asked (apparently rhetorically to Booz), lest you think I eluded the points you raised in your previous post.

            “Would you have the entire BDS movement (a broad movement with sometimes strange bedfellows) cease all activity until there is precise agreement on the extent, if any of ROR?”

            My answer is certainly not. The BDS is a nonviolent movement that has succeeded in keeping the Palestinians’ cause in front page. So this is a positive development. However, as I said,
            the BDS movement in this present form (there are some minor positive changes I have to say, but I won’t elaborate here) prevents many people — including me but also people who have political power — to participate. The ambiguity about the state of Israel in a future resolution of the conflict, the academic boycott and the indiscriminate boycott of Israel (as opposed to the boycott of Israeli products from the occupied territories) remain wrong in my opinion and for many people. So I hope now that the connection with my previous post is clear.

            “You think too well of me if you think that I would ever put any value on Israeli ‘trust’. I think it has to be Israeli fear; real fear not the self-indulgent pretend fear we witness. And that can only come into being with Israeli soldier deaths and/or economic pain via BDS. As I said, not a nice opinion to hold.
            Finally real fear will dispel the ‘massada complex’ pretty quick.”

            This is not the way it works.
            This is perhaps the way our own government thinks it works on Arabs. Interestingly you do the reverse projection.

            Fear will generate more fear and more suffering.
            And IMHO there is enough fear in this region of the world. And there is more than enough suffering around us. The people whom Arabs have chosen to represent them give us all the best reasons to fear them (or to hate them). But we have to look further. Reverse the roles for a minute, we see again fear: we also have a government who gives them all the best reasons to fear us (and I do fear our current government). So the real question is whether you want to raise more fear or more hope. Nothing is more universal than fear and suffering. You break the circle when you get concerned for the suffering of someone else, not yours. I believe that there are nonviolent and non hateful means to do this.

            Reply to Comment
        • Leo

          Yes, Eliza, I am aware of
          nonviolent movements, especially that in Bil’in. I believe that images and reports (however few they are in the mainstream press, but there is in this respect a huge respect with the US: there is more coverage in Europe) from Bil’in in Europe have done for the Palestinian cause than all the Hamas weapons.

          I am also aware of the IDF response — actually the word “response” is incorrect. Not only there is a military repression but also there are undercover agent provocateurs from the IDF who initiated it. This precisely shows that our government does fear nonviolence movements.

          Regarding whether nonviolence movements achieve anything, I cannot tell in such general terms. Nonviolence is misunderstood by most people. Nonviolence requires courage (arguably much more than taking arms) and absolute dedication and determination. It is quite the opposite of being “obedient, servile”. And of course, nonviolence does not mean that “freedom will come cheap”. Palestinians have shown such resilience that I do not think it is impossible to see a more and more organized nonviolent movement, supported by a growing international community, that will pressure our government to start *real* negotiations.

          My point is that while the Palestinian cause has gained
          international sympathy, Palestinians have yet to transform this sympathy into political actions. And in order to succeed, these political actions have to be precisely defined and agreed upon.

          But my post was just my personal viewpoint. Palestinians have to make their own (difficult) decisions.

          Reply to Comment
          • Eliza

            Leo – thank you for your response.

            Yes, I was referring to Bil’in type non-violent protest. I also agree with you when you say that non-violent protest (when met with violence or adverse consequences) requires greater courage than armed combat. I would also say it requires faith. Not religious faith but faith in the essential justice of your cause and faith in the essential worth of mankind. It requires an essential belief in the notion that the arc of justice may be long but eventually justice will prevail even if you individually do not live long enough to see this. (Am badly paraphrasing Martin Luther King here). I just do not really believe this is true – indifference to other people’s suffering is the default position and it is the victors who write history; not the defeated.

            Let me also say that if I could choose my courage it would be the courage to protest non-violently rather than the courage to hold a gun and either mete out or face death. That is, if I have courage at all.

            I would never characterise Palestinians (or Israelis) who peacefully demonstrate against the occupation in the W/B as ‘servile and obedient’ at all. IMO Israel will only accept Palestinians to remain living in Gaza and smaller and smaller areas of the W/B if they are obedient and servile. The villagers of Bil’in who demonstrate are anything but obedient and service to Israeli military rule.

            Palestinians are gaining international sympathy but I question how much of this can be slated back to ‘Bil’in’. It is the deaths of children and non-combatants in Gaza when Israel decides to ‘mow the grass’ once more that really charge up international sympathy.

            I really cannot blame or think badly of Hamas for meeting Israeli violence with violence. Of course, they cannot militarily win but eventually they just may cause enough suffering for ordinary Israelis to really want peace instead of making various motherhood statements re peace.

            I still think that real fear, fear for the well being of your children etc does make people rethink their position. Lack of fear, confidence in military superiority has just made most Israeli Jews grow fat and cosy and most do not give a hoot about the non-Jews who live within a few miles even if they are kept out of sight.

            Will leave BDS for another comment.

            Reply to Comment
      • Kevin

        Leo, I hope YOU get elected Prime Minister of Israel someday (soon, please)! Thanks for being sensible and reasonable.

        Reply to Comment
    5. Whiplash

      “If Palestinians were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel.”

      “The first statement is based on the false assumption that the only impediment to peace is Palestinian violence, and the second is based on the assumption that the Palestinians’ main goal is to eradicate the Jews.”

      I wonder why many Jews feel this way.

      The interior minister of the former Palestinian government (Hamas) said that the Palestinians would kill the Jews when they are submissive, that is after the Palestinians had conquered them. Strongman Jbril Rajoub (Fatah) said that if Palestinians had a nuclear bomb they would have already used it against Israel. In 2012 the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem called for a genocide of the Jews.

      If the Palestinians laid down their arms and stop inciting their children to hate and kill Jews, we would be much closer to peace then we are now. There would still need to be a lot of work done.

      Reply to Comment
      • Reza Lustig

        Your argument boils down to: “But, but, but Hamas said…”

        Reply to Comment
        • Whiplash

          Hamas has done more than just talk. Their suicide bombers and other assorted terrorist attacks in the second intifada helped kill more than 1100 Israelis and injure 8,888.

          While Gazans could export through the Port of Ashod, Hamas tried to commit a Bopal type disaster by attempting to cause a massive chemical explosion of the chemical storage area in the port but failed.

          Over 15,000 rockets have been shot at Israel from Gaza since Israel withdrew all its troops and communities from Gaza. Prior to this war, the Shin Bet stopped about 140 Hamas terrorist attacks including 28 kidnapping attempts in the last year and one half.

          2800 Hamas rockets have been fired in this war with the intent of killing Israeli citizens. They have only succeeded in killing 3 civilians.

          Hamas has dug dozens of tunnels into Israel for attacks on Israel. One tunnel captured by the Israelis contained arms, equipment and plans for a major terrorist attack against an Israeli Kibbutz on the Jewish new year.

          Reply to Comment
    6. peacemaker

      So much pain and folly on both sides. Mistrust and mutual fear.

      Justice won’t be achieved! It is very complicated and next to impossible to decide who is right and who is wrong.

      I’m an Israeli Jew and all I want is peace. Abbas and Netanyahu will be remembered as cowards who afraid to oppose the blood seeking parts of their nations.

      Compromise and end this bloody conflict.

      Reply to Comment
    7. Zornorph

      The trouble is the Palestinians continue to push for unreasonable demands. They are not the victors of this long conflict, they are the losers. Losers do not get to dictate terms. In 1947, realizing they had to take what they could get, the Jews were prepared to accept an awkwardly shaped state that did not include Jerusalem because they wanted a state more than anything. The Arabs attacked them and they were able to get more, but had they accepted, Israel would have existed in the partition borders with no Jerusalem. The Palestinians need to accept that there will be no ‘right of return’, they will not get Jerusalem (other than Abu Dis, which they can call Al Quids if they want) and Israel will be keeping the settlement blocks (including E-1). Then they can have their (demilitarized) state. Why do they need an army, anyway? Who do they think is going to attack their state? Egypt? Jordan?

      Reply to Comment
      • Reza Lustig

        That’s not how resistance works. Until the siege is lifted, absolutely, Gaza will remain piss-poor and its’ people a couple of paychecks away from starvation. Anything short of that is a slap in the face of all the suffering and sacrifices the Palestinian people have undergone. That is the reason there will always be a Hamas, even if Netanyahu deems burning Gaza to the ground necessary for “Israel’s right to self-defense.”

        Reply to Comment
    8. Avdim

      Here’s a recent poll.

      http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/new-palestinian-poll-shows-hardline-views-but-some-pragmatism-too

      Though the authors try to portray some pragmatism, what do you think about this?

      But now, a clear majority (60% overall, including 55% in the West Bank and 68% in Gaza) say that the five-year goal “should be to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine, from the river to the sea.” and another ~10% want a one state solution.

      I’ll repeat that, around 75% in Gaza and 65% in the west bank say in this poll that a compromise with Israel simply should not be a goal.

      What the hell do you want us to do?

      The “laying down of arms” is only a part of the general realization that we are both here to stay. That it’s time to find the way to make a compromise with Israel.

      Compromises are very hard, effort was required to convince the Israeli public to agree to Oslo or to the disengagement plan. Images of peace and happiness were constantly shown in the media and spoken about by politicians. Every effort was made to convince everyone that compromise and peace is the only possible path. Where is the same effort on the Palestinian side?

      The Israeli public yearns for peace and normalization and no prime minister would be able to resist the pressure once we feel the the other side is really ready to compromise and end the conflict. No prominent Palestinian figure was able to say the the agreement would end the conflict, that they would recognize Israel as a Jewish state, that they forsake the RoR, that land can be swapped without ethnically cleansing Jews and that organizations such as Hamas should lay down their arms or be destroyed.

      Reply to Comment
      • Reza Lustig

        They have lost faith in a “two state solution,” partly because their “two-state” representative, Mahmoud Abbas, is a genuine Arab Quisling, but mostly for the same reasons Israelis lose faith in it: they have no reliable partner. Israel says they want peace, but then they go and gin up an excuse to turn Gaza into an abattoir at the bat of an eye.

        If there is a 3d Intifada, remember this: you’re sowing what you’ve reaped, in the name of your “right to self-defense.”

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          “If there is a 3d Intifada, remember this: you’re sowing what you’ve reaped, in the name of your “right to self-defense.”

          This paragraph of yours clearly implies that you don’t think we have the right of salf defense. Nice one. And you expect us to take people like you seriously?

          Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            Occupiers don’t have the right to self-defense when the occupied resist the occupation.

            Bullies don’t have the right to self-defense when the ‘weaklings’ they pick on fight back.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            The occupation came about because of a war of aggression by the Arabs against Israel in 1967.

            Israel offered to end the occupation since 1967, in exchange for a negotiated peace settlement which would include recognition of the right of the Jewish people to our own state.

            To date, the Palestinians refused and Hamas clearly rejects the idea of any Jewish state in the Middle East.

            That is why the occupation continues. Your silly claim that Israelis have no right to defend themselves because of the occupation is beyond stupid. Can you imagine saying such a thing to the allied forces after WW2 when they occupied Germany and Japan for years? If remnants of Nazi or imperial Japan’s forces would have been shooting at American soldiers in occupied Germany or Japan in say 1947, and you would have made your grandiose assertion that the American soldiers had no right to defend themselves because they were occupiers, you would have been laughed at, at best. And something much worse would have happened to you, at worst.

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “Israel offered to end the occupation since 1967, in exchange for a negotiated peace settlement which would include recognition of the right of the Jewish people to our own state.”

            –> The only sincere offer to do that came from Rabin. That is why he was assassinated by someone who would support the current operation against Gaza.

            “To date, the Palestinians refused and Hamas clearly rejects the idea of any Jewish state in the Middle East.”

            –> Hamas has offered a ten year truce to Israel, which has refused to negotiate with Hamas. And no country currently recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, just as a state.

            The occupations of Germany and Japan were not only just, but the Americans never established settlements there Israel’s occupation, while understandable in the immediate aftermath of the 6 Day War, turned ugly and oppressive quite quickly. That is why Gen. Matti Peled, Chief of Logistics during the war, quickly joined the Peace Now movement at its beginnings.

            Reply to Comment
          • Avdim

            @Reza –

            “They have lost faith in a “two state solution,” partly because their “two-state” representative, Mahmoud Abbas, is a genuine Arab Quisling, but mostly for the same reasons Israelis lose faith in it”

            1. They never HAD faith in it, there is nothing to lose.
            2. The poll doesn’t agree with you, Mahmoud Abbas seems like the most popular leader.
            3. After 48, 67 and 73, the Israeli public still agreed to the concessions needed for a peace deal with two Arab states. Because peace is something we desire and we see it as a vital need.

            “Israel says they want peace, but then they go and gin up an excuse to turn Gaza into an abattoir at the bat of an eye.”

            We are not Christians, we do not turn the other cheek. Desiring peace doesn’t mean being a pacifist or ignoring threats. Nothing happens in the bat of an eye, Israeli south is being bombarded for 14 years now.

            “If there is a 3d Intifada, remember this: you’re sowing what you’ve reaped, in the name of your “right to self-defense.””

            1. I don’t what sowing what you reap is. You seem like an articulate person so I’ll assume I missed your metaphor instead of assuming you’ve written it backwards.
            2. I think both Israelis and Palestinians should take responsibility for their actions. A third Intifada, while painful for Israel, will probably damage Palestinians much more. As usual. This is not something I desire.

            @Goldmarx

            “Occupiers don’t have the right to self-defense when the occupied resist the occupation.”

            There is no occupation in Gaza, it’s an entity we’re at war with since its conquest by Hamas. A war they declared on us.

            “Bullies don’t have the right to self-defense when the ‘weaklings’ they pick on fight back”

            Your metaphor is backwards. It was the weaklings who time and again start the fights. It’s the weaklings that threaten us with erupting volcanoes, with opening of the gates of hell or earthquakes and then start whining when being beaten back.

            In addition, I find your comment over-simplistic. The weakling is not always the good one, the “occupation” is often totally fabricated (see Gaza or Shebaa farms) and the ways in which the weakling or occupied fight back are sometimes inhuman. Your comment may be true in some fictional childish world, but it’s nonsense in the real world.

            “The only sincere offer to do that came from Rabin. That is why he was assassinated by someone who would support the current operation against Gaza.”

            1. Rabin would have never offered the stuff Olmert or Barack did.
            2. There are too many details in I don’t know about Rabin’s assassination and there are many people that support the current operation but would have vehemently oppose the assassination. Again, your comment is over-simplistic.

            “Hamas has offered a ten year truce to Israel, which has refused to negotiate with Hamas. And no country currently recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, just as a state.”

            1. I don’t need a truce, I need an end to the conflict. A truce is just a convenient period for the Hamas to prepare itself.
            2. Please don’t translate the Arabic term they used with “truce”. The term they used carries a different meaning, not similar at all to what you think a truce should be.
            3. I don’t Canada to recognize me as a Jewish state, in the same way I don’t need to sign a peace treaty with Canada. I NEED their recognition as a way of asserting they really mean to end the conflict. Part of the conflict is their inability to recognize we have as much claim as they do for part of the land, that Jews are a nation and that they deserve a state. Like I said – end of the conflict.

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “There is no occupation in Gaza, it’s an entity we’re at war with since its conquest by Hamas. A war they declared on us.”

            –> On the contrary, as Peter Beinert points out, the occupation has been nonstop since 1967. Sharon simply substituted an external occupation for the internal one, surrounding Gaza with a chokehold consisting of total control of sea, air and land:

            “As the Israeli human rights group Gisha has detailed, even before the election of Hamas, Israel controlled whether Gazans could enter or exit the Strip (In conjunction with Egypt, which controlled the Rafah checkpoint in Gaza’s south). Israel controlled the population registry through which Gazans were issued identification cards. Upon evacuating its settlers and soldiers from Gaza, Israel even created a security perimeter inside the Strip from which Gazans were barred from entry. (Unfortunately for Gazans, this perimeter included some of the Strip’s best farmland).”

            Hamas did not start this war. Bibi did when Israel fired a rocket into north Gaza moments after Abbas and Hamas formed their Unity Government last April.

            My bully analogy was not simplistic, but true to the scale of the current conflict. I refuse to allow my dislike for the Hamas charter to blind me to Israel’s chief responsibility in starting and maintaining this conflict.

            “Rabin would have never offered the stuff Olmert or Barack did.” When he was “breaking bones”, he would never have allowed himself to be in the same room with Arafat, let alone make offers. But he changed, and he moved in a decidedly dovish direction. There was no indication that he was going to stop until implementing an economically viable 2-state solution championed by Peace Now.

            “I don’t need a truce, I need an end to the conflict. A truce is just a convenient period for the Hamas to prepare itself.”

            –> Get over yourself. This isn’t about you. A truce is a necessary waystation to an end to the conflict, during which time trust can be built. And speaking of rearming itself, isn’t the 72 hour truce accepted by Israel just a convenient way to rearm itself with American weapons? Hypocrite much?

            “I NEED their recognition as a way of asserting they really mean to end the conflict.” Again, it’s not about you, and why should the needs of a warmonger like you be respected, anyway?

            This “need” for Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state – how come no Israeli government until the current one demanded this of the Palestinians? Is it because once Abbas recognized Israel in the same way that every other country does, Israel needed to shift the goalposts to provide an excuse to deny him a sovereign Palestinian state?

            By the way, don’t give Talmudic hairsplitting a bad name by mouthing off about ‘truce’. Everyone uses the term, even some rightwing sources that agree with your support of Israel’s current war.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “The only sincere offer to do that came from Rabin. That is why he was assassinated by someone who would support the current operation against Gaza.”

            Yawn …

            As I proved to you before, Ehud Barak’s offer was more generous than Rabin’s.

            But let’s go back to right after the 1967 war. At that stage there were no “settlements” and Israel offered to give up the whole of the West Bank except Jerusalem.

            The Arabs responded with the three NOs of Khartum:

            1. No negotiations.

            2. No recognition.

            3. No peace.

            “Hamas has offered a ten year truce to Israel, which has refused to negotiate with Hamas.”

            A ten year truce implies war at the end of the truce. I’ll give you a smiley stamp if you guess what Hamas would do during those ten years.

            No? You don’t know? More likely you don’t want to know. So being the nice person that I am, I will tell you: they will arm themselves to their teeth with modern weapons and attack us at the end of the 10 years if not sooner.

            No country would agree to such a truce. They have to negotiate a peace deal with us now at the end of which they have to sign a solemn declaration that their war against us has ended and that they have no more claims.

            “And no country currently recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, just as a state.”

            Really? Then read UN resolution 181 for the partitioning of Palestine into two states. It clearly talked about a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Arabs clearly rejected that resolution in 1947. Now they clearly need to accept it before we can even start believing them that their war against us has ended.

            “The occupations of Germany and Japan were not only just, but the Americans never established settlements there”

            As I said, right after 1967, Israel did not yet establish settlements. So what was the excuse of the Arabs for not even willing to negotiate, let alone making peace? Come to think of it, what was their excuse for making war on us in 1948? There were no settlements in 1948, Goldo!

            The “settlements” are just an excuse and you know it. The best way for them to ensure no more settlements is to negotiate recognised borders and make peace with Israel. Following that, the Israeli people would topple any Israeli government which would attempt to build settlements outside Israel’s recognized borders.

            “Israel’s occupation, while understandable in the immediate aftermath of the 6 Day War”

            So why didn’t the Arabs make peace right after the 6 Day War. Israel did offer them a peace deal but in response they got the 3 nos of Khartum, as I said above.

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “As I proved to you before, Ehud Barak’s offer was more generous than Rabin’s.” You did not prove anything. You simply stated it as if it were a fact. And this from someone who presumes to lecture others about syllogisms!

            –> Yes, The Arab nations were wrong to say no at Khartoum. I never claimed they were right about that. At the time, Egypt and Jordan did not recognize Israel, and the Peace Now movement did not exist, in part because there was unanimity on this point.

            “I will tell you: they will arm themselves to their teeth with modern weapons and attack us at the end of the 10 years if not sooner.” Again with the crystal ball. Did you predict that Abbas would keep the peace for all these years in the West Bank by co-operating with Israeli security forces?

            –> Hamas would only have reason to attack if Israel provokes them, just as it has been doing up till now, spurred on in large part by open advocates of ethnic cleansing (Feiglin) and genocide (Shaked). But it’s nice to see that you are so preoccupied by the Hamas charter that you can’t be bothered to condemn Feiglin’s and Shaked’s remarks. I guess no one could ever accuse you of multi-tasking.

            “Now they clearly need to accept it before we can even start believing them that their war against us has ended.”

            Does Egypt and Jordan accept that resolution?

            You’ll never believe that “their war against us” has ended. That belief is the basis for your existence, and you’ll contrive one excuse after another to keep it going.

            “As I said, right after 1967, Israel did not yet establish settlements.” And as I have said, there is more than one way to oppress the Gazans; it was never just settlements. It was not the Palestinians in Gaza who launched a war in 1967 against Israel, after all.

            “The best way for them to ensure no more settlements is to negotiate recognised borders and make peace with Israel. ” The current Likud-led regime is opposed to negotiations to do just that. Ask Mahmoud Abbas if that’s working for him.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Yes, The Arab nations were wrong to say no at Khartoum. I never claimed they were right about that. At the time, Egypt and Jordan did not recognize Israel, and the Peace Now movement did not exist, in part because there was unanimity on this point.”

            Well, at least you admit something.

            Now can you tell us where did Hamas show a willingness to accept Israel’s permanent existence?

            Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood. Do you know what was the reaction of the Muslim Brotherhood to Sadat’s peace deal with Israel? No? Then let me tell you: they assassinated him.

            “Again with the crystal ball. Did you predict that Abbas would keep the peace for all these years in the West Bank by co-operating with Israeli security forces?”

            No, but nevertheless I was for the Oslo accord at the outset because Arafat made the right kind of noise about accepting Israel’s right to exist. The fact that he deceived us now makes me reassess that conclusion. But I still say it was worth a try. We have to take risks for peace. But not stupid risks. If even at the outset our enemies say that they want to destroy us and they act like they do, then there is no point in giving them anything except their own medicine. That is my position regarding Hamas.

            “Hamas would only have reason to attack if Israel provokes them”

            Provokes them how? By existing?

            “just as it has been doing up till now,”

            By responding to incessant rocket fire for nearly 15 years. It all started when Israel retaliated, right?

            “spurred on in large part by open advocates of ethnic cleansing (Feiglin) and genocide (Shaked).”

            BS.

            “But it’s nice to see that you are so preoccupied by the Hamas charter that you can’t be bothered to condemn Feiglin’s and Shaked’s remarks. I guess no one could ever accuse you of multi-tasking.”

            Nor you. When was the last time you condemned Hamas’s stated genocidal intentions towards Jews?

            Some Zionist you are. More worried about what some individual Israelis say but you excuse the specific genocidal charter of Hamas.

            “Does Egypt and Jordan accept that resolution?”

            Ask them.

            But more importantly, two thirds of the UN voted in favor of resolution 181 in 1947. So contrary to your claim, lot’s of countries recognized Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. Don’t you feel foolish now for denying that fact?

            “You’ll never believe that “their war against us” has ended. That belief is the basis for your existence, and you’ll contrive one excuse after another to keep it going.”

            Really? Is that why we made peace with Egypt and Jordan? I was all in favor of those peace deals. And as I said, I was even in favor of Oslo at the outset. But in hindsight, not so much.

            “And as I have said, there is more than one way to oppress the Gazans; it was never just settlements. It was not the Palestinians in Gaza who launched a war in 1967 against Israel, after all.”

            No they didn’t but they applauded Nasser when he lined up it’s troops along Israel’s border and promised to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

            ”The current Likud-led regime is opposed to negotiations to do just that. Ask Mahmoud Abbas if that’s working for him.”

            Maybe, maybe not. But what was their excuse for not accepting Ehud Barak’s offer in 2000/2001? And Olmert’s 2008 peace offer? They were not Likud. One was Labor the other on was Kadimah.

            And again: why did they even refuse to negotiate with successive leftist Israeli governments between 1967 and 1993?
            Are you saying that because now Israel has a Likud government, the Arabs are suddenly ready for the peace which they were not willing to accept with non Likud governments?

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “Well, at least you admit something.”

            –>Unlike you, I am not afraid of the truth.

            “Now can you tell us where did Hamas show a willingness to accept Israel’s permanent existence?”

            –>It’s hard for a person to talk when someone else’s boot is on their throat. Accepting the permanent existence of a country that is constantly engaged in brutal oppression is not in the cards as long as Israel refuses to enter into negotiations with its creation, Hamas, on all outstanding issues (not just prisoner exchanges).

            “ The fact that he deceived us now makes me reassess that conclusion”

            –>There is no proof that Arafat deceived Israel during or after Oslo. That is just your opinion.

            G:“Hamas would only have reason to attack if Israel provokes them”
            J: Provokes them how? By existing?

            –>”No, by strangling them economically and launching unprovoked military assaults.

            “By responding to incessant rocket fire for nearly 15 years. It all started when Israel retaliated, right?”

            –>It started with Israel’s occupation of Gaza. Then Israel’s creation, Hamas, became a major force and organized resistance against the occupation. After that, Peter Beinert in Ha’aretz put it best:

            “It’s true that in 2005, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew Israel’s more than 8,000 settlers from Gaza. . . . But at no point did Gaza become its own country. . . . As the Israeli human rights group Gisha has detailed, even before the election of Hamas, Israel controlled whether Gazans could enter or exit the Strip (In conjunction with Egypt, which controlled the Rafah checkpoint in Gaza’s south). Israel controlled the population registry through which Gazans were issued identification cards. Upon evacuating its settlers and soldiers from Gaza, Israel even created a security perimeter inside the Strip from which Gazans were barred from entry. (Unfortunately for Gazans, this perimeter included some of the Strip’s best farmland).”

            Israeli intelligence analyst Amos Yadlin has stated that Israel wants Hamas (Israel’s creation) in charge of Gaza as an excuse to treat Gaza as an enemy state.

            “When was the last time you condemned Hamas’s stated genocidal intentions towards Jews?”

            –>When was the last time you condemned Feiglin and Shaked’s remarks?

            “Some Zionist you are. More worried about what some individual Israelis say but you excuse
            the specific genocidal charter of Hamas.”

            –>Feiglin and Shaked are not ‘some individual Israelis’. They are powerful elected officials, part of Israeli’s ruling coalition. Feiglin is the deputy speaker of the Knesset, and Shaked is an MK from Naftali Bennett’s party, Jewish Home. Neither has been condemned for their remarks by any
            other member of the current government.

            I have never ‘excused’ the charter of Israel’s creation, Hamas. I am defusing your hysteria over it and putting it in perspective.

            G: “Does Egypt and Jordan accept that resolution?”
            J: Ask them.

            –>In other words, no. But you seem to be embarrassed to admit that openly.

            “But more importantly, two thirds of the UN voted in favor of resolution 181 in 1947. So contrary to your claim, lot’s of countries recognized Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. Don’t you feel foolish now for denying that fact?”

            –>No, because that resolution was a non-binding recommendation. Recognition of Israel through that resolution is therefore meaningless.

            “Really? Is that why we made peace with Egypt and Jordan? I was all in favor of those peace deals.”

            –>The arguments you use against Israel’s creation, Hamas, are the same ones used by hawks against Egypt and Jordan before Israel’s peace treaties with them, so your statement “I was all in favor of those peace deals” rings false.

            “No they didn’t but they applauded Nasser when he lined up it’s troops along Israel’s border and promised to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.”

            –>And for expressing an opinion, they deserve to be occupied and oppressed? Should the US have bombed Ramallah because during 9-11 Palestinian women there were dancing on their roofs in joy?

            “But what was their excuse for not accepting Ehud Barak’s offer 2000/2001? And Olmert’s 2008 peace offer? They were not Likud. One was Labor the other on was Kadimah.

            –>In previous posts, directed at you and others, I have already dealt with the legitimate reasons for Palestinians rejecting those offers. On this thread, I identified the current regime as Likud for clarification purposes.

            “And again: why did they even refuse to negotiate with successive leftist Israeli governments between 1967 and 1993?”

            –>After Khartoum, Israel refusal to negotiate, allegedly because of ‘the charter’, played the biggest role.

            “Are you saying that because now Israel has a Likud government, the Arabs are suddenly ready for the peace which they were not willing to accept with non Likud governments?”

            –>”The Arabs”? I am referring to the Hamas-led Palestinian Arabs, not to the entire range of Arab nations implied by your phrase “the Arabs”. Egypt and Jordan are not ‘suddenly ready for peace’; they’ve had peace with Israel for decades. Israel’s creation, Hamas, has been willing to enter into good faith negotiations with any Israeli government, regardless of party affiliation, for several years.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Unlike you, I am not afraid of the truth.”

            You don’t even know the meaning of the word truth. Everything is just a big word game to you with lots of gotcha’s.

            “It’s hard for a person to talk when someone else’s boot is on their throat. Accepting the permanent existence of a country that is constantly engaged in brutal oppression”

            What is hard about it? Just write down the words “we accept Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people” in a formal peace treaty and the boots come off the throat. Oh and show it too by stopping those rockets.

            “is not in the cards as long as Israel refuses to enter into negotiations with its creation, Hamas, on all outstanding issues (not just prisoner exchanges).”

            Israel is refusing to negotiate with Hamas? When did Hamas say it wants to negotiate with Israel?

            “There is no proof that Arafat deceived Israel during or after Oslo. That is just your opinion.”

            No it isn’t just my opinion. The second Intifada is the proof.

            ”No, by strangling them economically and launching unprovoked military assaults.”

            So you are saying that Hamas does not want to replace Israel by an Arab Islamic state? Their only problem is the blockade?

            That’s easy then. All they have to do is amend the charter and publish the amended charter to the masses. And Voila, the blockade will be lifted.

            “It started with Israel’s occupation of Gaza. Then Israel’s creation, Hamas, became a major force and organized resistance against the occupation.”

            Oh? And there were no attacks against Israel from Gaza before Israel occupied Gaza? You are a liar Goldie. Read up about the Fedayeen.

            (Hamas is Israel’s creation, yea, right, we are masochists and you are a Zionist are you Goldie? Why don’t you fess up that you are not. The truth will set you free, clown).

            “After that, Peter Beinert in Ha’aretz put it best:

            “It’s true that in 2005, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew Israel’s more than 8,000 settlers from Gaza. . . . But at no point did Gaza become its own country. . . . As the Israeli human rights group Gisha has detailed, even before the election of Hamas, Israel controlled whether Gazans could enter or exit the Strip (In conjunction with Egypt, which controlled the Rafah checkpoint in Gaza’s south). Israel controlled the population registry through which Gazans were issued identification cards. Upon evacuating its settlers and soldiers from Gaza, Israel even created a security perimeter inside the Strip from which Gazans were barred from entry. (Unfortunately for Gazans, this perimeter included some of the Strip’s best farmland).”

            Boo, hoo, Israel and Egypt did not open their borders to Gaza.

            Earth to Goldie … Yoo hoo … Are you there? Israel and Egypt are sovereign countries, they don’t have to open their borders to anyone. Particularly if the major import from Gaza to Israel would be suicide bombers, which is what happened between 2000 and 2006 when the borders were open.

            “Israeli intelligence analyst Amos Yadlin has stated that Israel wants Hamas (NOT Israel’s creation) in charge of Gaza as an excuse to treat Gaza as an enemy state.”

            Who the fuck is Amos Yadlin? The oracle of all wisdom? A self annointed intelligence analyst who spouts garbage? Give me one reason why I should believe his analysis, any more than your analysis? I don’t accept the opinions of biased stupid people. Particularly since they seem to think that everyone out there is stupid enough to swallow their half truths, distortions and lies.

            “When was the last time you condemned Feiglin and Shaked’s remarks?

            When was the last time you condemned Hamas’s stated genocidal intentions towards Jews?

            “Feiglin and Shaked are not ‘some individual Israelis’. They are powerful elected officials, part of Israeli’s ruling coalition. Feiglin is the deputy speaker of the Knesset, and Shaked is an MK from Naftali Bennett’s party, Jewish Home. Neither has been condemned for their remarks by any
            other member of the current government.”

            You condemn them enough. That’s good enough. Now are you going to condemn Hamas too? Goooo oooon, be a nice boy Goldie. You know you want to …

            “I have never ‘excused’ the charter (NOT of Israel’s creation, Hamas). I am defusing your hysteria over it and putting it in perspective.”

            Oh gosh, was I hysterical about Hamas wanting to destroy us? What was I thinking? I mean we Jews should know by now that when Homocidal Maniacs say they want to kill us, they don’t really mean it. Thanks for putting it into perspective for me Goldie. I am so relieved now …

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “In other words, no. But you seem to be embarrassed to admit that openly.”

            No, I am not embarrassed. It just does not matter what they accept or don’t accept.

            But it does matter whether the Palestinian Arabs have given up their pretext for war which is the existence of the Jewish state. If they don’t specifically state that they now accept the Jewish state then how do we know they won’t restart their war against us after we give up strategic assets (lands)?

            “No, because that resolution was a non-binding recommendation. Recognition of Israel through that resolution is therefore meaningless.”

            It isn’t meaningless if two thirds of the UN member states said in 1947 that they recognize the Jewish state. We think that it is meaningful. It is meaningful to us …

            But let’s accept your silly assertion that it IS meaningless. Then why aren’t the PLO and Hamas willing to give us such a recognition? I mean, if it is meaningless, then why is it so hard for them to do it?

            “The arguments you use against (NOT Israel’s creation), Hamas, are the same ones used by hawks against Egypt and Jordan before Israel’s peace treaties with them, so your statement “I was all in favor of those peace deals” rings false.”

            Does it? Nevertheless my statement about how I felt about it is true. I don’t care what arguments other people used about the peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan because most of us were for it. Want proof? The peace treaties were actually implemented.

            But as I said before, Egypt and Jordan clearly displayed to us that they want to live in peace with us. So we made peace with them.

            Hamas on the other hand clearly does not display peaceful intentions, so there is no peace with Hamas.

            “And for expressing an opinion, they deserve to be occupied and oppressed?”

            They did not just express an opinion. For many years before 1967, they sent murderous terrorists, known as Fedayeen, across the border and they murdered Israelis.

            Tell me, why are so many guys like you are so opinionated about Israel if you are not even bothering to read up on objective well documented facts? Go google the word Fedayeen.

            “Should the US have bombed Ramallah because during 9-11 Palestinian women there were dancing on their roofs in joy?”

            Did they do that? It’s up to the US what it does. Unlike you leftie guys from the US I would not be presumptous and tell you what to do. But I tell you what, I would be awfully pissed off at the people of Ramallah if I knew that they did that. As for bombing them just for that? Personally, I would not. But if they bomb you like they used to bomb Israel from Ramallah, I would not just take it on the chin. Nor does the US take it on the chin. Otherwise, why was the US in Afghanistan and Iraq?

            “In previous posts, directed at you and others, I have already dealt with the legitimate reasons for Palestinians rejecting those offers. On this thread, I identified the current regime as Likud for clarification purposes.”

            Oh and you don’t want to repeat yourself? You don’t seem to be too worried about endlessly repeating yourself on other issues though. Just sayin’.

            “After Khartoum, Israel refusal to negotiate, allegedly because of ‘the charter’, played the biggest role.”

            Oh yea. The Arabs were banging on Israel’s door begging to negotiate but Israel refused. You are a liar, Goldie. They were committing terrorist act after terrorist act against innocent Israelis even in places like the Munich Olympics.

            ”The Arabs”? I am referring to the Hamas-led Palestinian Arabs, not to the entire range of Arab nations implied by your phrase “the Arabs”. Egypt and Jordan are not ‘suddenly ready for peace’; they’ve had peace with Israel for decades. Israel’s creation,”

            Booooooring …

            “Hamas, has been willing to enter into good faith negotiations with any Israeli government, regardless of party affiliation, for several years.”

            Yea? Give me a link which verifies this lie of yours.

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “You don’t even know the meaning of the word truth. Everything is just a big word game to you with lots of gotcha’s.”

            –>’Gotcha’s’ point out your hypocrisy and dishonesty.

            “What is hard about it? Just write down the words “we accept Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people” in a formal peace treaty and the boots come off the throat. Oh and show it too by stopping those rockets.”

            –>“Stopping those rockets?” Even Bibi admitted that from Nov 2012 until early 2014, Israel’s creation Hamas observed the ceasefire ending the 2012 conflict. No rockets from them, and Israel’s creation Hamas got bupkes. One could argue that Bibi didn’t want a war because he hoped that Israel’s creation Hamas and Abbas would not form a unity government; but once they did, Bibi felt he had to go war to prevent the two-state solution from obtaining a new lease on life.

            So how about Israel just declare its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan invalid because those countries refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state? That scenario becomes more likely if Israel is allowed to get away with shifting the goalposts. “What is hard about it, General Sisi? Just write down the words….”

            Interesting that this time, you don’t demand Israel’s creation Hamas to revoke its charter, just write down words of “agreement” that many in Israel’s ruling coalition will claim is being faked.anyway. And then you want Israel’s creation Hamas to write down those words in a formal peace treaty, ignoring that Israel’s current government is opposed to any such treaty with its creation, Hamas, that bolsters the two-state solution.

            Minor detail: While the PLO has recognized the State of Israel since 1993, Israel does not recognize Palestine, even though well over 100 countries already do.

            “Israel is refusing to negotiate with Hamas? When did Hamas say it wants to negotiate with Israel?”

            –>In 2006, Israel’s creation, Hamas, sent out feelers that it would negotiate (through third parties) and maybe even formally recognize Israel. Hamas’ election manifesto did not repeat the Charter’s calls for the destruction of Israel. After the elections, Ziad Daiah, a representative of Hamas, Israel’s creation, in Ramallah told The New York Times, “If Israel will start new negotiations, with direct benefits for Palestinians in a useful time frame, we will accept that.” (New York Times, January 27, 2006). Some prominent Israelis, such as Efraim Halevy, the former director of Mossad, the Israeli secret service, and Giora Eiland, a former head of Israel’s National Security Council, have called for negotiating with Israel’s creation, Hamas (Foreign Affairs, Sept-Oct,2010), Both feel Israe’s creation, Hamas, is receptive toward entering into negotiations. In this context, the offer to Israel by its creation, Hamas, of a hudna, a long-term truce, would be its opening bargaining position in such negotiations.

            The current Israeli government and its supporters talk in another way. When Netanyahu’s former vice-premier Moshe Ya’alon was asked why Israeli governments went in for “all these games of make-believe negotiations”, he replied: “You have to create the illusion that an agreement can be reached. Time works for those who make use of it…. and we in government know how to make use of time.” According to Ha’aretz, Netanyahu’s ex-head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, stated: “We are not talking to the Palestinians because this (Israeli) government has no interest in negotiations…no interest in solving anything with the Palestinians. And I say this with certainty.”

            “The second Intifada is the proof.”

            –>How is it proof that Arafat deceived? What promise did he make that the mere existence of the Second Intifada broke?

            “So you are saying that Hamas does not want to replace Israel by an Arab Islamic state? Their only problem is the blockade?”

            –>The major problem for the Gazans since Israel’s withdrawal has been the air, sea and land blockade. By offering the hudna, Israel’s creation, Hamas, has indicated it is willing to settle for something far less than its original dream.

            “All they have to do is amend the charter and publish the amended charter to the masses. And Voila, the blockade will be lifted. “

            –>Yes, and I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you. Likud has not renounced its dreams of a Greater Israel in its charter, so how about simultaneous charter amendments? Think Bibi would go for that?

            “Oh? And there were no attacks against Israel from Gaza before Israel occupied Gaza? You are a liar Goldie. Read up about the Fedayeen.”

            –>Gaza was part of Egypt then, and those attacks were Egypt’s responsibility. Those attacks don’t happen if Nasser and his predecessors didn’t want them to happen.

            “Israel and Egypt are sovereign countries, they don’t have to open their borders to anyone.”

            –> I never said they did, and Beinert doesn’t either. There are other ways Gazans could reach the West Bank or other countries (airport, seaport) but Israel blocks those as well.

            “Particularly if the major import from Gaza to Israel would be suicide bombers, which is what happened between 2000 and 2006 when the borders were open.”

            –>So Gaza was IMPORTING suicide bombers?

            “Who the fuck is Amos Yadlin?”

            –>So glad you asked. He is director of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies. If you’d bother to google his name, the first entry that might come up is his Wikipedia entry. He’s quite the Israeli patriot.

            “A self annointed intelligence analyst who spouts garbage. .. don’t accept the opinions of biased stupid people.”

            –>Unless they’re biased against Arabs. Right, we get it.

            “When was the last time you condemned Hamas’s stated genocidal intentions towards Jews?”

            –>Such condemnation is implicit in my Zionism and my being a son of Holocaust survivors. Did you pose this loyalty test toward Larry Derfner or Noam Shezaf?

            “You condemn them enough. That’s good enough.”

            –>My condemnation for Shaked and Feiglin is ‘good enough’ for who?

            “Oh gosh, was I hysterical about (Israel’s creation)Hamas wanting to destroy us? What was I thinking?”

            –>Well, you weren’t thinking like the Mossad or Shin Bet people who observed Israel’s creation, Hamas, from the outset while Israel was giving it logistical support and money. They didn’t seem particularly worked about the dreams of Israel’s creation, Hamas, so why should we?

            If they don’t specifically state that they now accept the Jewish state then how do we know they won’t restart their war against us after we give up strategic assets (lands)?”

            –>What makes acceptance of Israel as a “Jewish state” a magic barrier that prevents them from making war? And what does a “Jewish state” mean anyway – has Israel offered a clear definition of that phrase?

            “It isn’t meaningless if two thirds of the UN member states said in 1947 that they recognize the Jewish state. We think that it is meaningful. It is meaningful to us …”

            –>In the poetic sense, it may be meaningful. But every nation that has had diplomatic relations with Israel has had to recognize it first, even if they already had voted for UN Resolution 181. When the US and the USSR were competing to see who would recognize Israel first in 1948, neither said to themselves, “Why are we doing this? We already recognized them in 1947.”

            “Then why aren’t the PLO and Hamas willing to give us such a recognition? I mean, if it is meaningless, then why is it so hard for them to do it?”

            –>Because no other country is required to recognize Israel that way, and no prior Israeli government made that a condition. It’s not ‘meaningless’ anymore because of the dishonest way it is being offered by Bibi.

            “I don’t care what arguments other people used about the peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan because most of us were for it. Want proof? The peace treaties were actually implemented.”

            –>That doesn’t prove you, a Likud troll, wanted it.

            “But as I said before, Egypt and Jordan clearly displayed to us that they want to live in peace with us. So we made peace with them. Hamas (Israel’s creation) on the other hand clearly does not display peaceful intentions, so there is no peace with (Israel’s creation) Hamas.

            –>Hamas displayed peaceful intentions by observing the ceasefire from November 2012 until April 2014.

            “They did not just express an opinion. For many years before 1967, they sent murderous terrorists, known as Fedayeen, across the border and they murdered Israelis.”

            –>Who is ‘they’? Did the Palestinian refugees there hold town councils and organize the fedayeen?

            “Oh yea. The Arabs were banging on Israel’s door begging to negotiate but Israel refused. You are a liar, Goldie. They were committing terrorist act after terrorist act against innocent Israelis even in places like the Munich Olympics.”

            –>Prior to the Yom Kippur War, Sadat, an Arab, contacted Israel via diplomatic channels about negotiating. Israel turned him down. Egypt had nothing to do with Munich.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Gotcha’s’ point out your hypocrisy and dishonesty.”

            So says the master of dishonesty and hypocrisy: YOU!

            “Stopping those rockets?” Even Bibi admitted that from Nov 2012 until early 2014, (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas observed the ceasefire ending the 2012 conflict.

            So? And during that time Israel did not attack them. Israel attacked them only after Hamas broke the cease fire.

            No rockets from them, and (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas got bupkes.

            They got peace and quiet from Israel not bupkes.

            “One could argue that Bibi didn’t want a war because he hoped that (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas and Abbas would not form a unity government; but once they did, Bibi felt he had to go war to prevent the two-state solution from obtaining a new lease on life.”

            One could argue anything. And you do. You make up lies. Hamas broke the cease fire.

            “So how about Israel just declare its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan invalid because those countries refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state?”

            How about not? Why should Israel do what a Hamas stooge like you suggests?

            “That scenario becomes more likely if Israel is allowed to get away with shifting the goalposts. “What is hard about it, General Sisi? Just write down the words….”

            Feel free to say anything you want to Sisi, Hamas stooge, just don’t go to Egypt, because General Sisi might just suddenly stop air flowing into your lungs. He is better at dealing with stooges like you than we are.

            “Interesting that this time, you don’t demand (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas to revoke its charter, just write down words of “agreement”

            Nothing what you say is interesting.

            “that many in Israel’s ruling coalition will claim is being faked.anyway.”

            You know bupkes about what Israel’s ruling coalition would claim. It’s all in your head. Did I say head? I meant Tachat.

            “And then you want (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas to write down those words in a formal peace treaty, ignoring that Israel’s current government is opposed to any such treaty with its creation, Hamas, that bolsters the two-state solution.”

            You wouldn’t have the foggiest about what Israel’s current government wants or does not want. You are just a Hamas stooge, regurgitating what you are told to say. A puppet.

            “Minor detail: While the PLO has recognized the State of Israel since 1993, Israel does not recognize Palestine, even though well over 100 countries already do.”

            Since 1947, Israel accepted the two state solution. It still does. So it recognizes Palestine. But where are the borders? The PLO refuses to agree to any peace deal which would define those borders

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “In 2006, Israel’s creation, Hamas, sent out feelers that it would negotiate (through third parties) and maybe even formally recognize Israel.”

            No they did not. I don’t believe the word of a liar like you unless you post a link to a reputable publication which verifies your allegation.

            “Hamas’ election manifesto did not repeat the Charter’s calls for the destruction of Israel.”

            So what?

            “After the elections, Ziad Daiah, a representative of Hamas, (NOT Israel’s creation), in Ramallah told The New York Times, “If Israel will start new negotiations, with direct benefits for Palestinians in a useful time frame, we will accept that.” (New York Times, January 27, 2006).

            They may or may not have said what you claim to the NY Times. But they sure as hell did not approach Israel directly as Sadat did.

            “Some prominent Israelis, such as Efraim Halevy, the former director of Mossad, the Israeli secret service, and Giora Eiland, a former head of Israel’s National Security Council, have called for negotiating with (NOT Israel’s creation), Hamas (Foreign Affairs, Sept-Oct,2010), Both feel (NOT Israe’s creation), Hamas, is receptive toward entering into negotiations. In this context, the offer to Israel by its creation, Hamas, of a hudna, a long-term truce, would be its opening bargaining position in such negotiations.”

            It does not matter what some Israelis feel. The question is what Hamas feels?

            “The current Israeli government and its supporters talk in another way. When Netanyahu’s former vice-premier Moshe Ya’alon was asked why Israeli governments went in for “all these games of make-believe negotiations”,

            Asked by whom, when and where? You are making this up as you go along. Unless you can provide a link to a non Pravda like site.

            “he replied: “You have to create the illusion that an agreement can be reached. Time works for those who make use of it…. and we in government know how to make use of time.” According to Ha’aretz, Netanyahu’s ex-head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, stated: “We are not talking to the Palestinians because this (Israeli) government has no interest in negotiations…no interest in solving anything with the Palestinians. And I say this with certainty.”

            Even if true, those are just opinions and allegations of some individuals.

            Besides, even if true, you have not proved that Hamas is willing to negotiate with ANY Israeli government. How do I know? Because Likud was not always in power and the story with Hamas was exactly the same as now. Go figure.
            “How is it proof that Arafat deceived? What promise did he make that the mere existence of the Second Intifada broke?”

            Oh not much (sarcasm) he just said: “No more terrorism ..” And guess what, the second Intifada was one giant terror campaign in which thousands of Israelis were murdered and maimed by Palestinian Arab stooges like you.

            To be continued.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “In 2006, Israel’s creation, Hamas, sent out feelers that it would negotiate (through third parties) and maybe even formally recognize Israel.”

            No they did not. I don’t believe the word of a liar like you unless you post a link to a reputable publication which verifies your allegation.

            “Hamas’ election manifesto did not repeat the Charter’s calls for the destruction of Israel.”

            So what?

            “After the elections, Ziad Daiah, a representative of Hamas, (NOT Israel’s creation), in Ramallah told The New York Times, “If Israel will start new negotiations, with direct benefits for Palestinians in a useful time frame, we will accept that.” (New York Times, January 27, 2006).

            They may or may not have said what you claim to the NY Times. But they sure as hell did not approach Israel directly as Sadat did.

            “Some prominent Israelis, such as Efraim Halevy, the former director of Mossad, the Israeli secret service, and Giora Eiland, a former head of Israel’s National Security Council, have called for negotiating with (NOT Israel’s creation), Hamas (Foreign Affairs, Sept-Oct,2010), Both feel (NOT Israe’s creation), Hamas, is receptive toward entering into negotiations. In this context, the offer to Israel by its creation, Hamas, of a hudna, a long-term truce, would be its opening bargaining position in such negotiations.”

            It does not matter what some Israelis feel. The question is what Hamas feels?

            “The current Israeli government and its supporters talk in another way. When Netanyahu’s former vice-premier Moshe Ya’alon was asked why Israeli governments went in for “all these games of make-believe negotiations”,

            Asked by whom, when and where? You are making this up as you go along. Unless you can provide a link to a non Pravda like site.

            “he replied: “You have to create the illusion that an agreement can be reached. Time works for those who make use of it…. and we in government know how to make use of time.” According to Ha’aretz, Netanyahu’s ex-head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, stated: “We are not talking to the Palestinians because this (Israeli) government has no interest in negotiations…no interest in solving anything with the Palestinians. And I say this with certainty.”

            Even if true, those are just opinions and allegations of some individuals.

            Besides, if true, you have not proved that Hamas is willing to negotiate with ANY Israeli government. How do I know? Because Likud was not always in power and the story with Hamas was exactly the same as now. Go figure.

            “How is it proof that Arafat deceived? What promise did he make that the mere existence of the Second Intifada broke?”

            Oh not much (sarcasm) he just said: “No more terrorism ..” And guess what, the second Intifada was one giant terror campaign in which thousands of Israelis were murdered and maimed by Palestinian Arab stooges like you.

            “The major problem for the Gazans since Israel’s withdrawal has been the air, sea and land blockade. By offering the hudna, (NOT Israel’s creation), Hamas, has indicated it is willing to settle for something far less than its original dream.”

            No it did not. It just indicates that Hamas is smart enough to know that they need Israel to lift the blockade so that they can import advanced weaponry during the temporary cease fire, so that they would have the means to challenge Israel’s military more effectively.

            You studiously avoided my question, as to why Hamas is only willing to offer a Hudna (cease fire) instead of a permanent peace deal?

            “Yes, and I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.”

            Really? Not interested.

            “Likud has not renounced its dreams of a Greater Israel in its charter, so how about simultaneous charter amendments? Think Bibi would go for that?”

            Depends. Define what you think he means by greater Israel. If you think he means the entire West Bank, then yes, I think Bibi is realistic enough to be willing to forego such an objective in exchange for a real peace deal instead of the sham Hudna which Hamas dangles.

            “Gaza was part of Egypt then, and those attacks were Egypt’s responsibility.”

            But not the responsibility of the people who ACTUALLY perpetrated the attacks? They happened to be the PLO.

            “Those attacks don’t happen if Nasser and his predecessors didn’t want them to happen.”

            But they did happen and the PLO was involved. Are you saying we should not blame the PLO for it? You are off your rocker!

            “I never said they did, and Beinert doesn’t either. There are other ways Gazans could reach the West Bank or other countries (airport, seaport) but Israel blocks those as well.”

            Those other countries? Stop using euphemisms. Let’s name one such other country, Iran. Of course so long as Hamas openly trumpets it’s intention to destroy and replace the Jewish state with another Arab Muslim state, Israel will do it’s best to stop Hamas from importing modern weapons from Iran.

            To be continued.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            So Gaza was IMPORTING suicide bombers?

            No, silly. Gaza was exporting suicide bombers. And when Israel had it’s borders open with Gaza, Israel was importing suicide bombers from Gaza. We did not like that. That’s why we restricted access from Gaza.

            “So glad you asked. He is director of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies. If you’d bother to google his name, the first entry that might come up is his Wikipedia entry. He’s quite the Israeli patriot.”

            I won’t be googling him. You want me and others to read him? Post a link.

            “Unless they’re biased against Arabs. Right, we get it.”

            No you don’t get it. Arabs are biased in favor of Arabs. I have no problems with that. It is natural.

            By the same token, we are biased towards ourselves, that is natural too.

            What is not natural is for us to be biased AGAINST ourselves and favor the interests of Arabs ahead of our own safety even.

            Having said that, it is possible for two biased groups to compromise and find a mid-way solution. You know why? Because with a bit of pragmatism, it soon becomes obvious that sometimes compromise, serves the best interests of both groups.

            Unfortunatly, as of today, Hamas does not believe in compromise. They play a zero sum game in which the winner would take all and they think that they will be the winners.

            To be continued.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Such condemnation is implicit in my Zionism and my being a son of Holocaust survivors.”

            LOL, can I use the same excuse as you in answering YOUR question?

            “Did you pose this loyalty test toward Larry Derfner or Noam Shezaf?”

            No. I haven’t been talking to them. And they have not asked me the question which you asked me about whether I condemned your favorite villains.

            “My condemnation for Shaked and Feiglin is ‘good enough’ for who?”

            Good enough for anyone who cares about your opinions. Personally I don’t. Because I don’t respect fascists like you who talk about your wish to knock people’s teeth out or summarily executing them.

            J:“Oh gosh, was I hysterical about (NOT Israel’s creation)Hamas wanting to destroy us? What was I thinking?”

            G:”Well, you weren’t thinking like the Mossad or Shin Bet people who observed (NOT Israel’s creation) Hamas, from the outset while Israel was giving it logistical support and money. They didn’t seem particularly worked about the dreams of Israel’s creation, Hamas, so why should we?”

            “We”? You are not us, so I don’t accept your claim that you are “we”. Therefore, you can accept or reject whatever you like, it isn’t of consequence to us because we ignore the likes of you.

            As for us, we take Hamas at their own words (and actions) and we believe their stated intention to destroy us. You don’t like it? Sue us.

            “What makes acceptance of Israel as a “Jewish state” a magic barrier that prevents them from making war?”

            There are no magic barriers to war. As I said to you before, if Hamas and the PLO recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and Israel then cedes lands in return, Israel would still be taking a risk. A calculated peace for peace. Most Israelis are prepared to take calculated risks for peace.

            However, giving up lands for nothing (no recognition of the Jewish state) would not be a calculated risk. It would be foolhardy. We are not willing to be foolhardy.

            “And what does a “Jewish state” mean anyway – has Israel offered a clear definition of that phrase?”

            It means a state for the Jewish people. A bit like the Palestinian Arabs say that their Palestine will be a Muslim Arab state.

            “In the poetic sense,”

            You can wax lyrical. I am not.

            “it may be meaningful.”

            It IS meaningful to us. Not to you? Who cares?

            “But every nation that has had diplomatic relations with Israel has had to recognize it first, even if they already had voted for UN Resolution 181. When the US and the USSR were competing to see who would recognize Israel first in 1948, neither said to themselves, “Why are we doing this? We already recognized them in 1947.”

            So? The US and the USSR did not make war on Israel. They also voted for UN resolution 181. So why exactly would we need to demand that they should again use the words “recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people”?

            The Palestinian Arabs on the other hand:

            1. Rejected UN resolution 181

            2. They made war on Israel precisely because it is Jewish rather than Arab.

            They want land? They need to show that they reversed their past policies. A bit like Nazi Germany had to renounce Nazism after the war.

            To be continued.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Hamas displayed peaceful intentions by observing the ceasefire from November 2012 until April 2014.”

            So? Israel observed the cease fire too. Cease fire for cease fire.

            “Who is ‘they’? Did the Palestinian refugees there hold town councils and organize the fedayeen?”

            In a war between two peoples, not every last person has to agree with the war. Yet the whole society is at war with the other society. And war has it’s consequences.

            You don’t want those consequences? Negotiate a peace deal and stop the war.

            “Prior to the Yom Kippur War, Sadat, an Arab, contacted Israel via diplomatic channels about negotiating. Israel turned him down.”

            Because if one wants to negotiate a peace deal with an adversary, one cannot deny the right of existence to that adversary. And for many years, Egypt did exactly that. It denied Israel’s right to exist. To press that point, Egypt refused face to face negotiations with Israel’s leaders. But as soon as Sadat broke that tradition, visited Israel and addressed the Knesset directly, Israel reciprocated and concluded a peace deal with Egypt. In fact, it was an ex terrorist Likud leader, Begin who made that peace deal. You see, a Likud leader was capable of making peace when he had a partner for peace.

            “Egypt had nothing to do with Munich.”

            You bet they didn’t. But the PLO did!

            Reply to Comment
    9. Tomer

      In the long-term, the Arab colonists will have to evacuate the land of Israel and move to one of the 20+ states in the Moslem Arab World.

      Just squatting in Aza all day and lobbing missiles only motivates israelis to bring the day of expulsion closer.

      Reply to Comment
    10. andrew r

      If this Steven Plaut twit is going to keep spamming every article with the exact same posts, maybe I should continually post a reminder that the Ziofascist IDF and its forerunner, the 3rd century BCE Haganah recruits minors for training in the Gadna (youth battalions).

      In fact, a big new thing going around is that Hamas makes children work digging tunnels. Guess what…

      “They dug anti – tank trenches neighborhoods Home and Garden, Talpiot and Qatamon, set up roadblocks all over the area and prepared the airport and the new road between Jerusalem and Bab el Wad (Shaar Hagai). These works were carried out after the 15th of May, under constant bombardment, which killed about a dozen youth brigades in the first month of the Arab invasion. Approximately sixty percent of all jobs in the city fortifications were made by them. Nearly 600 youth brigades mobilized out every day for these jobs.” (Google translate)

      http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%92%D7%93%D7%A0%22%D7%A2

      Israeli spokesdrones never talk about that in English, do they.

      Reply to Comment
      • Avdim

        1. I don’t like Steven’s comments, but using terms such as Ziofascist or spokesdrones makes you no better.
        2. I was in a Gadna, it was like a summer camp with no value whatsoever. I have no idea why the keep doing this crap. There is officially no Gadna in the sense you refer to in more than 20 years. In practice there’s no Gadna in the sense you refer to in more than 40 years. What is there to talk about?!
        3. You compare between a war of survival of a state just created (and whose people have just survived a holocaust). A war that cost the Yishuv around 1% of its populace and taking place in the 65 years ago, in a sense a completely different world. And the current employment of minors to perform dangerous tasks by a terror organization when no fighting is taking place. Really? Can’t you recognize evil even when it’s staring at you?

        Reply to Comment
        • andrew r

          Not too surprising that the Gadna is totally irrelevant now. The IDF has military bases that won’t be destroyed in one fell swoop. When the Haganah didn’t have that luxury under the British, it behaved no better than Hamas.

          Reply to Comment
    11. bar

      Will there be peace if Palestinians lay down their arms?

      Yes.

      Will the Palestinians lay down their arms?

      No.

      You’re welcome to hire me as your editor any time.

      Reply to Comment
    12. Tomer

      The so-called fakestinyans are not a real. They are a fiction fabricated by a Terrorist Egyptian pedophile in the early 1970s.

      When Manhigut Yehudit takes charge of the Likud, we will will deal with OUR enemy.

      Reply to Comment
    13. susy

      Aziz, this is a great article. But it is naive: Israel needs his Palestinian barbarians.

      Reply to Comment
    14. Hi

      “This argument is based on two false [citation needed] assumptions about Palestinians. The first statement is based on the false [citation needed] assumption that the only impediment to peace is Palestinian violence, and the second is based on the assumption [citation needed] that the Palestinians’ main goal is to eradicate the Jews. The argument also rests on the false [citation needed] premise that Israelis are completely peaceful.”

      Fixed that for you. The majority of Palestinian people are hyperconservative Muslims who probably believe in the death penalty for apostasy. They elected Hamas to the majority of their public seats. They celebrate and support publicized terrorist attacks and murders of Israelis, Americans and any Muslim killing anyone else in general. Israel, on the other hand, has a very small number of fundamentalist religious fanatics who have very little influence on the government. It is the complete opposite for hyperconservative Muslims, who claim the land is theirs because God said so. As long as this mindset exists in the majority of Palestinian people, there will ultimately be no peace. Islam is the true evil here. Religion has, once again, proven itself to be detrimental in progress towards world peace. Basically, if the Palestinians stopped wanting to destroy Israel and probably kill everyone that lives there since they currently are supporting just that, everything would be fine and I am pretty sure Israel would probably be more than happy to give up contested land. At this rate, however, the West Bank and Gaza are huge security risks for Israel because terrorists and other bad people are hiding there and are actively plotting new ways to kill Israeli people because God says they should in their twisted interpretation of their already-bullsh!t religion.

      Reply to Comment
    15. Click here to load previous comments
© 2010 - 2017 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website powered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel