We have different opinions on that matter. 

I would maintain that the Israelis won't back down on the dissolution of the State, and the Palestinians/Arabs  won't back down on anything but the dissolution of the State of Israel.

We can - and probably do - differ on the basics of the MIddle East conflict, but the point in which we both agree, as I see it, is that effective dialog cannot happen without there being parties to the negotiation.

We can argue back and forth that the Israelis have, in fact, "backed down" on several occasions, only to have renegade<?> Palestinian group move in with more violence, negating the results of negotiations by the "standard" Palestinian authorities.

Again, I maintain - negotiations fail when either the parties aren't negotiating in good faith or one of the parties really doesn't have the real authority to negotiate.

I must thank you and the others for an interesting  series of posts in which you have refrained from calling me a spiteful, criminal warmonger, and I have not called you a commie pinko liberal wuss...   Moreover, you did challenge some of my beliefs and reviewed them.  In the end, I don't think you've changed my views on certain SPECIFIC matters, and neither have I changed you on yours, but then, if you and I were doing the negotiations in the Middle East, we'd probably have solved it, eh?

Quote:


You're ugly, too. 

Quote:



Mom's opinions are biased, and your friends are too polite.   

(Interesting how there's always a "last word".... )

I'll let you have the last word on this..

Wow. That is exactly the same example that I used when having a discussion about the middle east with my German exchange partner about two years ago.

I suggest this scenario...

Supppose that the people coming back were the ones who lived there before you came in, and were thrown out by your neighbors.  Finally, after some time, they come back to their house.  Instead of totally throwing you out, they agree to share the house instead.  Some of your family, though, leave and try to get other houses in the same neighborhood, but your neighbors refuse and pile you back into the house, or stuff you in back rooms of their houses, all the while making public noises about how mean your roommates are.

Add to the mix the fact that while these original tenants went away, some of your relatives would meet them and have long , healthy and peaceful relationships together.

I don't know how we got from Cold War to Israel v. PLO  but it is both entertaining and educational (in the sense of learning others' views).

Please keep it up and keep it civil.

(Trust me, you don't want to know my political views on the mideast situation.)

Quote:

They only agreed to share with the Palistinians because you cannot displace one nation for the sake of another and because thats what was decided by Britain and America when it was decided to reinstate Isreal. When the Jews were forced out of Isreal by the Romans it was the Palistinians who were left, they have been there just as long as the Isrealis and are no less deserving of their land. When Isreal was recreated after WWII the Palistinians may not have liked it but they did move into the West Bank and Gaza strip while the Isrealis occupied the rest of the country and every single arab nation in the Middle east immediately vowed to wipe Isreal off the map. This lead them to declare war on Isreal and Isreal with American support and weapons beat them all and occupied it some new ground in the areas given to the Palistinians.

I hate to have to say this but the creation of Isreal, although done with good intentions is the cause of most trouble in the world today.

Quote:

They sought to solve the living arrangements by the removal of the Isreali's. Setting up Isreal is a bit like turning Utah into a communist utopia. For one reason or another it might seem like a good idea but none of the neighbours would want it or stand for it.