Dear Mr. Singer,

I apologise for my comments on your smoking habits. It seems your inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality does not require chemical assistance.

Abdullah is about as likely to accede to the re-incorporation of the West Bank as Netanyahu is to agree to a Palestinian "right of return". And for much the same reason.

You write:

"Abdullah must be subjected to enormous international pressure in the form of financial incentives and security guarantees for Jordan to resume its role in the West Bank…"

Who is going to exert this pressure? What possible "security guarantees" can be offered Jordan when the main threat would emanate from 2.5 million newly minted Palestinian citizens? Have you forgotten Black September? Have you forgotten the uprising in the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon in December 2009? Do you think Abdullah would risk incorporating 2.5 million Palestinians into Jordan no matter what the carrots or sticks?

But what you leave out of your analysis is the same elephant in the room that almost every Jewish pundit ignores.

Muslims are as determined to destroy Israel as Jews are to preserve it. Peace is not possible so long as a Jewish enclave exists in Dar-ul-Islam.

If you believe anything else you really are living in a fantasy world.

The issue of "Palestine" is one of the Muslim world's trump cards in their campaign to delegitimate Israel. It provides the cover for anti-Semites all over the world to attack Israel*.

But if it weren't "Palestine" Muslim leaders would find something else. This looks like a fight to the death. I cannot see this story having a happy ending.

To reiterate, I am NOT going to debate the rights and wrongs of the situation.

*There are also critics of Israel who are not anti-Semites and who do have a genuine concern for the welfare of Palestinians. But there is no denying that many of Israel's critics are motivated by anti-Semitism just as many critics of Islam are motivated by racism.

<<The Green Line is an armistice line not an international boundary.>>
Call it whatever you like it is the closest there is to a border and is widely recognised by the rest of the world. Even by a lot of the "Arabs".

40's, 50', 60's its just splitting hairs and you know it. Israel has studiously avoided most agreements but there are still a few. All of which have been broken or ignored. The refusal to set borders and the illegal nuclear program is indicative of Israels perfidiousness.

<<I call it the consequences to the loser of a war.>>
Will you still call it that if you were to lose and Israel ceased to exist? Or would you bleat about "property rights" or "god given favors"? How about the fact that the Romans beat you Jews and so the land is theirs by right? Or does it belong to the crusaders or Saladin's descendants? Even in 1919 it wasnt the Jews that defeated the Ottomans was it? Why doesnt the middle east still belong to the victors in that war? Is this how you justify the theft of land from the people who lived in what is now Israel proper? Was it war in 1948 or did they just "leave"?

<<it is difficult to see how reunification of part of the West Bank with the East Bank will result in oppression.>>
Because the Palestinians dont want to be Jordanian any more than they want to be Israeli or Mongolian or Martian for that matter. They want to be Palestinians! What gives you the right to tell them otherwise? You would think a Jew would have some understanding of the idea of identity and homeland?

continued

continued

<<7. The West Bank is not Palestinian land. It is disputed territory comprising about 5% of the Mandate remaining unallocated between Jews and Arabs. >>

Only disputed by people like you Mr singer. The people who live there and have lived there for centuries have no dispute about where they are and who owns and lives and works and farms on the land of the West bank. Your legalistic, denialist views on the Palestinians are calculated to advance and justify Israels theft of land and the oppression of its inhabitants.

Steven
I have also seen reports that the Arabs see the Jews as just one more in a long line of crusaders and even if it takes 300 years they will get their land back and destroy israel. Thats pretty scary talk and seriously insane but with the Israelis being just as crazy you may just be right about the nukes. Armageddon may be coming. Make you proud does that singer?

Like i have said many times before a pox on these crazy religionists and their cults of death and murder. They use their god to justify atrocities and then expect the rest of us to show them respect and social and economic favoritism. All godbotherers suck and religion is dangerous and must be wiped out.

David F, must say that the poetry you quoted was often talked about in WW2.

However, I must say that I am disappointed that you seem to regard the actions of both Gandhi and Mandela as just old hat, even to the point of boredom.

Must say yoy are the boring one, certainly not Gandhi or Mandela...!

bushbred wrote: "However, I must say that I am disappointed that you seem to regard the actions of both Gandhi and Mandela as just old hat, even to the point of boredom."

Dear bushbred,

I am mystified by your remark above. I mentioned neither Ghandhi nor Mandela.

Mikk wrote:

"I have also seen reports that the Arabs see the Jews as just one more in a long line of crusaders and even if it takes 300 years they will get their land back and destroy israel."

On the one hand you acknowledge that Israelis will not have peace and security no matter what they do.

On the other hand you state that Israel "must" do this and Israel "must" do that.

But why should they?

If Israel is doomed to a war to the death no matter what they do, why should they do any of the things you and many other OLO posters demand of them? Even if they're not "crazy religionists" what reason is there for the Israelis to make nice with the people who want to destroy them?

Again, I am NOT debating the rights and wrongs. I am simply pointing out that there appears to be no incentive for Israel to, for example, withdraw to its 1967 borders if, as seems probable, they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Mikk, here's an exercise for you:

Post an open letter to the Israeli prime minister explaining to him how it will benefit his country to do what you ask of it.

Of course if Israel does go down a goodly slice of the world's oil pumping capacity will be reduced to radioactive rubble. Look for petrol at $10 a litre. That is Israel's ace in the hole. It is the real reason America tends to be supportive of Israel.

Is there anybody on OLO who honestly believes that peace is possible so long as a Jewish enclave exists in the heart of what Muslims regard as Dar ul Islam?

Is there any poster who doubts that Muslims are as determined to destroy Israel as Jews are to save it?

If you answered "yes" to either of these questions then I suggest you have joined David Singer in fantasy-land.