Dear Danielle,

Yes, Israel was prepared, and in principle is still prepared, to exchange land for the settlements. I personally oppose this idea. Why should Israel give up its own legitimate territory in exchange for toxic, cursed territories that were obtained in the 1967 war?

It is my view that whether an agreement is reached or not, Israel should get out of any territory it obtained in the 1967 war, to the last millimeter.

Israel's withdrawal from Gaza has done it much good, but you cannot expect a single move to fix all the problems of the world: the Arabs are still the Arabs and the war is still on, but at least Israel is not trapped there in Gaza.

Once Israel is completely out of the occupied territories and within universally accepted borders, once it is again considered a fully-legitimate nation by the rest of the world (if not by the Arabs), then if/when it is attacked again it will be allowed to apply its full military power without the world objecting, blaming and stopping Israel as they usually do today.

You are right, a Palestinian state won't guarantee Israel's security. I don't believe that recognition would do it either. The only thing that can guarantee Israel's security is a strong army with the best and most advanced weapons AND the willingness of Israel to use them AND the willingness of the world to allow Israel to use them. That can only happen once Israel is out of the territories and is no longer perceived as a "colonial occupier".

#csteele

You state:

"Now to the British Mandate that David asserted came into effect in 1920. Perhaps he would like to go and correct the Wikipedia reference then.

“The British Mandate for Palestine, also known as the Palestine Mandate and The British Mandate of Palestine, was a legal commission for the administration of Palestine, the draft of which was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 and which came into effect on 26 September 1923.” Wikipedia

My answer:

Rely on Wikipedia at your risk.

The Mandate came into effect at the San Remo Conference on 19-26 April 1920 and was subsequently confirmed in the Treaty of Sevres on 10 August 1920.

You can't win a trick.

#Yuyutsu

Your comments on differentiating the Jews in Israel from Jews living outside Israel is quite breathtaking - even surpassing your attempt to equate murder with acts of God.

The Declaration of the State of Israel says this:

"ACCORDINGLY WE, MEMBERS OF THE PEOPLE'S COUNCIL, REPRESENTATIVES OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF ERETZ-ISRAEL AND OF THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT, ARE HERE ASSEMBLED ON THE DAY OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER ERETZ-ISRAEL AND, BY VIRTUE OF OUR NATURAL AND HISTORIC RIGHT AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL."

You have now identified yourself with those who want to eliminate the one Jewish State in the world and replace it with a 22nd Arab State in defiance of the decisions of the international community.

Our lunch date is off. Go join similar like minded people.

Dear David Singer,

My goodness my dear fellow, why on earth do you need to be schooled on legal concepts by a layman?

To come into effect – the condition of being operative.

If a person is arrested then convicted by our courts, sentenced to jail then a period of community service that community service does not 'come into effect' until he is released from jail.

The British Palestine Mandate did not come into effect until the British assumed their Mandatory responsibilities on 29th Sept 1923. Hell mate the Poms and the French only finalized the borders of their respective Mandates on the 7th of March that year. The French also assumed their responsibilities when the British did, on the 29th.

As to winning a trick, it is not something I aspire to. Trickery I would have thought is changing Charter to Constitution. I'm happy dealing in facts.

David,

I am more than familiar with Israel's declaration of independence, but as mentioned earlier, Ben-Gurion was cynical about it and did not mean any of the Jewish stuff when he read it. It was lightly-armed 600,000 people against 100,000,000 Arabs, the situation was desperate and few believed that Israel could survive at all. Foreign aid and arms were desperately needed and being Jewish was in fashion at the time, just a few years after the Nazi holocaust. No wonder that Ben-Gurion said whatever he could to please the world as well as to receive Jewish money. He even, as later did his foreign-minister, Aba Eban, both atheists, raised a bible as supposed "proof" for Israel's rights on its land.

That was of course dishonest, but it cannot bind 63 years later those 3 generations that were subsequently born in Israel and have it as their natural home, along with those who were only children at the time.

There is no international law, nor a UN resolution stating that Israel must remain Jewish. I also know of no country that conditioned its acceptance of Israel upon the later remaining Jewish.

I find your idea that people must be EITHER Jews OR Arabs amazingly illogical. The chances of Israel becoming the 22nd Arab state are very slim (unless Israel formally annexes the West-Bank and Gaza and grants Israeli citizenship to those people). It is also most unlikely that Israel all-of-a-sudden will stop exporting Judaism, just as an Arab country wouldn't suddenly stop exporting oil -it's just too good a business!

I also see no reason why Israel should suddenly be dropping its Jewish characteristics: it has for example the Hebrew language and the Sabbath (Saturday) as its national day of rest, not Friday or Sunday - I don't see these changing any time soon, nor do I recommend it. The whole point is just that the citizens of Israel could make any changes if they wanted.

Israel is an independent sovereign state and will not be held hostage by any external group, not even that fuzzy collection of people called "Jews".

Dear David,

I agree with Yuyutsu, I don't see Jordan, considering the its bloody history with the Palestinians, agreeing to a proposal such as you make.

Also, what about Gaza ... and are they truly Palestinians? They speak an Egyptian Arabic, not the Arabic spoken on the West Bank, and their familial and economic ties are with Egypt.

Egypt was only too happy to relinguish this protectorate, which it had parlously administered. Only after Israel had occupied Gaza did it move into the 20th century.

Some have suggested that Egypt resume control of Gaza. Do you feel that this is also a solution? One has to wait for the dust to settle in Egypt to see what sort of regime takes control. A poll showed 85% of Egyptians want the introduction of Sharia law; this does not look too promising.

# Yuyutsu

What a font of knowledge you are.

You state:

"I am more than familiar with Israel's declaration of independence, but as mentioned earlier, Ben-Gurion was cynical about it and did not mean any of the Jewish stuff when he read it."

Can you please quote your source for this amazing revelation?

For your information this is what Ben Gurion read:

" In the year 5657 (1897), at the summons of the spiritual father of the Jewish State, Theodore Herzl, the First Zionist Congress convened and proclaimed the right of the Jewish people to national rebirth in its own country.

This right was recognized in the Balfour Declaration of the 2nd November, 1917, and re-affirmed in the Mandate of the League of Nations which, in particular, gave international sanction to the historic connection between the Jewish people and Eretz-Israel and to the right of the Jewish people to rebuild its National Home."

You have no credibility whatsoever.

#csteele

1.You state:

" The British Palestine Mandate did not come into effect until the British assumed their Mandatory responsibilities on 29th Sept 1923."

So what was Herbert Samuel the first British High Commissioner for Palestine doing in Palestine in June 1920? Wasn't he sent there to put into effect the decision of the San Remo Conference held three months earlier?

2. You confuse "taking a trick" with trickery". Obviously you have never played bridge or solo. You insult the millions of people who do.

Come to think of it - you are totally confused.

#Danielle

You may be right - Jordan and Israel might not do a deal. But then again they might. No one will know until they sit down and negotiate.
Jordan might just accept sovereignty in 95% of the West Bank knocked back by the Palestinian Authority - by redrawing the existing boundary between Israel and Jordan. There is no other Arab interlocutor that I can identify to negotiate with Israel.

As for Gaza it is a real problem - a basket case. Annexing it to Egypt makes sense but Hamas will not give up power very easily.