Alon,

What bollocks!

The attacks on Jewish civilians predate the occupation and even the initial creation of Israel. In fact, they have reduced in frequency and intensity after the occupation of the west bank.

The idea that is being peddled that relinquishing the west bank would stop these attacks is founded on either extreme naivety or willful stupidity.

I wholeheartedly second shadowminister. I was going to say 'nonsense', but bollocks is fine.

A one eyed view becomes obsessive and boring, and detracts from the attention the cause may be deserving of!

As an alternative to a view from the comfortable wood panelled halls of elitist left wing teaching faculties at universities, where other evidence of “non-think” emerge, such as gender bending theory pushed with a shrill of authoritarian butchery, onto a less than deserving public, more intent on survival in an increasingly difficult domestic setting in the Western provinces; those that is, who because of political destabilisation and perpetual war, are tired of the causes of “others”, and growing more tired of paying the price of their intransigence and lack of will in solving their own F* problems!

Give us a break mate, I’m over ya!

Dan.

Without civil marriage, an integrated school system and separation of religion and state the present feelings of resentment and hate will continue. In their separate school systems different versions of history will be taught which will exacerbate resentments. Without civil marriage it will be difficult for Arab and Jewish young people to treat each other as possible future partners. Miscegenation statutes in the US before they were made illegal served the same purpose. Without separation of religion and state those not Jewish will continue to be treated as inferior. The problem is that in any state defined by only a part of its population there will continue to be an underclass. Israel cannot be both a democracy and a Jewish state.

Agree! And you've nailed it Alon.
Alan B.

How depressing!

---

Dear ShadowMinister and Ttbn,

Time would tell, but while I hope otherwise, your claims that no peace with the so-called "Palestinians" is possible, may well be true.

Moreover, suppose even that the "Palestinians" would be ready for peace, still Israel could not afford to confront and evacuate its West-Bank settlers - they are just too strong, violent and dangerous for Israel to handle.

But even without peace, Israel must leave that cursed place, for various other reasons, some listed in this article.
Israel can still withdraw as a state, taking its army out these occupied territories, wash its hands from that whole affair, leaving behind the settlers and the "Palestinians" to their own devices, then let whatever happens there, outside its borders, happen.

No need to mention, should the so-called "Palestinians" be stupid enough to continue attacking Israel within its own borders even after its withdrawal, then Israel's hands would not be tied, then it could do whatever it takes to stop them, even re-occupy that land if necessary, but this time legitimately, unlike the corrupt occupation of 1967 by Israel's Labor government, whose true unspoken motive was to allow its defense-minister, Moshe Dayan, to loot occupied archaeological sites and steal more artifacts for his private backyard archaeological collection.