Logic

Peace would be created if you and those like you dropped your generalised racist remarks and your 'blame the Palestinians for everything' attitudes.

That's what is stopping peace in the mid east. Nothing else. You and those like you repeat these unthinking baseless ideas endlessly.

The rest of us are considering other attitudes as reasonable.

Yuyutsu

'The question is not whether Israel wants or not to deliver the "goods" (Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, etc.), but whether it CAN - and currently, it regrettably cannot (even though a majority of Israelis would like to see that happen, with certain reservations).'

It is more a question of whether you occupationists can stop thinking and planning for the 'certain reservations'.

Keith,

I have no idea why you number me among those "occupationists":
I do not like them more than you do.

Like there are no two identical snowflakes, so there are no two identical Israelis, but the main and uniting reservation that most Israelis have is: "PROVIDED WE STAY ALIVE".

Perhaps for you it is too much, too outrageous to ask - so tough luck, because I don't know of many Australians either who were willing to die in order to avoid occupation. Perhaps we should jump into the sea so that aborinigals can have their land back? do you volunteer?

Now, there is a legitimate discussion within Israel about what is required to maintain life in the Jewish state - to what extent can Arabs be believed and how much risk is reasonable to take. Even you would admit (I guess) that Israel is not surrounded by angels, so one main issue is TRUST. Another big issues is GUARANTEES: if the Arabs cannot be trusted (based on both their history and their holy-book which calls for signing treaties when they are weak, then betraying those treaties once they become the stronger side), then perhaps the rest of the world can help with guarantees that Israel will be preserved: but alas, if you also have no consideration for the life of Jews, then your guarantees are not worth the paper they are written on.

The more Israel is criticized by the rest of the world and identified en-block with those bloody occupationsits, the more you show that you care nothing about its survival, the more it must conclude that it has no other support except its own strength and the USA. It is a self-fulfilling curse! This is not helping the moderates of the Middle-East, it just hurts ordinary and reasonable Israelis and Palestinians, it only helps the Moslem extermists - "wonderful people" you must say...

Keith,

Any border between Israel and Palestine will be close to the old Green Line. This is not a matter of principle, but practicality. That line has the major advantage of already existing (thus its determination does not require endless negotiations); it is roughly (but only roughly) demographically sensible; all but the most extreme Right and Left continue to ascribe to it at least symbolic significance; and despite criticism of alleged “creeping Israeli annexation”, outside of Jerusalem the Green Line continues to have practical legal consequence.

Nevertheless, there are major reasons why a peace deal will not exactly recreate the Green Line. That armistice line reflected the 1949 reality based on where forces on both sides had succeeded in occupying territory, and in the case of Arab forces, expelling the entire Jewish population. It does not reflect reality on the ground in 2007.

Remember when I wrote that “all serious peace plans in recent years... look very similar”? (Add the Nusseibeh-Ayalon Initiative to the list.) One way is that they call for corrections to the Green Line. The Palestinians involved in formulating those plans recognize the necessity and benefits of border corrections.

Keith: “...any solution that does not accept the principle of '67 borders simply rewards Israeli aggression”

In 1967, Israel only captured the West Bank after Jordan attacked it from that territory. Thus, one could argue that return to the 1967 borders rewards Arab aggression.

Note also that before the 1967 war, Syria was in occupation of Israeli territory and no-man’s land near the Sea of Galilee. Again the so-called “principle of ’67 borders” would reward Arab aggression.

Finally, note that many peace plans call for territorial exchanges, which would not only annex some West Bank land to Israel, but also some Israeli land to Palestine. This would not reward one side only, but would benefit both sides.

Keith: “...refusal to accede to the terms of the Geneva convention.”

The Geneva Conventions do not demand a one-sided settlement of conflicts over disputed territory, and do not forbid mutually agreed determinations of, and changes to, common borders.

Re. logic

1) Arab countries waged several bloody wars under the slogan push the Jews into the sea.

2) The occupied territories (Gaza, West Bank) were used as springboards to wage wars of intended annihilation of Israel. After there defeat they were, (not surprisingly) occupied, as were Germany and Japan after the war, and forbidden their own defence forces in view of a justified fear of further attacks.

lol funny stuff mate, and how are they gonna do that against the worlds 3rd most powerful and sophisticated army in the world?.. the use of your selective language appalls me, your blurred rationale, and shoddy attempt to analyse the facts means that peace is never bound to occur.. be constructive and offer some real solutions rather than providing inertia for the pendulum to swing harder in the opposite direction. you could write a novel on the FACTS on Israel and Palestine but a solution needs deeper analysis.
use some logic

Yuyutsu, your absolutely right..
just as there is fundamentalists within Palestine, with increasing prominence of radicalised groups whom believe that Israel should literally be 'pushed into the sea', Israel has dissenting elements pushing for a theocratic state as well, with the orthodox jewish movement wielding considerable power within the political system. Groups such as Gush Emunim, whom literally interpreted what it means to be Gods Chosen People believe that there should be pressing of a thorough colonisation of Palestine to align the frontiers of biblical Israel, where non Jews have no right to the land.
With every martyr created on either side of the conflict, these groups increase in popularity... which is why we need discussion and increased dialog with groups on both sides of the divide to steer away from the disillusionment of fundamentalism, to actually seek peace

Peachy, your analysis about the influence and goals of Orthodox Judaism is overly simplistic, but never mind. That is partly the inevitable consequence of the limits to dialogue imposed by this site.

But tell me, by what measure is Israel "the worlds 3rd most powerful and sophisticated army in the world"?