Fellow_Human:

The legal situation is clear: the Geneva convention allows countries to occupy territories of other countries during war - especially during a war of defence, without any time limit. What the convention does not allow, is the settlement of civilians in such territories.

The social situation was also very clear until the settlers came: Palestinians received the best possible treatment by Israel: no other occupied enemy residents were treated so generously in history. They were prosperous than ever, they had freedom of movement within both territories and Israel itself, and over the bridges to Jordan; the refugees were allowed for the first time to leave their camps; they could invite their familes over from the Arab countires; they were free to work in Israel and had a flourishing tourist industry consisting of both Israelis and tourists from around the globe; there were no road-blocks and Israel's military presence in Arab cities and villages was sparse, because it was not required. Palestinian policemen were employed and paid by Israel to keep law and order in their streets.

The only Arab country still having land-claims against Israel is Syria. Very few Arab countries today still do not recognize Israel - most do, even while criticizing its borders - which many Israelis do too!!

Regarding Indonesia - the scenario you presented is very different than mine: those Islamist extremists in Malaysia and Indonesia are not calling for a Chinese state in Australia - but for us becoming part of a Moslem one (P.S. it was many years ago since Australia was under British flag).

About fundamentalist Islam: we all hope that your prediction, based on the Egyptian experience, is correct. Yet we in Australia cannot afford to remain complacent.

Yuyutsu,

I guess you summarized were the agreement and where the conflict areas are:

As per your posting, an average Israeli believes Syria have a claim to the Golan Heights subject to peace and recognition but no rights to a Palestinian land or state except as an occupied territory because they are well treated. According to you, Palestinians have a choice of being treated well as Israeli Arabs or being thrown into tents, 40% unemployment and an average income of a dollar a day if they want to keep their Palestinian identity and want their land back.

I would probably say that an average Egyptian would say while partial Zionism benefited Israel establishment it will play against the peace prospects on the long term. I hope I understood what you are saying correctly but the idea of fully replacing Palestine with Israel is the least likely option to achieve any peace prospects.

-All,

I checked the website link and oh yes….It was me who was under the influence of propaganda! I lived in Egypt for 29 years of my life, spent weekends in Sinai and all Palestinians on the Egyptian borders are living in 5 stars hotels because they are bored of their water view properties, everything else is a lie don't let anyone fool you..

Fellow_Human,

Don't worry: unlike the peaceful euphoric times following 1967, since the terrorist attacks began, most Israelis today prefer total separation from the Palestinians - with a long and high wall to protect them and make them forget about Palestinian existance.

Although only about 30% of Israelis believe that the Palestinians have a right for a state, most would consider it, right-or-no-right, as the most practical and beneficial solution for Israel itself.

Some Israelis are even playing with the idea of getting rid of 3 Arab towns (Umm Il Fahm, Bakah Al Garbiah, Taybeh) that were part of Israel since 1949, giving them away to the Palestinian state (but that would be a harsh move, since the residents of those towns are now Israeli citizens and are used to a western standard of living, which they will probably prefer over squeezing with their poor brothers). The ones who prefer a single state are the settlers (obviously, so that they can stay where they are) and many of the Palestinians themselves (away from the cameras for fear of life, they prefer living in a developed country rather than in a corrupt third-world one).

Most Israelis believe that Syria has a claim over the Golan Heights, but also that Syria could never be trusted until it becomes democratic: otherwise, they will use the topographic advantage to attack Israel again.

F H, I would agree in most instances the Palestinian Issue is perpetuated by Arab interference, there is ample footage of what is broadcasted there and what the youth are brainwashed with.
If Arafat had dispersed the financial generosity of worldly nations to the people instead of his own bank accounts, then just maybe the situation would be a little different for the Palestinian population and the people, mere fact the U N had issued a noble Peace prize is evidence enough of Pathological traits of that establishment.
We do not always see the good in people; Iraq is a great example of Media Bias and propaganda by our media, the never-ever reporting of the good things and massive progress of the Iraq people.
I could present a few hundred web links on raw footage, some of Arab Children as young as 3 dressed up in battle fatigues gun toting, “that footage is the least offensive”, in the western world is tantamount to Psychological pedophilia. That is what we are talking about. I do not doubt there are millions of other good thing that happen, and just as seriously bad, but the nature of the Tribalistic behavior spurred on by Political and religious zealots for their own ego and gain is where we see the innocent used as pawns. Israel is Democratic and accountable; Arabs and Islam seem to be above that, and unaccountable, Just excuses and blame others are what we see and hear and that is not the exception, in some political sections and the media, it is the rule. Even many Arab Victims of Islamic repression will never see the light of day, nor will anyone hear about it, unless an American or Jew placed a pair of Underpants on a Murderers head and shames him, you will hear about that. That is what concerns me and conserns you. It is not enough to pretend it never happens and everyone else is to blame.

-All,

I totally agree that Palestinians have their own mismanagement, corruption, leadership and division. I still read the local news there however this is not the issue. Also, I agree that Israel is one of the better examples of democracy in the Middle East. It is its policy against another sovereign nation (ie Palestine) that I am trying to understand. When Japan attacked the US (for no reason whatsoever) the US after a long battle reconstructed the country into a free democracy and maintained its sovereignty.

Also, I am surprised at the Israeli intellects who are wondering why Palestinians were attacking Israel: Palestine was a British colony under occupation, because of the Nazis, the British relocated large numbers of Jews into Palestine then split the country into two!

In what logic would anyone expect the natives (who are trying to get rid of British colonialism anyway) to welcome the new comers?
My view was it would have been possible if the new comers added real value or enriched the locals life. As far as my discussion with Yuyutsu there was little done or done within the frame of identity trade (ie if you want to live well forget your Palestinian identity and become an Israeli Arab).

Yuyutsu,

I honestly think the fence is a good idea only if you guys thought of it in 1948.

Fellow_Human:

I never previsouly heard such a strange argument equating the Jews with the British: is it so difficult to understand that Israel has its own independent agenda, unrelated to any power or empire?

Zionist Jews started to settle Israel first during the Ottoman rule - not the British.
Most of the first settlers were socialists if not communists, and were certainly disliked by both Turkey and Britain.

When the British came, they actually preferred to have only an Arab state on the whole of Palestine. Most British officials sided with the Arabs and even armed them. The Jews came DESPITE the British. The British government resisted Jewish immigration, but many Jews managed to sneak in anyway in small ships in dark nights past their coast-guard. Initially, those Jewish refugees that were not so fortunate and were caught by the British, were sent back to Euorpe, where they found their death by the Nazis. Later on, Britain sent the refugees they caught to detention camps in Cyprus.

The Jews sought independence so that they can bring in the rest of the refugees - the British were reluctant, but had to obey the 1947 U.N. decision. On that background there was bitterness and even violent clashes between Jews and British police.

The lands allocated in 1947 by the U.N. to become a Jewish state, were already owned by Jews who bought the land from Arabs for full (and often multiple) price. Many of those lands, when bought were Malaria-infested swamps unfit for human habitation, but the Jews worked hard and managed to dry those swamps. Perhaps the locals did not welcome the new comers - but they certainly welcomed their money!

Those Arabs who chose to live in peace with the Jews, had their lives enriched in many ways - and were never even required to give away their Arab identity (Palestinian identity became popular only much later as a reaction to the settlers' provocations).

It is indeed regrettable that the wall was not built in 1949. I guess the reason was lack of manpower, materials and technology.