It would be nice if we could see BALANCED reporting on BOTH sides of these issues.
Israel's right to exist is completely ignored in this article (unfortunately the current vogue) and she has been desperately trying to be accepted by her Arab neighbours since her inception. There were no protests of occupation while Jordan was in control of the same area - that was self-rule. The Palestinian plight is a terrible, self-inflicted tragedy and if Israel were accepted it would disappear like a puff of smoke.
Israel is proud of its diverse population, why must the PA be "Judenrein"?
The Jews have a claim to this space that predates the Palestinians' by hundreds of years and they are happy to share it. This should be acknowledged.

My solution to the Middle East problem.

NUKE THE BLOODY LOT, REGARDLESS.

That would get rid of 80% of the worlds problems.

Both these two groups of people should not be allowed into Australia. They are nothing but trouble. Round them both up and deport them. Even seeing this article written here pains me. It has nothing to do with Australia. Multiculturalism has nothing good about it. There is not one ounce of evidence to support Multiculturalism being an overall benefit to Australia. I challenge any believer to produce evidence to refute this. There is also mounting evidence to suggest that it does extensive harm. These foreign people are bringing their views, opinions and troubles here. I say again, lets deport them.

ozzie

Agree. Deport all foreign groups who have tried to change the Australian culture.

Start with the English. Only Aboriginals should be allowed to stay, the English made a mess. Only aboriginal culture allowed, as a true ozzie you will of course agree with that.

Oh by the way when you ask to deport two groups which are in conflict in the Middles East, who do you mean? You had better not include Jews on your list, they were here on the First Fleet. No Aboriginal Jews though. Some Australian true blue slang terms which you may well use are of Jewish origin. According to ANU "cobber" may even be one of them.

Jayb

Nuke Israel and you have destroyed one of the most productive societies on earth. The mobile phone, pentium chip, Windows XP, countless life saving medical treatments all came from there, you had better be careful there.

Totally irrelavent Logic. 80% of the trouble in the world to day eminates from the Middle East. It's better to wash the entire slate clean & start again. The whole area's nothing but a bloody great sand pit anyway. Land of milk & Honey? You've got to be joking. It is GODs greatest joke on humanity. These two peoples deserve one another. In fact all the peoples of this area should be rounded up & sent back. Then it should be NUKED. The rest of the world would be safer for the exercise.

JayB

Don't worry. It's going to happen anyway. The Israeli's will attack one neighbour too many with their bombs and Pakistan will respond by supplying the Iranians with warheads for their rockets and bingo away goes the whole shebang.

Keith

>> “The Israeli's will attack one neighbour too many with their bombs and Pakistan will respond by supplying the Iranians with warheads for their rockets and bingo away goes the whole shebang.”

What? Israel is the one which has been attacked by its neighbours. Seven of them at least, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. And three times in 60 years.

Secondly the Pakistanis are fairly upset that the Iranians are after the bomb as they are rivals and they are not just going to hand the technology over.

Until the Arabs accept that the state of Israel is here to stay there will be no end to the conflict. It doesn’t matter how prepared Israel is to negotiate, unless they offer to leave altogether, there will be no peace.

People like Mustafa want to believe that it is the new building, even though it is in inside existing settlements, in east Jerusalem which is causing the problems. As Bren Carlil points out in the Australian today, when Israel withdrew unilaterally from the West Bank all it did was confirm the Palestinian militias belief that their violence was achieving the gains and encouraged them to fight harder.

Any concessions from Israel are seen by Hamas as more reason to continue fighting, not less. Until we can get past this mindset I cannot see a solution.

Logic,
Exactly which life saving medical treatments are you talking about that came from Israel?

PaulL, yes the state of Israel is here to stay.

The problem is it isn't 'here' anywhere on a map that Isael is prepared to stick to.

Yesterday it was here. Today it is here, with a bit of over that land that was over there. Tomorrow it will be here, plus that land it added yesterday, plus the added bit of land that it has settled even further over there.

and so on

When will Israel stop expanding into occupied territory?

When will it publish a map that defines the boundaries of Israel?

"Israel has been desperately trying to be accepted by her Arab neighbours since her inception. The Palestinian plight is a terrible, self-inflicted tragedy and if Israel were accepted it would disappear like a puff of smoke..."

Comments like this demonstrate why we need balanced reporting. Wthout it the victor writes the history.

PaulL

Your comments about Hamas are bigotted and don't reflect the new reality of a negotiated truce between Israel and Hamas. They also show you are not accepting that new reality: Israel is prepared to negotiate with terrorists. I wonder why the change?

Hamlet,

It’s very simple. Those countries which neighbour Israel and have accepted its right to exist have clearly defined borders. Egypt and Jordan, who both lost land to Israel after the six day war, have since regained it after they made peace with Israel.The fairly universally accepted border for Israel/Palestine is the green line with a few exceptions. It is that line which a Palestinian state could be formed behind, if they are prepared to stop the violence.

What expansion are you talking about specifically? Because building inside a preexisting settlement without expanding the borders of that settlement isn't actually expansion at all.

The suggestion that Hamas and other terror groups fight on because there is no clear border is fanciful in the extreme. If you bothered to have a look at Hamas’ charter you would see that their fight with Israel is for ALL of the land, not just their side of the green line. They want to ethnically cleanse Jews from the Middle East. Or at least that is what their charter says. Plenty of soft-lefties from the west will try and have you believe they don't actually mean what they SAY in the Charter, it's all just a miscommunication. What ROT.
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm

Keith,

It all very simple slagging me off as a bigot. But you don’t have any evidence for this view so it’s just name calling. It doesn’t actually advance the debate at all. I could just as easily say you’re a bigot and an anti-Semite.

Secondly my comments about Hamas were backed up with solid references and are borne out by any analysis of the situation.

When Israel unilaterally pulled out of the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Authority didn’t seek to start a Palestinian state, they used their freedom to enable more accurate and frequent attacks on Israel. It is a fact that at the time Hamas declared they had won a great victory and encouraged Palestinians to fight even harder.

TBC

cont,

>> “All the Palestinian factions are keen to take credit for the withdrawal which, they say, would not have taken place were it not for years of armed resistance.”
http://www.theage.com.au/news/middle-east-crisis/last-israeli-troops-pull-out-of-gaza-strip/2005/09/11/1126377206279.html

>> “Gaza withdrawal is a defeat for Israel, says PA foreign minister”
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1124590916759

Israel has negotiated with everybody and anybody who actually had the power to make peace, and many who did not. It shows that Israel is actually interested in peace. If only we could say that about Hamas.

Article 13, Hamas charter>> “ Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of [Hamas]. …Now and then the call goes out for the convening of an international conference to look for ways of solving the (Palestinian) question … , [Hamas] does not consider these conferences capable of realising the demands, restoring the rights or doing justice to the oppressed. These conferences are only ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Moslems as arbitraters. …There is no solution for the Palestinian question EXCEPT THROUGH JIHAD. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with.”

Article 11 Hamas charter >> “[Hamas] believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.”

BTW, they aren’t referring to their side of the green line here, just in case you had any doubts.

The latest ceasefire/truce is, in my opinion, a ruse to allow Hamas to rearm and re equip. Israel goes along with it for a number of reasons. Firstly Israel IS actually interested in peace and IS prepared to negotiate. And secondly, if, or more likely, WHEN, Hamas break the ceasfire, Israel will be SEEN to be the party actually interested in peace.

It looks like it won't be long.
see http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1000068.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4272883.ece

Paul L.

Jordan has regained the land that it lost in the Six Day War?

That must come as a surprise to all the inhabitants of Jersualem who were governed by Jordan. Didn't the Arab Brigade, a Joranan force, try to defend Jerusalem against Israeli attack?

Compare a map of Jordan in 1966 with that in 1968, and then today.

The West Bank was part of Jordan up to 5 June 1967, it isn't any more.

Do you still want to stand by your statement that: "Egypt and Jordan, who both lost land to Israel after the six day war, have since regained it after they made peace with Israel."

It should be axiomatic that one form of injustice and oppression . . . regardless of how, when or where it starts, or what excuse or justification has been given for it . . . eventually creates its own enemy . . . in an opposite form of injustice and oppression. Both sides in this issue have been constantly arguing over who "started" it . . . who struck the "first blow". In any such conflict over long periods of time, with conflicting moral claims over the same land by different people who both have historical ties to that land, one reaches a point where the question of who threw the "first blow" becomes irrelevant. Neither side is just going to voluntarily "go away", and, unless they WANT a massive tragedy of epic proportions on their hands, they will need to find a middle-ground where NEITHER side gets ALL of what they want. They both need to acknowledge the suffering of the OTHER, and collectively realize that the infliction of any NEW injustice by either side will simply perpetuate the same old cycle.
Unfortunately, whenever the official administrations of both sides in this conflict have managed to hammer out an agreement on any particular FACET of their differences, the rejectionist extremists on one side or the other always try to undermine or sabotage the agreement by engaging in some provocative act.
I personally am in despair over this issue, especially because I have friends on both sides. Until there is a transcendent change in the collective mindset, I cannot see any humane solution.