falxori

I can't argue with your twisted views of things, you have the right to pick and chose the facts that suits your views and disregard the rest. some of your "facts" are indeed truth, but wildly taken out of context and lacking the big picture. to name a few: - the west bank belongs to the palestinians: how do you conclude that? because they were there first? wrong (unless you decide that history began 200 years ago). BOTH nations have a valid claim over this land. even if I believe these lands historically belong to Israel, i accept the fact that there is another nation here that calls these lands home. - the lands should be given back: why exactly? throughout history land was acquired by war and the winner usually kepts it. shall I remind you that it wasn't Israel who started these wars? anyhow, again, there is the right and the practical. Israel has accepted the fact that its better for it to give up these parts of the homeland for the sake of peace. sadly, every time Israel pulls back, it gets more violence (lebanon, Gaza, etc.) - Iran and Syria: no, they have not attacked Israel directly but in my book, sending others to fight for them (while blowing themselves up) is far worse. you ask why Iran must not get nukes? well, its not because it might attack Israel, its because at some point, when a nuke explodes in the middle of Manhattan, there will be no return address. - appartheid: again, funny... Israel has a population of 20% israeli arabs (basically palestinians with Israeli citizenship) who have the same rights BY LAW as I do (they are exempt from military service). they can elect and get elected like in any other democracy. if you refer to the palestinians in the west bank, well they are NOT israeli citizens, they are PA citizens. is their life hard? no doubt. but when you elect Hamas as your government you've brought it upon yourself. so let me get that straight, your solution for a terrorist group who uses whatever means it has to blow out civilians (on purpose) is to give them better weapons? i'm sure that would lead us to a better world... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

hmm lets see, sending human beings strapped with explosives sounds much better. and yes, both Syria and Iran are actively taking part in a military action against Israel. only difference is that they are sending others to die (Hezbollah, Hamas, etc). you keep saying that people should stick to the subject of the post but after reading your posts it seems that you are the one who is mostly busy spreading cheap propoganda and half truth... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

and as always, you pick and chose the facts that serve you and ignore the rest of the reality. - the examples you've given are not terrorism. burning cars, throwins stones and clashing with the police is something that happens all over the world. very different than going on a bus full of people and blowing it up, dont you think? - before you start googling for more "facts", yes, there have been cases where Israeli have killed Palestinians and there was even a small group that planned to plant a bomb in a school. luckily they were caught and were put behind bars. -the BIGGEST different is that SH funded the terrorists' families directly. the US aid for Israel goes to the state of israel, that have nothing to do with the extreme individuals you have described. btw, since you like quotes so much and always complaining about the aid Israel is getting, take a look at that: http://www.usip.org/pubs/usipeace_briefings/2006/0810_aid_palestine.html "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

err, the fact that one is and one isn't? "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

you are mixing one case of disputed municipal borders and a several criminal acts by individuals (which sadly exist on both sides.) isn't it nice that you pick and chose a few criminal (i say again, CRIMINAL) acts by individuals and display them as the official conduct? while on the other side, where there is an openly declared terroristic government, you insist that all they want is to sit down and talk peacefully? even the PA itself (Abu Mazen's government) see Hamas as a huge obstacle for any kind of negotiation. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

since you love facts so much, any chance you'll back this claim somehow? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

said, but did not do. as always. the fact that there were 14 conditions is not on dispute, your interpetation of their meaning is. once again, the problem is not these conditions, its the lack of will (and later on lack of ability) to control their own extremists that go wild whenever there is some progress in negotiations (remember the exploding busses of 95/96, the riots of 2000 and others?) again, its a point of view. I don't see Israel as "taking land", Israel has the same rights as the Palestinians (if not more). from my point of view , we are willing to make a huge sacrifice in order to get peace. to be very specific: Walls - purely a security measure that has proven itself completely. when they stop blowing up things, there will be no need for a wall (and it will be taken apart or moved when the final borders are set) Occupation - the result of jordan losing the lands to Israel in 1967. believe it or not, most Israeli have no desire to be a foreign ruller over the palestinians, but it seems they can't handle themselves (take Gaza as an example) oppression when terrorists hide themselves within the civilian population the result is civilians suffering. missiles - you say this as if Israel is just firing randomly into towns, and you know that's not true. blockades - once again, i'm very sad to see people waiting at roadblocks, but what would you do when they use every mean possible to smuggle explosives and suicide bombers (including children, ambulances, and recently 2 pregnant women). and yes, i'd rather 100% of them checked than the 1% of them blowing up busses. and even more sad is the fact that the other 99% don't show any desire to stop those 1% (same goes for electing Hamas for government) are you serious? "provoke" the palestinians? you pull out of Gaza and they come after you, then fight among themselves (while still firing at you) dragging themselves into a civil war, or is that Israel's fault too? how about Lebanon, did Israel "Provoke" Hizbollah into crossing the border, killing and kidnaping soldiers and launching thousands of missiles targeting INTENTIONALLY civilian towns? give me a break.... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

no, simply lack of time and too long of a post. again, even if your claims are true, they are not relevant because the very first (and mandatory) step of stopping the violence didn't take place. all the other conditions may be a starting point for negotiation, but you have to stop shoot first. well your bottom line is simply wrong. Israel has stated (and backed it up with actions) that it is willing for a huge compromise on the land. I wish the palestinians would take a break from violence and terror and see what happens, if when there is quiet, Israel will avoid peace, THEN i will have anger at my own officials. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

oh, but there is a huge difference. I can promise you that there will be no shooting what so ever on Gaza if there was no rockets and/or terror attacks coming out of there. can you say the same on the other side? when Israel pulled out of Gaza, and rockets kept flying across the border (more than they used to actually) Israel didnt respond for awhile, but there is so much you can take. indeed, how nice of them to "limit" their attacks... you dont negotiate with a gun to your head. I don't have any statistics but i can say "a lot and a lot". both are wrong and both are unacceptable. quite the opposite actually, i feel their suffering all too well. but their anger should be pointed towards their (elected) government since it is the cause for their suffering. Israel puts no pressure on Gaza now (there is no Israeli presence there at all) and the border crossings will (as they have been) open as long as things are quiet. sadly, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the rest of the nice people there, often try to blow up the exact same border crossing that is used to transfer supplies to Gaza. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

oh please... most Americans don't know/care what's going on beyond their back yards and American networks dont deal with international news too much. I was talking about the more international networks like BBC, CNN international (very different from what you see in the US, etc. maybe accepted by words. the FIRST thing that had to be done according to the roadmap is to completely dismantle the militias and cease all terror activities, they didnt even try to do that. i am not talking about who shot first. i'm talking about who kept shooting when one side stopped, huge difference. less talking, more actions. anyway, the only "good" thing about Hamas as opposed to arafat in his days is that Hamas is at least not pretending, they state exactly where they stand, and accepting peaceful ways is simply not it. I'm not sure but it doesnt matter since the whole border is open (if they can carry across missiles, i'm sure they can carry food as well. anyway, i don't have a problem for goods to be supplied through israel (as they run freely at quiet times) but i do have a problem with maintaining an open border with an enemy who is trying to kill you. if they chose the way of war, they will have to find a different way to supply with their people. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

I have to tell you that from my point of view, often CNN, BBC etc are biased, but to the other side. "victims" and poor civilians look better on screen. I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle but it is definitely not one sided towards Israel. your claim MIGHT have been acceptable had there been even one day of silence since the pull out. I completely stand by my claim that if no rockets/terror attacks come out of Gaza, there will be no Israeli activity there. we simply don't want to be there. and as for it being a "prison camp", first of all, the border with Gaza is open for supplies (unless they try to blow up the crossing which happens quite a lot). but if we take it to the extreme, why should it be open ? the PA led by Hamas has sworn to destroy Israel, why should it get supplies through it? they have a border with egypt, let them use it (again, this is not happening for humanitarian reasons) O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

a few mistakes in your "facts" well, that's an indication for your character, not for their right to live there imprisoned by who? there is a clear border between Gaza and Israel and i don't think israel should maintain an open border with an enemy (and at the moment they are an enemy). israel has continued to supply electricity and supplies through the border crossings (which doesnt really make sense when you get fired upon). the Gaza strip has a border with egypt to, why don't they use it? (oh right , they just use it to bring in tons of explosives...) you keep forgeting that the current ruler in Gaza has sworn to destory israel and has made endless attempts to do so. not allowing free transport of ships loaded with arms straight from Iran sounds very logical to me yes it is. Hamas refuses to accept any previous agreements, they continue to fire rockets across the border for no reason. indeed the US has, and the rest of the world as well. but Hamas never did. btw, as long as Hamas is a terrorist group being a parliment member doesnt grant you any immunity. but to your point, Israel hasn;t assassined any Parliment members, it has arrested a few but don't let the facts confuse you. indeed, there was a real hope here that the "trial" in gaza will prove that the Palestinians will take things seriously and start building a home for themselves rather than firing missiles across the border. supprt for additional withdrawls went down when it was obvious that when you leave the palestinians alone, they come after you seeking more violence. I was a huge supporter of pulling out of Gaza, but now that missiles fly out of there and Hamas has total control over everything, i think it might have been a mistake. true, and if you read carefully (especially in the road map) , the FIRST thing that needs to be done before any withdrawl is a complete and unconditional stop of all terroristic activity and gathering of the guns held by the numerous militias. this never happened. and another point. who is israel, the US, the quarter and the arab league is clear. but who is the "palestinian" side? is it fatah who is willing to talk, still holds armed militias but can't control any of the other militias? Islamic Jihad who refuses to accept anything but the destruction of Israel or Hamas who is pretty much the same and also controls the official PA at the moment? that was the problem from day one. one group signs treaties and the other continues to shoot at you (and Arafat admitted that he had kept the "violent" option handy on purpose, now it seemed to have backfired on his party) O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

if by Sabres you mean Israeli born, then not really. like anywhere in the world, there are citizens that have duties and rights and non citizens that have different duties and rights. about 20% of israeli citizens are arabs, they are equal by law, can elect and get elected etc. the only difference is that the arab minority is not required to serve in the army. there are a few benefits reserved for army veterans but minorities who do chose to serve do get them (I don't, for example, because i didn't serve because i'm diabetic). can i say that everything is perfect and the arab minority gets treated exactly the same? I would say no (and show me one place on earth where it is perfect). the important thing is that they are equal by law and they are citizens with the same rights as me. the Palestinians in the PA are not Israeli citizens. the two are completely different groups. one is israeli and one is foreign (was under Israeli, then under PA rule) O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

i see it as the only solution. both issues of water and movement are solveable (and there were actually initial discussions about them) the largest water deposit in the region is under the west bank area so if anything, the PA will need to share some of it with Israel. as for movement, the idea is to have a "safe" passage (road, railroad) between the Gaza strip and the west bank. its possible and its easy if that was the only problem. trust me, when THIS is the problem, it can be solved easily. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

errr, why ? the Galilee is not even in dispute and i'm not sure what do you mean by "Jordan". they will have the natural resources within their land like any other country. do you see me asking for 50% of the Iraqi oil? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

well, there were 10 US official investigations, backed up by recordings that clearly show that even the israeli rescue helicopters dispatched thought they were rescueing egyptians at first. friendly fire is very common in warfare, but some how i doubt there is any point in talking about it any more... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

hmm lets see... - Israel pulled out of Sinai , taking settelments down for peace with egypt. - Israel has returned some land to Jordan (they didnt want the west bank back, and i can see why,,,) - Israel has transferred lands to the PA based on the oslo accords so they could start to develop self rule - after seeing that there is no one to negotiate with, Israel has pulled out of Gaza completely , forcing 15,000 people to leave their home. (we didnt expect peace, but we were hoping for some quiet, yet we got missiles....) i think that should be enough indication. i repeat my question. if you and I agree on something. then you say you will not honor thins agreement and that you don't even want to talk to me and recognize my right to exist, what's the point in talking about new agreements? first honor the old agreements, then we can talk about new things. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

History shows otherwise. Israel has taken down settlements for peace before. you must understand that these lands are considered "home" to us just as much as they do for the Palestinians. what you call "stolen", I call liberated. yet i'm willing to give these lands for some peace and quiet (and the majority of Israelis think the same) it won't solve anything. there was war and people were forced to move. almost a million arab jews were kicked out of their homes and found refuge in the newly founded Israel. my family had lost several houses in Hebron (during the 1930's riots) after living there for hundreds of years, and I dont expect to get them back. 2 states for 2 nations, the jewish people living in what will be Palestine will move to Israel and the palestinians will build a homeland for themselves. you are still ignoring the very basic point that the current PA (or what's left of it) is refusing to accept signed agreements, what's the point in having new ones? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

not with these huge differnces and small land mass. and yes, 20% of israel are arab israelis, they are israeli citizens with all the rights involved (although they don't have to serve in the army) knowing the situation, 99% of them would rather live in israel as a minority than move to a palestinian state. i just dont see any one good reason to force two nations to live as a single state. let each have their own homeland , side by side O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Israel was founded as the (well needed) home of the jewish people and i see no problem with that. you are starting with this B/S again. no one in israel thinks they are any better than anyone else. take your inferiority complex elsewhere as always you are mixing two things. Israeli arabs - have full israeli citizenship and are equal by law (beside the fact that they do not serve in the army) palestinians - they are not israeli citizens , they are citizens of the PA. maybe if instead of firing rockets over the border the PA would take care of them, their situation would be better. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

why would you want to put twho different nations with a different culture, language, religion and life style in a single state? what's the sense in that? i can think of many "attempts" in history to join two nations like that (czechoslovakia, yugoslavia and even the netherlands). some are still holding, some seperated quietly and some ended in bloody civil wars. two nations, that are not mixed into one another two much. they both think all of the land is theirs, but they will have to accept that they need to share it. and I say that as an Israeli. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

actually, more than one side want them started. there is nothing new in this initiative and its very clear to everyone that the final borders will be around the 1967 line. the two major open issues are jerusalem (solvable in a creative way) and the right of return which is a big issue (dont forget there were refugees on both sides). the only factor currently refusing to sit and talk is the palestinians (led by Hamas). as long as they refuse to accept exisitng treaties, what's the point in signing new ones? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

you mean the US ship that was mistaken for an egyptian ship during the war and was attacked by the Israeli airforce? this was investigated to death and was accepted as a mistaken identity (very common in wars) beside a few who think Israel attacked the ship intentionally. what does it have to do with the peace between Israel and Egypt? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

and here we start with the lies again... if there were no "israelis" because there was no israel until 1948 then how can there be "palestinians" if there is no (and never has been) "palestine"? many many of the jews that "invaded" where refugees from Arab states that were kicked out with violence, living everything behind. they hate "us" because they are brain washed by their leaders. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

maybe if some day rockets will stop flying out of Gaza, you will be proven wrong. let me put it in simple words. Israel controls its side of the border with Gaza and it has the right to decide what crosses this border. the gaza strip has a very long border with egypt as well, but it seems most of the things crossing that borger have a trigger on them... i have no intention of starving the gaza strip, but if the palestinians voted for a government that wants war with israel, how can they expect israel to provide them with supplies? btw, the ban of the PA was now lifted since now there is a government without Hamas (at least in the west bank) so let me tell you why. for once, it wasn't hezbollah, but palestinian groups within lebanon. in case you dont know, there have been bloody clashes lately between the lebanese government and these groups. they are simply trying to drag israel into that mess (same reasons missiles were flying out of gaza while the Palestinians were fighting amongst themselves. open your eyes. not once have they tried the peaceful way. every time you give them a chance it blows in your face. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."