This comment is utterly asinine, particularly since it repeats a mistake that’s been repeatedly corrected.
As the guy who was one of the major authors of the agreement admitted, the Israelis have offered a just settlement and the PA rejected it and then started turning Jewish children into kosher hamburger.
To his credit he called the rejection “a crime” though not the turning Jewish children into kosher hamburger. That he praised and supported.
To further add to my question:
In Israel’s situation, would it be possible for them to eventually take all of Palestine’s land, and move the Palestinians onto predetermined reservations?
I believe the Palestinians area as insistent upon Jerusalem as the Israelis are.
But if Israel’s very existence is wrong, then there’s nothing to negotiate; Israel can hardly be expected to accede to its own dissolution. And if Israel as a Jewish-majority homeland ceased to exist, then you’d just be turning the clock back to the 1930s, when anti-Semitic riots tore what was then the British Palestine Mandate.
Lumpy,
The propaganda of both sides includes extermination of the other.
Gaza is very big business for Israel. The current incursion is a 5 billion dollar stimulous program for the Israeli economy.
Crane
Please source an example of Israeli government propaganda calling for the extermination of Palestinians.
This is known as the “broken window fallacy”.
Malthus,
The goal of the incursion was destruction of Hamas.
Actually it’s called economics.
Crane
I don’t think thats true. Jacob stole Esau’s birthright and Esau was so mad that Jacob fled. When when Jacob returned bearing gifts, Esau embraced his brother and Jacob kept the birthright.
I don’t know what will satisfy the palestinians but it is up to the Israelis to figure it out. The Palestinians outside of gaza seem ready to make a deal that includes the presence of a Jewish state. Why not make peace with them and let the gazans see how much better life is without war.
That was the goal of the unity government that Israel was so quick to reject.
Crane
No, it was not. The incursion had no such goal - evidenced by its limited nature and duration.
In any event “destriction of Hamas” is not “extermination”. The goal of Hamas, in contrast, is “extermination” of Israel and of the Jews living there, as evidenced by its Charter.
Yes, what you said was a common fallacy, well-noted in the field of economics. Your point being?
You simply spend to much time characterizing other people’s comments as asinine or stupid or foolish. But since there are no consequences I suppose there is no real incentive for you to be less insulting.
Your statement is stupid and makes everyone who reads it less infomred about the subject. Its spreads disinformation and displays an obvious bias towards the Israeli position. Its little wonder you insist that people read your little reading list of books before forming an opinion on Israel. Your post arrogantly and condescendingly assumes that a comment allegedly made by the saudi ambassador to the US should be the arbiter of what is fair to the Palestinians.
What Prince Bandar did or did not think about the deal offered at the Camp David Summit is not definitive of whether or not the deal offered a just resolution to the Palestinian problem. Why is it that Israel gets to insist that Israel be guaranteed a Jewish majority but Palestinians are not allowed to insist on a right of return?
And if Prince Bandar IS the arbiter of what is “just” then why isn’t Israel accepting the Arab Peace initiative? Is it possible that its because it includes a right of return? Why is it a “crime” for Palestinians to reject a proposal that doesn’t include a right of return but pefectly reasonable for Israel to reject one that does?
Here’s some reading for you so you can educate yourself a bit on the situation and history of the middle east so that you don’t make such silly ignorant statements.
ISTM that the Palestinians were willing to create a choice for Palestinians that would steer them away from choosing to return to Israel and limit the number of Palestinian immigrants to 150,000/year.
Israel seemed to think that restitution (of ~$3000/Palestinian or ~$6000/Palestinian refugee) and a total of 100,000 Palestinian immigrants should be enough to do the trick. Arafat disagreed and while others tried to convince him that this was the best deal he could get out of the Israelis, he was not obligated to accept what israel was willing to offer and its not clear that this was a just resolution.
Malthus,
The failure of Israel to destroy Hamas is not an indication of intent. Hamas won the conflict. They willl probably fire rodkets once in a while to make their point.
Your readiness with propagandist jargon makes my point. The value of Gaza is economic and propagandist…
Crane
I would be interested in seeing anything resembling proof for these assertions.
I fail to see any value whatsoever, to Israel, of the Gaza situation.
I have already addressed your “economic” argument - it is a classic example of the “broken window fallacy”. See link in previous post, which contains a (non-Israeli) description.
I am not aware I was using any “jargon”, whether “propagandist” or not. It seems to me you are simply, provably wrong; but then, you have advanced no evidence for any of your arguments, so it is difficult to tell.
Malthus,
Turn on the news. Hamas is still the governing body of Gaza and they are in negotiation with Israel. International pressure is likely to yield concessions to Hamas.
You need to educate yourself on the economic situation between Israel and Gaza.
Crane
The issue is not the fact that Israel did not destroy Hamas, but the assertion that the destruction of Hamas was the goal of the Israeli action in the first place - and beyond that, that the goals of Hamas and Israel are mirror-images - that each seeks to “exterminate” the other, as evidenced by their respective propaganda.
So far, you have proved none of what you have asserted, and my head spins at how fast you are moving your goalposts.
What “economic situation” are you claiming exists, that I need an “education” concerning?
Malthus,
Netanyahu is carefully rephrasing the goals of the invasion so he can claim ‘victory’. The present goal is the ‘de-militarization’ of Gaza. That will require the destruction of Hamas.
Surely you understand the economic realities. Elbit and Raytheon are using the Gaza rockets as a test facility for developing the Iron Dome system. Trade with Gaza is totally controlled to Israel’s advantage. All rebuilding activity in Gaza will be controlled by Israel to it’s economic advantage.
Nothing personal, only business.
Crane
Or, alternatively, smashing their infrastructure (which Israel has done) and making it difficult for them to re-arm (which Israel has done and is allegedly doing).
I have never seen anyone claim Israel is making a profit on Gaza rebuilding, let alone one that offset the costs of war. The notion that ‘testing the Iron Dome’ is a major source of profit strikes me as bizzare and absurd.
It is good advertising. 
Malthus,
Malthus,
Missile interception is an extremely difficult technology to develop. A test case of 3000 tactically fired, incoming rockets is a data gathering fiesta. It is heavilly funded by Israel and the US.
Crane
“Profit” usually means “getting money from some development”, not “pouring money into some development”. One needs evidence that Israel will recoup such costs and make a profit over and above these costs from the sale of the system to others.