Frank Collins

I am here to help. What do you not understand ?

Lets take it from the top buddy. The guys that are today living in Saudi Arabia , Afghanistan, Turkey, Syria, Jordan etc, have a continuous un-interrupted history with those lands. These people are not transplants nor did they purchase stolen property and assets. Hence while it is very true that somewhere in between they reverted to Islam, but legally, that does not impact their ownership of the land they posses. The law allows us to change religions. We do not have to loose ownership of our assets when we switch our religions. The people of Mecca, Saudi Arabia (for example) were not required or expected to give up the ownership of their property and land to People of Bali, Indonesia (just an example) because they reverted to Islam back in the days of Prophet Mohammed (pbuh).

As opposed to that Palestinians had their land stolen and then sold for peanuts to alien transplants. This is how the world sees it and this is how the world has recorded it.

This is not about religions as much as it is about ownership of real estate (and water and dignity). I hope that this little discussion has made matter clear enough for you.

Frank Collins

The original owners are living there and owning it too. It is Saudis who are living and owning Saudi Arabia. It is the Turks who are living in and owning Turkey etc.

When the cold war started, Israel found itself fortunate to be at the right place at the right time. Read John Mearsheimer (U Chicago) & Steven Walt’s (Harvard) white paper on AIPAC/Israel and you will understand. If Israel had not existed, the western world would have had to fabricate some other beach head in the Middle East to guard its national interest (Oil) against the cold war opponents. But today the Cold War is over, and hence Israel finds itself kind of unneeded. Therefore the need to keep USA, by hook or crook, perpetually at war. The way things are progressing, it appears that USA, the new Rome, will one day wake up, like the old Rome did, and realize that Israel was more trouble than useful. It will do then what Rome did back then.

I would like history to not repeat itself. I would like all to persevere with dignity and freedom. No I do not seek Israel’s destruction. I do not believe that the present Israelis should be made to bear the burden of the crimes of their ancestors. We all can only be responsible for our own actions. But the indiscriminate killing of the Palestinians and their suffering has to end.
I understand you desire for stability in the region. Nonetheless stability without justice is a myth. It is not sustainable. At the end of the day, stability can only come as a consequence of a just solution to the present crisis.

If you ask me where from here, I would say, one country with equal rights, equal vote, equal justice and equal freedom.

You know, everyone insists that Israel has some sort of strategic importance to the US, but I'll be hanged if I can figure out what it is.

I think we should support national governments that govern their people well and support international stability and commerce. In the vicinity of Palestine, that means Lebanon (don't laugh, they're trying), Egypt (at least they're stable), Israel and Jordan.

These countries have generally worked out their differences and are capable of living in peace. But Syria, Gazastan, Fatahland and Hezballaland are not peaceful and I do not approve of them. I don't care what their issues are, terrorism is the terrorist's fault, not the fault of the guy who hurt his feelings.

I really thought the Unoccupation of Gaza would make a positive diferrence, but I don't think it has.

So what sort of resolution would make YOU feel happy? Israelis peacefully living within the 1967 borders while their friendly neighbors live in Palestine next door? The Jews all emigrate to Argentina (or the Moon or wherever) and United Palestine 100% Muslim?

What is the best way to get there from here? Why do you want the US to stop giving the Israelis money? Do you think they need it to maintain their edge and that without it the country will fall?

Please do not lump Spain with Israel. Your point vis a vis Spain is valid and accepted (in a limited way, I will explain more if you insist). Nonetheless Israel is a totally different matter. This unjustifiable and atrocious occupation has to end ( in accordance to UN resolutions) so that, not just the Palestinians but the entire world can rest easy. Perhaps this is the only way that the occupation of my country (i.e. USA) will also end. Unfortunately the Palestinian/Israel problem is sucking away my tax dollars, compromising the values of my USA (the very values that made USA a great nation). I want to travel the world once again with my head held high. I want to sleep once again without fear of terrorism. My country is my pride and my joy and it makes me unhappy seeing its reputation tarnished. I think we have a shot at repairing the damage once the Israeli/Palestinian problem is over.

Saladin was by all accounts an honorable man.

I don't hate Muslims, I just get tired of the double standard. Islamists (who are allegedly not mainstream Muslims) seem to think it was OK for the Muslim armies to conquer Iraq and Syria and Palestine and Egypt and Algeria and so on. But it’s not OK when it happens to them. Fine, it happened. One percent to all the lands conquered by Muslims and converted to their religion have reverted to their original religions (Spain and Israel). So what? It's just a scratch. Stop acting like it's a stab wound to the heart.

Redrum:

Bud

When the Zionist first started coming to Palestine during the British mandate, it was the Palestinians (Christians as well as Muslims) who helped them settle. Little did they know what was in store for them. Also note that the wars you are talking about were provoked and started by Israel for the purpose of capturing more land. Even before those wars they made an attempt to take over the Suez Canal itself. Hence it was Israel which poisoned the neighborhood not the Arabs.

Please don't once again turn this into a religious issue by making statements had have no bearing in factual history. Once you look at issues via the prism of facts and apply context you will find that it is very malicious to make the statements that you make. I can tell you that for a Muslim (I am not talking about self proclaimed Muslims) justice and integrity is an issue that cannot be compromised. The great warrior, Sallauddin ably demonstrated Islam's propensity to forgive and forget and be peaceful by giving safe passage to all those he captured when he took over, take a guess, ......... , Jerusalem. If what you say was correct then how do you explain Sallauddin's take over of Jerusalem ? In fact history tells us that it was the Crusaders who did the very things you mention, when they took over Jerusalem. Hence I ask you to calmly look at facts. It is easy to hate, but check and see if this hate is warranted.

Hey, Shaan:

I didn't rob, anybody, dude. I'm an American and I was 2 years old in 1967. The Palestinians robbed themselves of the opportunity to live in peace with their new neighbors. My understanding is that the whole stupid Zionism thing started back when the Turks ran Palestine and that the Jewish immigrants bought their land from the Ottoman government. Then a bunch of wars happened and the Arabs tried to kill off the Joos, who fought back and won. When the Joos won the war, THEN they took the land. Mohammad said that it’s OK to take loot and plunder in battle, so I would assume that any good Muslim would agree that the Israelis had a right to take the Arab land. And chop of the men’s heads and “marry” their widows. Oh wait, in your worldview it’s OK for MUSLIMS to do that to JEWS, but not the other way around.

By the way, I think both sides are idiots. When I was in school we had a couple of “cultural ambassadors” from Israel come and speak to our class about the wonderful Israeli culture. It all sounded very nice. So then when question-and-answer time came, somebody asked why it was OK to take over Palestine and he pointed out that Yahweh gave the land of Canaan to Moses and his tribe about 3,000 years ago and directed him to evict the inhabitants and take it over. So that was what they were supposed to do. I don’t think it occurred to him that the rest of us don’t care about some desert nomad’s Bronze Age propaganda and that in the modern world, it’s considered bad to do that.

Redrum

Simply put Fatah is just doing Israel's dirty work. Muslims recognize that, you refuse to acknowledge it becuase it suits your purposes.

Your rationale for accepting the overturn of election results can be used to legitimize child abuse also ("becuase it has happened before it must be allowed and accepted"). Fortunately moral conscience still exists. We still know the difference between right and wrong.

Are you sure you want to call people who's land, water, dignity and life you have robbed, beggars? Any help the west provides can only be seens as a from of just compensation.

Annonymous

I happy to know that you have made some progress from the days when Israel claimed that it was situated on "a land without people for people without land". Atleast now you recognize that Palestinians always existed.

Mass,

Your argument assumes:

1) There was a sovereign state in place in 1947 prior to the UN's partition plan (and that Israel's being re-established is a "crime").
2) Arabs alone have historic legitimacy in the region.

Both points could not be more incorrect. The UN was asked to address the coming end of the British Mandate. Given the irreconcilable differences between that area's Jewish and Arab residents, the UN came to the conclusion that a partition plan was necessary. No other alternative was viable. Previously, the Peel Commission had reached exactly the same understanding.

In addition, historical literature that predates the 20th century and archaeological artifacts confirm a historic Jewish presence in the region. Hence, the Jewish people have a historic claim that is equal to that of the Arabs. A solution that seeks to treat the historic claim of one side or the other as superior is bound to fail.

In the end, no "legitimate country" was "removed from the world map." The UN tried to create two legitimate countries for two peoples who possess equal legitimacy in the region. To try to strip one people or the other of their historic legitimacy would be the truly "heinous crime."

The whole world will never see peace as long as the crime of the 20th century is not handled adequately.A legitimate country was removed from the world map to be replaced BY an illegitimate country with new immigrants from all over the world.Palestinians,being moslems or christians,were kicked out into refugee camps to be replaced by jews from Europe,Russia,Ethiopia etc.
Repercussions of this heinous crime are behind all turmoil and bloodshed in the Middle East including Iraq,Lebanon,Palestinian occupied territories,Syria,Iran etc.
The unending support of US to Israel is encouraging the latter to reject all UN resolutions on the Palestinian Issue including Resolution 194 which calls for the return of all Palestinian refugees home.It is time for the US admin to wake up to the real cause of all problems in the area and to change its foreingn policy categorically

I agree with the article that this Palestinian blunder has handed Israel an opportunity. Indeed, it is in Israel's interest to foment the split between Gaza and the West Bank to whatever extent possible.

Noah makes an excellent point in noting that the territories would likely split anyway because "throughout history, geographically divided states never stay unified." Pakistan and Bangledesh, which split after being separated by Hindu India seems the best example of this. Moreover, this fact casts doubt on the viability of "Palestinian" nationism and the prospect of a Palestinian state.

The connection between the West Bank and Gaza has always been the defeat in 1948 and the refugees that war created. Residents in both territories had a common goal in reclaiming the land lost to what became Israel. Any form of Palestinian nationalism therefore must be committed to this goal - and hence the destruction of Israel, at least in its present form as a Jewish state. This is also why the right of return is critical to the Palestinian cause, and will never be bargained away.

However, since Israel is almost certainly not going anywhere, we must ask whether a Palestinian state in only the West Bank and Gaza would be viable. History suggests it would not, and current events seem to bear this out. So, if Israel cannot be shoved aside in favor of a Greater Palestine, and if the West Bank and Gaza alone cannot adhere together in a unified state, what is to be the fate of the "Palestinians"?

One possibility would be permanent Israeli occupation, but this seems both unlikely and undesirable. At a point, Israel will have to surrender what it has left of its territorial gains from 1967. However, if the occupations that began in '67 are to be reversed, the obvious solution would be a return to the situation before the Six Day War. Prior to that War, the West Bank belonged to (Trans)Jordan and Gaza belonged to Egypt.

The current split between the West Bank and Gaza raises the possibility of these territories being returned to their former owners. Since Israel already has peace treaties with both Jordan and Egypt, it would much prefer dealing with them to any Palestinian entity or entities. Even if the territories are not formally integrated into their former countries, they still can be ruled indirectly, similarly to the way Syria formerly maintained control of Lebannon.

Its hard to say why, for example, Gaza should become and independent country instead of part of Egypt. The Sinai Peninsula did not become an independent country when Israel relinquished it. If Israel withdraws from Golan, it won't became an independent country. The only reason for keeping Gaza out of Egypt and the West Bank out of Jordan is common identity as Palestinian. If they can't maintain political unity that identity is likely to disappear, forever precluding a Palestinian state.

It is a sad situation that both Israelis and Palestinians have been fighting and killing each other for more than 60 years now and unfortunately, no light could be seen at the end of this dark tunnel.
The geography and demography of the area that extends between River Jordan and the Mediterranean indicate the complexity of the current situation. Every party is trying hard to grab by mere force what is in the hand of the other. Many wars have been staged and thousands of innocent lives have been shed for this purpose.
Nowadays, almost everybody is talking about setting up two countries for both Israelis and Palestinians. This simply means that the land of historical Palestine will be divided between the two parties, Israelis and Palestinians.
I doubt very much that either party will be satisfied with his share of the cake. There are chronic problems like Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, borders, water resources that nobody on earth can sort out to the satisfaction of both parties.
The short vision of setting up two separate states could sow the seeds for more bloody conflicts in the future. Nobody can guarantee or secure permanent and lasting peace under this proposition.
A far better viable solution that should satisfy both parties and put an end to all complicated issues is available. It is the establishment of one country for all on the whole territory of historical Palestine that includes the West Bank and Gaza besides Israel. Jerusalem will remain united for both parties, settlements could remain where they are now provided an appropriate compensation is made to the original land owners, natural geographical borders are already in place for the whole country and the issue of refugees could be settled by allowing refugees to return home and to be compensated fot the 60 years of misery they spent at refugee camps. All citizens of the new state, PALISRA (Palestine +Israel), would enjoy equal rights and bear the same responsibilities.
The newly established state, PALISRA will emerge as a prosperous and safe country within a very short period of time, and citizens of this state will learn how to respect and even cherish each other. PALIRA will become a key player and an integral part of the Middle East as yesterday's enemies will become today's friends and allies for ever.

I do not blame the Palestinians who voted for Hamas. It was mostly a protest vote aginst Israel obstructing the peace process by building more settlements and making Palestinian lives miserable with checkpoints and general harassment. It also was a protest against the corrupt and ineffective Fatah under Arafat. However, the solution is not to support Hamas in its bloody coup in Gaza, and to encourage it to have a fundamentalist extremist regime.

Do we want a Taliban regime in Palestine? I was born to Christian parents in Jerusalem. What rights would I have under a Hamas regime? They already have burned a church and a seminary in Gaza, and attacked people using the Internet!

I want to see practical proposals for solving the national political problems and for protecting civil rights from Hamas supporters, and not more slogans and empty words. Can they deliver? I doubt it. I believe the solution is to reform Fatah, as Abbas has been trying to do and as Fayyad can do. Let us support them in their efforts and stop trying to go backwards to the status quo that was leading to more misery for the Palestinans.

Shaan, Old Buddy!

Yes, the violence is self inflicted. The Palestinians are doing it themselves. With their own machine guns and their own trigger fingers. Umm, I can’t explain it more clearly than that. I want to, but I just can’t.

Rejecting a democratic election because an extremist Islamic party won isn’t unprecedented. Algeria did the same thing about 10 years ago. So did the Turks and, I believe, the Egyptians.

The US and EU aren’t obligated to give the Palestinians money. When you give money to a poor person it’s called charity. Charity IS an obligation, but there are limits. If a beggar spits on you and then demands a hand out, my guess is that you will push him aside and walk on by.

The Israelis aren’t obligated to be nice, either. If you promise to kill somebody and then shoot lots of missiles at them, they might not want to be your friend. Really. And don’t tell me that they deserve to be killed because they immigrated here so it’s wrong for them to fight back.

And yes, the occupation of Gaza has ended, the Israelis left. A couple of years ago. Are they free? Well, no, they are ruled by Hamas.

If there were any evidence that the Israelis will trade land for peace, then yes, this is self-destructive. However, I think the Palestinians might as well have a crack at self-governance, as it's the only one they'll ever have.

Redrum

Even after being aware that the election outcome was rejected by the world and even after knowing about the counter productive isolation of Hamas, to look at this "only" as a self inflicted violence is to defy intelligence. Do you really believe that Abass' action was independent of the carrots and sticks from USA/Israel?

Also it is news to me that the occupation has ended and the Palestinians are free?

What's so bad about dividing Palestine into the West Bank and Gaza? It's not like they would have stayed together anyway - throughout history, geographically divided states never stay unified.

This way, the West Bank can get independence first, and then Gaza will (hopefully) follow. If they feel like reuniting after that, they can.

What's the worry?

Ms. Andoni wrote, "By forming a new cabinet, on his part, President Mahmoud Abbas has effectively institutionalized a dangerous and unprecedented division between the West Bank and Gaza. The U.S. and Israeli announcement to back Abbas and tighten the noose on the Gaza Strip does nothing to promote a peace process but everything to accelerate the fragmentation of the Palestinians. The idea of talking to the 'West Bank leadership' and isolating Hamas is preposterous. Yet it is in the hands of the Palestinians to take responsibility for the blunders of the past year."

The "division" is only meant to be temporary. The new Palestinian Government continues to assert jurisdiction over the Gaza Strip, though the Hamas takeover precludes an exercise of that authority for now.

The two-entity approach makes sense. It allows diplomatic efforts to be focused where progress is feasible. To date, Hamas has refused to accept the Madrid Quartet's principles (renunciation of violence, acceptance of Israel's right to exist, and respect for existing diplomatic agreements).

The Madrid Quartet's principles, far from being unreasonable, are based on the United Nations Charter. Article 2 (3) states, "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and. justice, are not endangered." Article 2 (4) adds, "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

The Hamas Charter contains exactly the opposite principles. It rejects peace initiatives and seeks Israel's destruction. Article 13 states, "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement." Article 11 declares, "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up."

The bottom line is that a two-state solution (Israel + Palestine) is irreconcilable with the Hamas vision of a single Arab state. Moreover, the differences between Hamas' position on violence and objective of Israel's elimination and the UN Charter's principles of non-violence and mutual recognition are unbridgeable.

Returning to the status quo ante would freeze the political situation. Taking a new approach that would pursue progress where it is possible (the West Bank's relatively moderate secular leadership) and then leave the option open for the Gaza Strip to eventually enter the framework or to be absorbed in a state that would arise on the West Bank would be better. At least, it would offer some possibility of advancing toward a peaceful solution of the historic Palestinian-Israeli dispute. The status quo ante, on account of Hamas' rejectionism, would be a dead-end.

Lamis:

It appears to me that Gaza is not an "occupied territory". The Israelis left the area. Nor is it under seige. Gaza shares an extended border with Egypt.

All during the Israeli occupation of Gaza, everyone said that the violence was due to the Israeli occupation. I believed them. So when the Israelis left, I thought peace had a chance. But everyone was lying. The occupation ended, but not the violence, so the problem must lie in the Palestinians themselves, perhaps in their poisonous ideology of hate.

Oh, by the way, now the wise political commentators are telling me that the Israelis caused the violence by unoccupying Gaza. I've decided they must be fools and will ignore them henceforth.

As for the incursions you mentioned, it sounds to me as though you have almost convinced yourself that the Palestinians are not the aggressors. It seems as though you think that responding to rocket attacks, bombings, and other acts of war is somehow out of line. As though it is immoral for mere Joos to object the Muslim violence.

The palestinian people voted for a government of hatred.

What did they think would happen after that?

The palestinian people voted for a government of hatred.

What did they think would happen after that?

the fact that hamas is islamic does not matter. that they call for israel's destruction is the critical issue. recognize israel and the world will recognize you

In politics, reviews don't make sense -- previews do. It is all fine to argue about what has happened in Gaza; it is quite another to predict what's gonna happen now.

Before the last elections when Hamas wrested power, the world knew what was going to happen. Only the US administration (and its serfs elsewhere) were loathe to admit it. After the elections, Condy Rice said something like... we didn't see it coming. I wonder why these people never see anything coming. They didn't see 9/11 either. And they didn't foresee the Gaza takeover by Hamas either.

Yes Ms Andoni, Abbas has fragmented Palestinians more than they already were. But what Abbas has also done is negate the fact that it were the people who had voted for Hamas. And Western governments have done likewise. The same people who talk big about democracy and all that, can't seem to digest the fact that Hamas militants were democratically elected.