Look at the source you're using, dude! Prior to the 1970s there WAS NO PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT. I know...I just spent an entire year writing a thesis on the Six Day War, which I handed in this afternoon. In 1967, there was not a single mention of the word Palestinian. This is because the West Bank was in Jordanian hands and the Gaza Strip was in Egyptian hands. Israel tried to give them back in the Allon Plan after the war, but neither the Jordanians nor the Egyptians would take them! Get your facts straight.

EDIT: It's the continued use of remarks like the one above that keep forcing Jews to remind people.

[quote=DeepIron]To get into that you have to know the history of Israel. Have you read any of the history?

Forget it. I can't discuss this topic any longer without injecting a personal bias into it...

Live long and prosper...

Thousands of years? Please, they are mostly related to the Arabs conquerors. Many arabs declared to be palestinians after -48 to get in to the "refugee" camps were international aid was delivered. Its the Jews that have been there thousands of years.
There was no Palestine state when Israel declared independence and not after it, Egypt and Jordan took the arab territories and waged war from them.
Now that their genocide plans have failed every time they cry for sympathy, i dont have much, not abandoning their plans tough.
I expect nothing from them, but i except the civilized world not to give up to them.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0421/mideast.html

Hmm.

Should have taken his passport when we had the chance! Dammit!

The same day Carter reported that Mamas told him they were vready to accept Israel'S right to exist, german media quoted a spokesman of Hamas denying that Hamas has said that, instead they are ready to have a ceasefire for around ten years if Israel withdraws to the borders of '67, but he pointed out that they will not recognize Israel. Not now, not then.

My impression of it: words are cheap, good ol' Carter read to much into it this time, and in the ME, words come and go with the wind, like the seasons. And an agreement with an organization like Hamas I would not bet my life on anyway, at no cost.

Hamas rejects Israeli recognition

"We have offered a truce if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, a truce of 10 years as an alternative to recognition."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm

:rotfl:

Well you cant take it seriously either.:doh:

This isnt peace, its a truce, and they have offered that before. They just want 10yrs to rearm and grow in strength, the Israelis would be crazy to agree on this.

I would say its a realistic wiew and yours is idealistic.

What is there to discuss? Its not in anyones interest but Hamas. Or do you see some possible way to turn this against Hamas? Then i would like to hear it.

Ha, strange, really - down to the word selection and constellation of words: exactly the same answer I was about to post. Only possible that I would have produced one or two typos.

Does anyone else understand at all that solving the Palestinian question would cut down on terrorist attacks on US interests around the world?

If the US took a major role in finally getting the Palestinians an Independant State,itwould take away a major reason for various terrorist organizations to attack the US and make it harder for Al Quaeda to recruit. They wouldn't be able to use the "plight of the Palestinians" as a recruitment tool any more.

It is in the USA's best interests to see a Palestinian State be created and if that means talking to the political wing of Hamas then so be it.

Your logic is flawed, it would be a victory that would bring more supporters for Hamas and all terrorists.:nope: There is no sense in making truce with them and "peace" has too big of a price, the end of Israel. What would be next, Califate of Spain?


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/wo...ref=middleeast

they can have him