And you wrote ... As opposed to the peace and popularity that Israelis enjoy now?
It might be more precise to say ...
The wall will mean war, a war that will have many more Americans rooting for Palestineans because of the wall.
You wrote ... If the wall is such a bad thing for Israel, then why are those who have sworn to destroy Israel universally opposed to it?
You've assumed that those sworn to destroy Israel are always wrong.
Ditto that regarding your comment ... When you find yourself on the same side of an issue as mass murderers and terrorists, it's not a bad idea to wonder why you are agreeing with them.
You wrote ... By comparing this wall with the Berlin Wall, which was built to keep people in, not keep them out, you are confusing defense with oppression.
There is no confusion over the fact that walls preventing the movement of people generally work to the detriment of those who build them. The oppressive Berlin Wall revealed the inherent evil in Communism, and the defensive Maginot wall revealed stupidity within those Western Europeans that depended on it.
And now we have the prospect of a Palestine Wall, a wall that is "defensive" to Israelis and "evil" to Palestineans, an Israeli Wall that might both betray (as in Berlin) and defeat (as in Maginot) Israel.
Walls can start wars, they will not prevent them.
"When goods cross borders, armies will not." --- Frederic Bastiat
Quotation source reference ... from Lawrence Reed's statement in center column on page four of linked (click here) document.
Frederic Bastiat is the 19th century French author of "Economic Sophisms," in which certain governmental actions (walls, tariffs, make-work projects, protectionism, etc.) are shown to be absurd. The famous line is probably in "Economic Sophisms," but I haven't found it yet.
Having presented your case against the wall, what do you propose instead?