[Pearls Before Swine]

Deals only work with honorable men. The Syrians have acted brutally within Syria; what makes anyone think a peace bought by transfer of strategic high ground would be lasting?

I am aware of a recent comment by an Israeli general that the Golan is not essential to Israel's security. I find that incredible myself, but perhaps someone with a more on-the-ground viewpoint could enlighten me.

[American in Israel]

The Golan is a high mountain plain between Syrias invasion route and Israel's water supply. Strategically it is the single most important terrain in all of Israel. The mountain range drops off into a extremely steep valley rift between it and the Jordan border so there is a natural cut off to the west flank of Israel. If Syria had the Golan it not only would have the high ground bordering the water supply at its feet, but could build a bridge that would allow it to threaten the entire Jordan Valley.

Having the Golan between Israel and Syria defends not only the water but the easy passage into Israel's entire east flank. The mountain range continues all down the east flank of Israel on the Jordanian side of the border. These mountains are so steep that they are a natural Tank barrier. The ONLY way Syria can invade with tanks is to have the Golan.

So to say it no longer is strategic is simple bullshirt. One look at a topo map blows that out of the water.

When Syria had the Golan before it became nothing but a gigantic bunker complex that they used to shell Israel from DAILY.

This Israeli General may think it is not important, but Syria obviously knew what to do with it. Syria knew the Golan was the door in the gateway between Syria and Israel and acted accordingly.