Replies

Don't worry. What the Bush Administration means by "restraint" is "don't trigger a nuclear war in the Middle East."

You may want to recheck your program. Bush Admin has not been a great friend to Israel. They came up with Roadmap to Peace, in which Israel had to give up several sections developed land to the Palis. A couple of years ago Bush Admin was insisting that -- get this -- Israel sell weapons to Palis. And of course, Bush Admin has been opposed to Israel's building a protection wall. Recall, too, that each time Sharon confronted Arafat, Bush Admin called for Israeli restraint, while continuing to send Arafat $Millions each year.

No, I would disagree with that assessment, and I know Prime Minister Olmert does too in terms of giving up land. What is more important than land is the survival of the Jewish people, and demarcated, defendable borders without large, hostile populations inside is the smart move. Sometimes Israel's divided politics make it harder for Israelis to see the sensible move.

If you notice, the new borders will include most Jewish settlements; only the outlying, harder-to-defend ones, like Gaza, were gone.

I don't think the results of negotiations would have led to a Kumbaya scene, but rather, a grudging peace. But it was worth a try. It failed, but after this is over, there's still going to be people having to live near each other.

If the Palestinians hadn't been such blithering idiots, it could have worked. It is the tragedy of history that the listened to their fellow Arabs and continued to be their tool rather than strike out and be a prosperous partner of Israel.