[ExiledInTaiwan]

For the others in varying degree, Zionism was seen as a necessity for Jews. I was surprised, for instance, when Sternhell during the final session admitted that a grave injustice was committed against the Palestinians, and that the essence of Zionism was that it was a movement for conquest, then went on to say that it was a "necessary" conquest.

This about sums up the whole thing. These historians have proven beyond a doubt the state of Israel was founded on killing, burning and displacement on a wholesale basis, but their personal bias and prejudices are there after the glaring evidence is staring them in the face.

"The conquest was necessary!"

Indeed!

[Nachum]

It is hard to take Edward Said seriously, as it is hard to take Benni Morris seriously. All of them come from hardened ideological perspectives. They simply represent their point of view and little else. The hope for an egalatarian democracy in the holy land is a futile dream. There is neither trust, nor is their good will.

However the people of the holy land came to be, whatever their religion or background, there are claims of violence and counter claims of injustice. Nothing will never satisfy the combatants. Nothing will satisfy the critics either. All that is left is war.

Neither Arab or Jew will compromise, and only war and the ability to win it remains. The Arabs have never stopped dreaming of the destruction of any organized Jewish presence. The Jews have never stopped dreaming of their national homeland.

If this sounds fatalistic, it is.