As for your arguments in your written paragraph 2 - I believe you are arguing for points I made my reply.
The Arabs have not stopped their belligerency. Israel has been negotiatibng with the Arabs, who have not fulfilled their end of 242. I am fully aware that Israel has returned over 91% of the land. That is not the issue at hand. I also realize that Israel uprooted settlements in Egypt.
I don't think I'm blaming the settlers per se, but any settler who goes into the territories, except for the settlements along the Green Line, had to realize that one day, Israel would have to enforce 242 unless Israel planned to annex the territories. Since Israel has not annexed the territories, the settlers, in the hopes of building a Greater Israel and contrary to 242, moved into a place where, one day, they would be forced to leave by their government's complaince with 242, or the fact that the Arabs don't want them. This is nothing new to the settlers. This isn't being "sprung" on them. They knew these realities when they went into the territories. It's the pumpkin hour...unfortunately.
Yes, Likud encouraged them to go...but the settlers aren't deaf, blind, or dumb. They realized what they were doing. They realized that this day might come if Labor or Likud decided to negotiate peace for land.
If Sharon believes that the Palestinian state would be a bed of terrorism, then it is up to Sharon not to negotiate until he finds a partner for peace. The Bush administration did not make Sharon deal with Arafat. If Mazen proves to be Arafat in a suit, I do not believe that the Bush administration will make Sharon deal with him.
Perhaps, you need another argument besides the tired old chestnut of American culpability in forcing Israel to do what Israel doesn't want to do. I really don't think that dog hunts anymore.
I wasn’t disagreeing with you, though I don’t think 242 is the reason for the withdrawal. IMO it’s the first stage of an essentially unilateral solution to the conflict, in the event that a “peace partner” doesn’t emerge. Presuming the Palestinians refuse to disarm the terror groups, I’d expect to see the delineation of defacto borders in the West Bank as well, accompanied by a similar withdrawal. As to the US, I don’t think we’re pressuring Israel in Gaza, that’s essentially an Israeli initiative, though I’m sure GWB is pleased. My point was that the fact that the new state must be Judenrein argues against the probability that a successful “democratic” state will emerge, defining “democratic” as preferably pro-Western but at least non-expansionist, rather than the terrorists get to elect a terrorist government.