Replies

That's right, but it's in Israel's interest to create a Palestinian state on the West Bank. The 1967 borders won't work, but something will.

Decide what that is, build a wall to separate it, if necessary for security, and move on.

At some point, even the Palestinians will realize that they have most of what they asked for. And the demographics for Israel remaining Jewish will remain intact.

It isn't that simple. Do you know how small Israel is?

Let me give you an idea. From my home in Netanya, which is on the coast, to Samaria is just seven miles. A wall will not stop modern weaponry. Imagine the Palestinians with rockets and chemical warheads, for example.

Israel cannot cede the territories or any part of the territories without some sort of security guarantee.

Catch 22: We can't keep the territories and we can't survive without them.

Fine. Annex the West Bank, and soon the Jewish State becomes an arab state… Decide what that is, build a wall to separate it, if necessary for security, and move on. At some point, even the Palestinians will realize that they have most of what they asked for.

At some point that’s what has to happen, since there’s no rational negotiating partner

Palestinian’s living within the annexed area will be voting citizens of the new “Palestinian state”, though if peaceful could be living or working in Israel. Or they could move to their new homeland. Terrorists would be imprisoned or expelled.

. But the borders need to be defensible. Try these on for size.

Center for Security Policy

Thoughtful military experts have for many years recognized the risks for Israel should it no longer be able to control the territories it acquired in the course of the Six-Day War in June 1967. For example, shortly after the end of that conflict, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff concluded that, "From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders."

The Chiefs made the following specific findings:

"The prominent high ground running north-south through the middle of West Jordan [Judea and Samaria] generally...would provide Israel with a militarily defensible border."

"The commanding territory east of the boundary of 4 June 1967 [the Golan Heights]...overlooks the Galilee area. To provide a defense in-depth, Israel would need a strip about 15 miles wide extending from the border of Lebanon to the border of Jordan."

"By occupying the Gaza Strip, Israel would trade approximately 45 miles of hostile border for eight. Configured as it [was prior to 1967], the strip serve[d] as a salient for introduction of Arab subversion and terrorism and its retention would be to Israel's military advantage."

"To defend the Jerusalem area would require that the boundary of Israel be positioned to the east of the city to provide for the organization of an adequate defensive position."

…………………………

These findings are as valid today as they were in 1967. In fact, they have been reaffirmed again and again by knowledgeable military professionals. For example, in October 1988, 100 senior U.S. generals and admirals issued a public call for Israel to "retain the Jordan River line as [her] eastern security border" noting that:

"...If Israel loses this line, it would have virtually no warning of attack, its border would be three times longer than the present one. In the midsection of the country it would be 9 to 18 miles from the Mediterranean. Virtually all the population would be subject to artillery bombardment. The plain north of Tel Aviv could be riven by an armored salient within hours. The quick mobilization of its civilian army -- Israel's main hope for survival -- would be disrupted easily, and perhaps irreversibly."

…………………………

In 1991, Lieutenant General Thomas Kelly, the highly respected chief of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during Desert Storm, said, "Israel's control over these areas is the only guarantee, however imperfect, of peace. Their loss is a prescription for war." He added that:

"The West Bank mountains, and especially their approaches, are the critical terrain. If an enemy secures those passes, Jerusalem and all of Israel become uncovered. Without the West Bank, Israel is only eight miles wide at its narrowest point. That makes it indefensible."

…………………………

Importantly, the Israeli Defense Forces are under no illusion about the abiding importance of strategic analyses like that performed by the Joint Chiefs. As the IDF Chief of Staff Ehud Barak said in May 1993:

"The 1967 Joint Chiefs of Staff memorandum [is] still applicable. The Arab arms are reaching superiority over Israel with a qualitative as well as quantitative edge....If Israel has to retake the territories proposed to be given up, we cannot do it without tremendous casualties."

…………………………………

The Pentagon Plan - Joint Chiefs of Staff Map (1974)

You are missing the point. The Palestinians do not want the West Bank and they do not Gaza. They want the whole of Israel. In 1974, they signed the Phased Plan which stated they would settle for a small part of the territory now to begin the "liberation" of Palestine. Since 1974, they have been systematically working toward this goal.

Giving them their own state will not solve anything but make it worse. The Palestinians are determined to remove "the cancer tumor from the midst of the Arab people."

Furthermore, it isn't really Palestinian versus Israel. It's Arab versus Israel. The Palestinians are the weapon in the Arabs hand.

Widening the circle, it isn't Arab versus Israel. It's the Arabs versus the West. The Arabs see Israel as the foothold of Western Civilization on their land. That foothold has only one purpose... to further humilitate and oppress Islam. That is what this war is about.

The fact that the West sides with the Arab by forcing Israel into an impossible retreat of its rights shows the Arabs that the West will not even defend itself.

A wall won't separate Israel from the Arabs. You can't move on from an enemy bent on your destruction and extermination.

You wrote "at some point, even the Palestinians will realize thaty they have most of what they asked for." They have had it since 1993. Oslo gave them control over the 90% of the Area A. That still wasn't enough. They were given everything they wanted in 2000, their response was the intifadah.

Words are cheap in the West. When our leaders speak... most of us take it with a grain of salt because it is nothing more than political rhetoric. Therefore, IMO, we think that Arab rhetoric is just that. But, it isn't. They have proven that they will do what they say. Right now, they lack the proper weapons to take on Israel properly. But, they are ever working to gain control of those weapons.

Israel is the forward guard of this clash of civilizations. Instead of forcing Israel to retreat because the West is terrified of upsetting the Arabs, we need to strengthen Israel's hand and stand with them. After all, their fight is our fight. Remember 9/11. (not that you forgot... I know you haven't. But I bring it up to show that the conflict is the same.)