UN Assembly Orders Israel to Halt West Bank Wall

Israelis, Palestinians Differ on Strike

Current Events Links

This probably sounds like a reversal of my position on this issue but I do not think it is. I believe that Israel and Palestine need to become independent states, but the only way I think that can work is if both sides enforce law that keeps citizens from carrying out attacks. While I find fault with the tactics of both sides, Israeli civilians are (as far as is reported in the news) not the source of attacks that result in the death of Palestinian civilians. (The Israeli military on the other hand is)

The process that began in 1991 to provide for a staged creation of an independent Palestine and by 1993 the present quasi state was created in the form of the Palestine Authority. However what has resulted is a second Intifada and a stalled process and a partial-birth state.

Please forgive the digression but this reminds me of my take on the Treaty of Versailles which is largely decried as being such a bad peace it laid the foundation for World War II. Most people say that the Treaty of Versailles was bad because it was too hard on Germany. I say it was bad because it was an unfortunate compromise between punishing Germany and implementing the 14 points. France wanted to punish Germany and the United States wanted an idealistic peace that promoted democracy.

If the 14 points were fully implemented there would have been a peace without victors and Germany would have been welcomed as a new democratic nation.

If France had its way Germany (a relatively new nation) would have been cut down to size until it was weaker than France. Instead Germany was limited on paper only and was asked to comply with a treaty that gave it full blame for the war (unfair) and left it the resources to be a military power but said that it could not be one.

If Germany had been broken up into say Prussia and Bavaria it would have been a divide of Germany and the creation of a new ethnic state that would want to survive. Germany would have lost its place as the leading military/industrial power of Europe. It would have been a harsh treaty but it would have been better than kicking them without defanging them.

So back to the point. The present autonomous region of Palestine is not enforcing the law among its own people and because of this terrorist organizations are using it as a base of operations against the nation of ISrael.

Question for debate (finally)

Wouldn't it be better if Israel re-occupied the Palestinian lands and rooted out the terrorist organization from the regions and then worked at creating a democratic government that would understand it exists only so far as it keeps its citizens from waging war or terror against Israel?

No I don't believe so, for the following reasons.

A. I do not trust Israel would impliment such a free democratic society upon the Palestinians for the simple reason that the Israeli's do not want a Palestinians state. The reason I say this is because if peace was ever established, there would be nothing to stop the Palestinians from simply out breeding the Israeli's in their own nation.

B. (Leading from A) The Palestinians would most likely end up with even less land than they have now, no water rights, severe population density, and a dependence on Israel for ever more

C. I can't see any moral basis for the arguement that gives Israel the right to impose a government upon the Palestinians. This 'peace' would be as flawed as the Treaty of Versailles. It is impossible to 'impose democracy'. Democratic ideals must come from the ground up, and as along as the Muslim world prefers their idea of what a just society should be, then it is not for us in the western world to impose our set of ideals over theirs.
There is no universal truth that says Muslims are wrong and democracy is right.

D. Hamas and the other terrorist groups cannot be simply 'rooted out' any more than the IRA or the ETA have been. Forgive me for be brusque, but this seems to be a point that Americans just don't understand. Terrorists are not different from any one else, it is only their actions which set them apart, and the Muslim world in particular is full of potential terrorists.
Unless this problem is dealt with fairly (and I see no indication that either Israel or America has the ability or will to do so) then the War of Terrorism will continue to be the eternal war that Thatcher, Napoleon and Ceasar all fought in their day.

It is clear that under the current situation, the Palestinian Authority does not have either the resources or the will to deal with the terrorists in its midst.

Therefore, the structure of the PA must be radically changed.

Does that mean a return to the "occupation" conditions that existed before the PA was created? I don't know.

I believe that Israel DOES want a separate Palestinian state, but not for altruistic reasons. Absorbing the Palestinians as full Israeli citizens would mean that the Israelis would be out of power (outnumbered in the vote). By creating a separate state, you avoid that.

The downside, as I have stated before, is that the PA has demonstrated no ability to curb the terrorists in its communities. Given a separate state, what assurances would there be that a Palestinian government would do any better?

I do agree with moif that it is impossible to "root out" terrorists completely from the outside. You need cooperation from the local population, which the Israelis obviously will never have. Unfortunately, the PA is not providing that cooperation either.

Israel should formulate a plan to create a Palestinian state, however. They would need to be water independent, of course (a key issue in the region). Once such a state was created, the government of that state would be held responsible for future attacks. In the current situation, the PA washes its hands of any responsibility. Were the PA a full government, then it would have no choice but to accept responsibility for the (then) international aggression committed by its citizenry.

Why is it acceptable in the democratic West for the Israelis want to do that? Whenever people in America talk about wanting to eject blacks or hispanics from their society, or when the NoI talk about wanting to set up a spearate black state within the border of the USA, they get treated with the contempt that they deserve. When white South Africans (a minorty) talked about excluding blacks and coloureds from the democratic process, they were treated as global pariahs by most Western governments, especially in the last decade or so of apartheid.

Yet, when Israelis talk about not wanting to absorb people living within their borders into their system of government for fear of losing absolute control over it, the West generally and the USA in particular seem willing to give them a get-out-of-bigotry-free card.

It goes equally for the Palestinians, none of whom seem to be asking for equal rights within Israel - they only seem to find the idea of an entirely separate state acceptable.

Surely a unified Israel, that treated all the people within its borders as full citizens with full democratic rights, but that limited constitutionally the powers of the elected government along similar lines to the US constitution would be a medium term solution to stopping the fighting?

Palestinians might be more cooperative with IDF soldiers if they included some Palestinians in the IDF.

The lesson from places like Northern Ireland is that increasing sectarianism furthers the problem, it does not contribute to the solution; witness the problems that the RUC created by being almost completely drawn from the Unionist community.

I don't agree with that. There are alot of people frustrated with illegal aliens in America because they're taking away job opportunities from citizens and taking advantage of the health care system here. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not they're a physical danger to society.

And as far as blacks are concerned, the ones who want to kick them out should be the ones under observation.

Blacks and Hispanics don't blow up buses and cafe's in NYC or anywhere else in the nation. In fact, whites in this country have been the main perpetrators of terrorism here.

Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, the KKK and those men who blew up the Black church in the '60's, killing those little black girls.

Indeed. But that is not a reason to deny all whites their democratic rights, is it? Only a reason to deny terrorist whites those rights. So why have Palestinians in Israel been denied Israeli citizenship if they want it (and admittedly, many do not). Why, at the very foundation of Israel, was Jordan "for the Arabs" and Israel "for the Jews"?

For want of a better phrase, why can't everyone just get along?

Julien dear boy.

If the Israeli's let the Palestinians become full class citizens og Israel, then the Israel's themself would be threatened by the relentless birth rate of the Palestinians.

For that reason alone, Israel will never seek for peace with the Palestinians.

WRONG. For that reason, Israel wants two separate but EQUAL nations, fully independent of each other. If they want to have a nation full of Jews, why not!? It's not America the melting pot, we can't push our version of acceptability onto others. If they want to have a one nation religion and a one nation tounge that's their prerogative!

Ah. So the only thing wrong with the goal of Nazi racial purity was the method they chose to use to achieve it?? Come off it!

You really now how to twist words Julian! That comment is a slap in the face and very offensive! I can easily turn your statement around and say the same thing about all the Muslim nations that hate Israel for even existing and want to drive the Jews into the sea! Don't take this down that road...

could there BE a more frustrating issue than the Arab/Israeli conflict? ugh

Since Arafat is just a "figurehead" propped up by Hamas, with little power to enact ANYTHING, is it Hamas who doesn't want peace or the ruling party in Israel?

Even that Malaysian PM fool, in his racist tirade, admitted to the fact that in 50 years of this conflict, the Arabs ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING. Frustrating indeed. One really has to figure out WHY. WHY continue to suicide bomb when it is nothing more than a dead ender? WHY not use funds to BUILD, like the Israelis have, instead of destroy? WHY NOT try to earn the respect and cooperation of all nations with OTHER means? 50 years. WHO is being the stupid here? Certainly not Israel who have prospered, built, educated, enhanced technologically and scientifically, industrialized. What advancements have the Arab people MADE for the Arab people? Once they accept the idea that THEY hold themselves back, then maybe they can advance. there's been no evidence beyond being willing to kill. Time for a strategy change...imo.

Since 50 years ago the Arab mentality has not changed. Continuing forward with the status quo in the PA would only mean that in 50 MORE years nothing will, other than racheting up the body count, be different. That in mind, building a wall impervious to the people who mean to destroy and little else is probably the safest thing to do. What other options have the Arabs given Israel?

Like naughty children who never learn, the best is to separate them. The Powers that be in "Palestine" are not ready for civilized negotiation. These people, by the status quo policies of 50 years leave Israel with no alternatives.

Re-occupying would be one way to go. It would mean risking MORE lives. It would means Israel would be outnumbered by a rapidly growing Arab population who is hostile towards it.

Building the wall, within the correct boundaries, is the quickest and easiest solution for the time being.

Fair comment, and I apologise ofr any offense caused, but I also deem "If they want to have a nation full of Jews, why not!?" and "If they want to have a one nation religion and a one nation tounge that's their prerogative!" as offensive and inflammatory.

I don't want to derail this thread with this side argument any further, however, so I'll say no more about it.

My comments earlier asking why unification as a single multi-ethnic Israel were more rhetorical than anything else. Clearly neither side currently wants to go down that road. It just struck me that the speediest and most obvious route to peace in the region is the one thing that everyone rules out almost without thinking about it.

I don't know what the solution is, but as I've said before on other threads many times, I don't believe that Manichean finger pointing on either side is going to lead anywhere constructive. Blaming the Palestinians and Arabs OR the Israelis and Americans exclusively for all of the problems in the regions is deeply counter productive, in my opinion.

We can only be responsible for what WE do. Laying all of the negative motivations at the door of the other side is merely giving ourselves permission to behave badly in response if it seems necessary and ignore the effects of our own actions. nobody MAKES anybody do anything, so saying "our actions were regrettable, but your actions MADE us do it" is just adding fuel to the fire.

Why don't the Arabs use the money to build? Probably because the Israelis come in and bulldoze entire economic centers in Arab neighborhoods. If you want to see destruction just look at Rafah. And the last time I check the world, UN wise, supported the Palestinians with the exception of the United States.

And as far as Israel being a all Jewish state I think it would be and impossibility. Think of all the different religion with shrines in Jerusalem. I do support the two independent countries, but Jerusalem should go to neither side and be deemed an international city governed by the UN, sort of like the Vatican. I would glady pitch in $2 a check to stop the fighting between the arabs and the Jews-christians.

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Last time I checked, they supported saddam huseein as well. INCLUDING the UN. So?

Most nations have a "national language" and most faith based nations have a state recognized deity, why can't Israel?



Oh, I agree, I'd give anything for them to live in peace and harmony, heck, I wish that for the whole world. But unfortunately, you're right, neither peoples want that unless they get their way.



I agree with the Jerusalem belonging to neither people, there are so many cultures and religious that sprang from that city. But I do think that Israel should be a Jewish controlled nation, I'm not saying other peoples won't be welcomed, but that the Jews have a right, just like any other people, to be governed by their own.

Billy Jean



Its quite alright for Israel to want, and demand a national language, and even a national religon, but not if membership of that religon is demanded.

Not if Israel wishes to consider itself a member of the family of western democracies. Freedom of religon is central to the basic human rights the west subscribes to.




I'm sorry but Julien is right. You cannot have a nation where in all members belong to one ethnic group, and no other.
To aim for that is ethnic cleansing, and that is exactly what the Serbs were recently punished for trying to acheive. It is also what the nazi's wished for, and that simple fact does not change just because you feel to point it out is insulting.

Rather it is highly insulting, for any one in this day and age to wish for it!

It is exactly because of this 'Jews first' attitude that Israel is in the mess it is in, and I don't see that the holocaust, or any other terrible act in history, permits that the Jews act this way, any more than any one else does.

For Americans to support such an attitude is horrendous, and I have not seen any post, either here nor any where else, that adequatly defends the American position on Israel. Its one thing to defend an ally, but its quite another to defend an ally who blatently violates human rights, the geneva convention and the UN.

How are they violating human rights?! They aren't murdering hundreds of thousands of people, or telling them their inferior. All they want is there own little nitch in the world and the Palestinians and other Muslim nations don't want them there!

And how is their heritage a violation of democracy?

You don't need to be murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent lives in order to be violating peoples basic human rights.

If you want to know more about it, then I suggest you look up Israel on Amnesty Internationals web pages. I've already posted several detailed posts regarding the IDF and its horrendous track record.




The Basques also want their own state, and so do the Kurds. Will you also lend your support to these groups?
After all, they are following the same path of armed ressistance (aka terrorism) by which Israel was originally founded.

And, I wonder, would you feel the same way about the Israeli's if for example, they decided they wanted Florida as well? After all its easy to back a people in a land snatch if they are not snatching your land!




Heritage? Whats heritage got to do with it? Israel has no heritage, it was only founded in 1948!

I assume you are refering to the Jews? If so, then I'm afraid it does not count for anything.
Being Jewish should not garantee a better life, any more than being Danish or American. If a Muslim comes to Denmark, for what ever reason, the Danish state cannot demand that he learns Danish, nor that he converts to the Lutherian church.

And, if indeed Denmark did do this, America, as well as a good many other western democracies would (quite rightly) cry foul.

Why should it be any different for Israel? Just because of their Jewish 'heritage'?

Yes, yes, yes. Of course you know that every retaliatory strategic military targeted strike is in response to car bombings, bus bombings, nightclub bombings, cafe bombings....all by palestinian terrorist! This is becoming redundant!



Israel was originally founded by the UK!!!




The heritage of the Jewish people. The Torah. The Israeli Jews take pride in their ancestorial lineage and ties to the disputed land in question.

There are nations around the world that are virtually homogeneous, why do you treat Israel any different in this regard? Setting aside the palestinian question for just a moment, really look at the citizenship of many other countries, some of which being muslim. Why the double standard? And, as we've seen in places like the former Yugoslavia, diversity and multi-culturalism aren't always worth worshipping.


Switch Jews with Palestinians in your statement. How do you figure that palestinians have any more rights by your logic? There was never a palestinian state, nor a palestinian identity until the early 1900's. I've linked to supporting evidence of that in an earlier post.


It seems to be OK for Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc...I'm not even remotely Jewish, but let's have some parity here please.

My solution to end the problem would lie squarely with Israel pulling out of the 'occupied territories', and give them back to their rightful owners. Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Let them deal with the problem.

Billy Jean



Are you bored?

It is only redundant because you refuse to look beyond your perspective with an open mind. As I've often repeated, Israel is a state and as such cannot be measured against the actions of terrorists.

This is not a question of 'they did it to us, so we're going to do it to them!'. Israel cannot afford to think and act like that, because by doing so, Israel proves itself no better than the terrorists!

Ask yourself, why is it wrong for the terrorists to kill innocent people, but okay for the Israeli's?

Its got nothing to do with some vague idea that because the IDF only 'targets' the terrorists then its okay, because the hard, cold-light-of-day evidence shows that the IDF has, and continues to target innocent civlians. The simple fact that the Israeli's have killed three times as many Palestinians as the Palestinians have killed Israeli's ought to be a dead give away.

The fact that the suicide bombers only appeared after Ariel Sharon became PM ought to be another.

And the fact that Amnesty International regards Israel as a major violator of human rights ought to be a third.




Then why should the Palestinians or the Arabs think that their terrorism should have any other outcome than the terrorism perpetrated by the Israeli's?




As I already said, it counts for nothing. Why should some old religous text give any one the right to anything?
Unless God him/ herself appears in the sky, then the Torah is not worth the paper it is written on.

Also, i very much doubt the Torah makes any mention of destroying the original inhabitants of the land in order to make way for the creation of Israel...

And if it did, then what value does such a lore have? Is that the sort of heritage you wish to support?



Why don't you ever answer any of my questions? At this rate, I may be forced to conclude that you are deliberalty ignoring them.


DTM



I don't.

Could you give me examples of which nations you had in mind. How many of them are democracies? And of those, how many are currently building massive walls around their opponents villages?




And I have also posted the link to the CIA fact book which shows, quite clearly that of the 80% of Jews in Israel, only 20% were actually born there.

In my opinion, the other 80% of the Jews of Israel do not have any more right to the land than the Palestinians already in residence. Not by their religon, or their heritage, or any form of international law or any sembelnce of 'morality'.




I'm sorry, but I was not aware that Saudi Arabia was a democracy.




I would support such a move since it would relieve Israel of the burden, and also force the Muslims to put their money where their mouth is.

I'm not following here. Is Israel allowed to defend itself or not?

My original point of this post was that Palestine is not a complete nation and the only government with any authority to stop the terrorism (obviously the PA will not and I believe it can not do this) is the Israeli government. They occupied these territories before the 1990s peace process. The Palestinian state is not happening and now those regions are breeding grounds for terrorism. I am unsure that Jordan, Egypt, or Syria want these lands, but there definitely is an existence of Palestinian nationalism now.

The Israeli government is the only group that has the will and the ability to get those terrorists groups out. They may as well go in and get these organizations out and try to start all over.

I BTW do not agree with Israel when it defines itself as a jewish state. I think this is against the natural laws that Jefferson wrote about. But since israel is defined as such and will not consent to giving full democratic participation to Palestinian Arabs, then I think the only (but sad) solution is to create to separate nations.

(Of course, the Palestinian and Arab position that has been held for so long that Israel does not have a right to exist makes it extremely difficult to put the two groups in one country with equal political rights)

My main point is that this Jihadist terrorism is intolerable. Israel has shown boldness in its foreign policy in responding to threats throughout its history. It is obviously facing one of its most severe threats ever right now. We know the organizations that pose that threat. It's main ally is already putting in place a doctrine of preemptive strikes. Israel has done it before (in 1967, of course I think that attack caused this problem in the first place). Why is it launching attacks against Syria when the problem seems much closer to home?

It is just too bad Gandhi didn't have more of an influence on the Arab world.

SoCaliente_1



Providing their response is in proportion to the attack, then yes of course.

However, I don't consider a Palestinian suicide bomber as an attack on Israel. I consider it a criminal action.

The reason i think this is because if Israel is allowed to defend itself, then so to is Palestine.

Mostly though, I agree with the Tony Blair's approach to Northern Ireland.


Eeyore

I apologise for any thread sway.

I agree with most of what you say, but I cannot agree that the Israeli's are facing one of their most severe threats right now, for two reasons.

First, because the Palestinian terrorists do not have a snow balls chance in hell of ever defeating the IDF.

Second, because the current wave of violence was deliberatly instigated by Ariel Sharon who knew all along that the PLA was not strong enough to control the Palestinians if he put them under great enough pressure. If Sharon were replaced by a leader less blood thirsty, then I'm sure a common ground might be found.

There is nothing in Ariel Sharon (or his past) that indicates he has any desire to see an end to this conflict.




Agreed!

Moif Israel is not facing annihilation, in that the 1973 war may have been the greatest threat, but I wonder how long a society can withstand continuous criminal attacks against innocents. Israel has historically gone and found and taken out terrorists against its country (like the Munich Olympics terrorists that Germany inexplicably allowed to be released after they were captured)

But when these terrorists are in the PA they act like they are powerless to do anything. I mean Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear plant that the French sold them. Why don't they take responsibility for criminal enforcement in the PA until the PA does. If Canadians kept coming and killing Americans I have a hard time seeing how the United States would long maintain a retaliatory doctrine of proportionate response.

This policy seems only to create a long drawn out feud that imperil both societies and economies. It should be made clear, if you want to be sovereign Palestine, you have to agree to punish your civilians if they resort to terrorist acts against your neighbors.

Eeyore

I agree with you again. If the PA is not willing to do something about the terrorists then Israel has the right to take action against them.

However, I believe it is Israel's pressure on the PA, and specifically Arafat, that has more or less paralyzed them. After all, how can Arafat do anything when he is barricaded in his head quarters, or when the IDF is firing missiles into Palestinian area's?

If Arafat is seen to be doing the bidding of the IDF, he loses his support, if he is seen to be doing nothing then the Israeli's will do it for him.

That is not say that Arafat is the victim here though. The man is a disgrace and the sooner he kicks the bucket the better in my opinion.

On the whole, I consider both sides equally guilty in this matter, and I would like to see some novel thought being applied. I am sure that Abu Mazen understands what has to be done, but given the hostile environment created by Sharon and Arafat, his (Mazen's) voice of reason was simply drowned out.

The real tragedy with this whole situation, is that entire generations of Israeli's and Palestinians have grown up in an atmosphere of extreme attitudes and its hard to see any redeeming feature any more on either side.

The answer for these people is plain to see in Northern Ireland, and if the British can swallow their hatred for the IRA, then I see only one reason why the Palestinians and the Israelis cannot also do so.

Religon.

editted for spelling

Moif,

In theory I agree with your last post. If you confine the leader of an organization to house arrest how can that person oversee the civil affairs of his domain? But in the case of Arafat, do you really see him ever tracking down Palestinian terrorists to punish them for anti_israeli violence? He had an opportunity to demonstrate this. The policy of house arrest is absurd. If his organization will not provide a respect for the people of Israel, it is not legitimate. Placing him under house arrest doesn't solve the problem it exacerbates it and gives him an excuse for his continued non-action.

Arafat, as "president" is almost a non-issue where Sharon is concerned. where the arab people are concerned, Arafat is their President. Naivety ensues...

As to the route Israel IS taking, which has been some months now, is to target Hamas. Targeting the tunnels used to smuggle weapons (among other things), and terrorists themselves. Targeting the Hamas leaders has proven very successful from a body count perspective. Where ARE their headquarters within "Palestine," if not in residences? Where is PA equivalent of the Pentegon, white house, etc so they may BE targeted? Hamas, IJ, hezbollah hold offices in downtown Damascus and probably Egypt as well, wouldn't targeting the main headquarters do much in cutting the head off the snake?

I mean, think about it, if Israel were to TRULY defend itself wouldn't it have to NUKE the whole damm area? Good Grief! Where to start? lol.

Barring a major nuking of all nations hoping to kill Israel off, which Israel has been pretty dern conservative and compassionate in NOT doing...what is left?

The wall of protection seems like a nice benign, body count friendly thing to do.

Wouldn't that just irritate Arab neighbors even more, that Israel is just waltzing in? Besides, there would be bloody battles on the streets like the ones predicted when we were to enter Baghdad during the 2nd Gulf War. There would be a massive war going on of huge proportions.

We must live up to the fact that there will never be an end to the violence in Israel

World leaders must own up to their responsibilities to make this violence end. This is not something to simply resign this vital region to endless bloodshed and endless threats to international stability.

Nuking is way over the top as an option.
Whose land is the PA officially? It wouldn't really be just waltzing back in. The have occupied these regions repeatedly without blood in the streets on a daily basis.

This is a blunt weapon for ISrael to wield, but it would be more likely to flush Hamas and the Al Aqsa Brigade and the other main terrorist groups out of Palestine. Those left behind might be more willing to choose a path of peaceful coexistence.

Israel can declare that they will not tolerate terrorist attacks on there citizens anymore and the next suicide bombing launched from inside PA territory will be the cause of the re-occupation of the area. They have much more justification than we did in Iraq and the arab nations didn't come running to Iraq's aid.

Bush tried with a roadmap to peace plan. For a week, it looked like it may actually work! Silly us. It didn't. Hamas got trigger happy. So they killed 3 Israeli soldiers. Then it all started over again.

Ok

First of all there is a lot of israeli arabs in Israel (about a million or so if I'm not mistaken)who are living in israel and are Israeli citizens who have all the rights. There are even arab MKs in the knesset.
Secondly the reason why Israel is restricting the movement(roadblocks,e.t.c.)
and palestinian rights is because every time they make a step forward and lift some restrictions terrorist groups immidiately seize the opportunity and carry out attacks.

In fact many israely arabs use their passes and documents to aid terrorists. A good example would be when arab ambulance driver hid terrorists in his emergency ambulance and tried to smuggle them(or evacuate them not exactlu sure).

When IDF opened fire CNN in it's broadcast described how israelis abuse innocent palestinians.

In a different little known story New York Times Put a picture of a bloodied youth and an IDF soldier standing next to him with a bat. The article described how IDF soldiers abuse Palestinians. The "palestinian" youth was in fact a jew who was stabbed, smashed in the head with a rock(all by a mob of palestinians)and who bearly managed to escape with his life and the soldier in fact came to his rescue.

The media coverage on this conflict(at least the american media) is equvalent to the Gulf war 2 coverage by Iraqis(there are many examples). I'm going of a tangent here ,back to my point.

I used to think(long time ago) that arabs might out number jews eventually due to high birth rate. But most of it is offset by the high birth rate in the religious community. (I read that same statistics were 20 years ago but as we can clearly see jews are still a majority, there are a lot of factors at play here).

Also Intifada started when Yehud Barak was in power his negotiations led to nothing. So a tougher Sharon was elected to deal with the problem.

I don't think the Israelis or the IDF in particular are angels but I seldom see reporters reporting from a place at which the rocks are thrown...
I wonder why, perhaps there is really more threat from palestinians than from IDF
(they do enjoy to show tanks and explosions from a rock throwers perspective)
The way this conflict is covered and served to the public,how everything and everyone is manipulated after a long while can make someone only sigh...

To tell the truth I couldn't care less about the whole of the american media
my opinion of them is better left unspoken.

What bothers me is that the public swallows it without a question or a thought.

Also about the road map.

Few people actially saw the contgent of the road map. Although its not some secret informaton few people actually bothered to find out its content(I could be wrong about this this is solely my opinion).
From the beginning it was obvious that it was destined to fail. In fact it only encouraged terrorism.

All of these are my opinions. I am not trying to pursuade someone. In fact I may be wrong on many points. I merely stated what I saw and what I understend is happening. Others are encouraged to believe what they want or what brings them to a logical conclusion. Although logic is often a poor substitute for experience...