Posted on 05/20/2008 10:21:57 AM PDT by tedbel
In my article Refefining "What it means to be pro-Israel" I suggested that my definition of it is to advocate abrogating the peace process and annexing Judea and Samaria. Ami Isseroff commented that the problem with that solution was that no one will take the Arabs in. I agreed to the extent that to achieve such a solution would be extremely difficult. The world will vociferously oppose it.
Ami then referred me to his article Zionism and Israel: Ideological house cleaning. It is extremely well researched and worth reading. Here's an extract.
Solutions - Whatever solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we support, we need to re-examine all the arguments for that solution, because all of them were born in different circumstances, "a long time ago on another planet." It is easy to see that there is not much chance for a "bi-national state" (born in the 1920s) or that a "one state solution" (a favorite of the Nazi Mufti, Hajj Amin el Husseini) would result in an explosion no matter who was in charge of that state. But the two state solution (born in 1937, revised in 1947, revived more recently in a new context) may need rethinking as well. Here is one very pessimistic take on the two-state solutionMahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad, the official Palestinian Authority (PA) government:
They want Israel out of as much territory as possible and they wish to receive as much aid, both in dollars and weapons, as possible. But are their long-term policies consistent with the fantasy?
No, because there will not be an end to the conflict.
(Excerpt) Read more at israpundit.com ...
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT
..................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.