Because I believe that it is in the best interest if Israel's security. The wall is a half measure as long as so many settlements remain outside it, and require the IDF to be constantly defending them, when it should be defending Israel's borders. Everything you've suggested is either a pipe-dream (expulsion) or too dependant on changing how people think and feel, which in most cases is next to impossible.
That's my argument. Believe it, disbelieve it, think I'm a racist cocker spaniel with the reading ability of a fourth grader, whatever. But I'm not going to continue arguing with you if your posts are as incivil as your last one.
You: Because I believe that it is in the best interest if Israel's security. The wall is a half measure as long as so many settlements remain outside it, and require the IDF to be constantly defending them, when it should be defending Israel's borders. Everything you've suggested is either a pipe-dream (expulsion) or too dependant on changing how people think and feel, which in most cases is next to impossible.
That's my argument. Believe it, disbelieve it, think I'm a racist cocker spaniel with the reading ability of a fourth grader, whatever. But I'm not going to continue arguing with you if your posts are as incivil as your last one
...and this is the sort of closely-reasoned rebuttal to which you feel I'm somehow obligated to show even so much as a dram of "civility"...? Not only is your firsthand knowledge of Middle East realpolitik lacking; but your skin badly wants some much-needed thickening as well, if the very best you can do, in the cause of advancing palsied "argument," is to play the grievously wounded drama queen.
Point by slapdash point, quickly: Israel, in establishing (and stoutly safeguarding) the settlements, IS "defending its borders," obviously. You're simply unhappy that said "borders" aren't the withered, indefensible things of 1967, is all; a pigeon-toed intellectual stance which (really) more than adequately speaks for itself, really and truly, without want of further comment on my part.
Israel -- having survived (barely) multiple illegal and unprovoked Arab attacks, over the decades -- has logically concluded that "borders" bulwarked by a Jewish population are actually easier to "defend," ultimately, than ones where the squatter inhabitants of same spend the greater bulk of their days plotting on how best to kill Jews. Shocking, I know... but: there you have it.
Your failed dodge to the effect that actually asking the Palis to negotiate in good faith -- like normal human beings, rather than slavering kobolds or orcs -- and cease killing Jews is just (your own words) "a pipe dream" speaks for itself, once again, in a clear and unmistakable voice. The marvel, here, isn't that you genuinely believe the Palis incapable of articulating their political worldview by any means other than slavering hatred and cold-blooded murder; it's that you (bizarrely) champion this studied inability to belly up to the bar of civilized behavior -- that you blithely redefine soulless atrocity and ambition as just "how people think and feel."
The fact that you are (manifestly) tone deaf to the appalling tenor of such a black and awful little aria is its own best rebuttal, ultimately. A burning, yowling need to butcher as many defenseless Jews as possible -- whether in cold pursuit of land, or else simply for its own horrible sake -- is just "how people think and feel," by you.
And I've no doubt it actually is, either.
The point you repeatedly fail to grasp, however, is this: no Jew is in any way obligated -- no matter how much you stamp your little feet otherwise -- to respect people "thinking and feeling" that way; nor is Israel, as a nation, mysteriously called upon from on high to respond to others "thinking and feeling" that way as if it were a sane and valid socio-political posture.
Jews don't believe that Pali savages -- you've already long since conceded that point, qua the Palis -- possess any sort of God- or Allah-given right to murder Jews, by means of benighted political protest. That's the way Jews "think and feel," on the matter. And all sad attempts to daub that stance as being unreasonable merely end up leaving the Pali "cause" (such as it is) looking that much more intellectually threadbare, and morally indefensible.
The fact that it does likewise to the flimsy exclamations of the Palis' more ardent online defenders is just a sweet, unintended sort of bonus, really.
Post any manner of arrant, pie-eyed foolishness in an online forum, if you like... but: don't blanch with a girlish little squeak of dismay, when others refuse to suffer it, gladly or otherwise.