1) This argument may have had more logic if Jordan still claimed the West Bank. Jordan claimed the West Bank after the partition of Palestine until after Jordan lost the territory in the War of 67. With the Sudetenland, Germany claimed the Sudetenland because of the Germans living there. With the West Bank, Jordan is not claiming the territory, Palestinians are claiming soverignty by virture of the partition of Palestine in 1948.
2) Israel is not likely to claim the West Bank as part of its territory or that the Palestinians are Israeli. If that happened and the Palestinians became Israeli citizens, they would soon outvote Jewish voters.
3) As long as the Palestinians seek to destroy Israel, I have no problem with the IDF keeping control of the West Bank. Even if peace is achieved, I would expect that the West Bank would not be militarized by the Palestinians. However, keeping the Palestinians in a state of limbo where they have no state, no self-determination is not right UNLESS the Palestinians are a security threat to Isreal. A successful peace treaty would be predicated on the same kind of peace as the Israeli-Egyptian Camp David treaty.
THE PROBLEM is not with Israel, it is that the Palestinians are in deep denial. That WILL have to change before true peace.
“However, keeping the Palestinians in a state of limbo where they have no state, no self-determination is not right UNLESS the Palestinians are a security threat to Isreal.”
It’s nice to hear somebody at FR make sense on this issue. I’ve noticed it doesn’t happen very often.
3) As long as the Palestinians seek to destroy Israel, I have no problem with the IDF keeping control of the West “Bank. Even if peace is achieved, I would expect that the West Bank would not be militarized by the Palestinians. However, keeping the Palestinians in a state of limbo where they have no state, no self-determination is not right UNLESS the Palestinians are a security threat to Isreal. A successful peace treaty would be predicated on the same kind of peace as the Israeli-Egyptian Camp David treaty.
THE PROBLEM is not with Israel, it is that the Palestinians are in deep denial. That WILL have to change before true peace.”
Ummm no. Both sides are in deep denial at this point with their current leadership. Bibi will be PM again of that I am sure and perhaps Israel will stop being in denial.
One thing or the other will happen because the third choice you mention of ‘peace’ with Israel does not fit into militant islam. That is one of the major similarites between Nazism and the West at the time. Either the Palestinians disarm their militants (unlikely) or they continue to attack Israel and Israel destoys enough of them to have them stop attacking.
Every war is won by either complete annhihalation (Hitler himself) or by crushing the enemy enough to force surrender (Emperor Hirohito). It is exactly right for Israel to keep them in a state of limbo, the alternative is a mass scale invasion of tens of thousands of casualties to crush the enemy into submission. That Israel hasn’t done and is unlikely to do in this anti-semetic world with it’s constant media spectacles on Israel as the bad guy. If the Palestinians really wanted their own state, they would have accepted the Camp David offer in 1998.