[grandpa]

Quote by: Atlas That's why I'm implying some Palestinians and maybe most of them wouldn't be so satisfied with the magical solution of Israeli total withdrawal to the 67' borders, look above.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not have magic solutions, but practical ones of the kind I have described. On the present course, nothing will be solved, and I'm not living in a "fantasy world" for pointing that out, though you express that sentiment later in your post.

Quote by: Atlas The ones you reffer to as Palestinians are either Arab Israelis with full rights and citizenship (within the borders of 48') or citizens of the PA (within the 67' borders) with PA responsible (unresponsibly, I might say) for their rights and duties.

The minorities within the arrangement are oppressed. You leave that out.

Quote by: Atlas The terrorism was there before the fence, thats why they are building it, not the other way around, and Israel never supported South African apartheid, the close relations that existed between the two countries at the time was thanks to the mere fact that they where both diplomatically isolated at the time, I won't even get in to compairing the two, well... mostly because this is not the topic of this thread, unfortunately, so is everyother topic brought up here except the one on the first post, but never mind that, it got out of my hands very quickly.

here is some information on Israel and South African Apartheid:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/down...ections%20.pdf

The connections weren't as tenuous as you make them out to be.

here's another link:
Brothers in arms - Israel's secret pact with Pretoria | Israel and the Middle East | Guardian Unlimited

How is this off-topic? We're discussing Israel and Palestine, and this type of apartheid relationship is proof enough that Israel doesn't shy away from endorsing racist policies. Presumably, it's another reason some Palestinians would want to rise up and kill the Israeli tyrant.

Quote by: Atlas There is a lot of truth to this simingly ignorrant statement of our former prime minister, the "Palestinians" of today had no distinct national identity until the rise of Zionism and the Jewish resettlement of Israel began, they where simply Arabs living in Palestine, by the irony of faith the struggle for independence of one nation formed another one.

There is very little truth to his words whatsoever. Back then I believe palestinians were called "Phillistines." That's the only difference. So it doens't just seem ignorant, it is ignorant.

Philistines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In fact, if you wanted, you could say the Palestinians lack a distinct identity now. It would make just as much sense.
And sure enough, there is no absolutely universal identity. There are possibly other representations of "Palestinians" one can dream up, as such a discussion is limited only to teh imagination.
But that doesn't mean people bearing that name are not living in or around Israel, and that Israel doesn't regard them all as second-class people to push around.
There are better options than dismissing the existence of Arabs at that time period. But a certain PM realized his policies could not stand unless he lied and said ignorant things.

And, again, I'm not suggesting jews or Christians living inside or outside Islamic countries never get harassed. I must also stress that.

Quote by: Atlas Boy... wouldn't that be a blast, unfortunateley we do not live in TeleTubbie land yet, as long as there are more insane than sane people in the world ( and by that I mean any hardcore nationalists, religious fanatics or corporate tycoons) this won't change by a bit.

No one seems to want to accept the obvious: The solutions I proposed are the ONLY ones that are almsot guaranteed to work. There is nothing "dreamland" about it.
It's not the reckless, religion-addled nonsense that plagues the Middle East now, sure. But it's more realistic, not less. If peopel want more stupidity and death, they'll cling to business as usual. If they want change, they'll halt the religious and state-sanctioned terrorism. That's not some fantasy solution, but the only reality-based one. I'm not going to feel stupid for advocating it, because the need for it crystal clear. It's not simply a "gut feeling" or a utopian vision, but the only one that would seem to work.

Quote by: Atlas You suppose unstable Muslim countries should have them as well then ?

I was merely pointing out the irony that the only nation which actually used nukes is telling others not to develop nuclear programs. That's a pretty glaring hypocrisy. It's also hypocritical when this same nation is developing more nuclear weapons, which presumably could still get sold, traded, lost or stolen.
Also, Israel has nuclear weapons.

My personal view is that no one should have them, but that's another "fairytale" view that no one seems to heed.

For someone who seems to distrust hardcore nationalists, religious fanatics and tycoons, you sure seem to be copying your answers straight from their playbooks.

Grandpa h.