Hamas position is “accept 67 borders as a start, and then use whatever territory it has in order to destroy Israel”. If you believe that the 1948 war is not over, as Hamas seems to, then destruction of Israel is a viable end-game.

Claiming to know what is in their minds as a statement of fact is bit presumptive, don’t ‘cha think?
This was a statement made by an Israeli leader about how they would expect the Arabs to feel about Israel’s actions, I believe. Please provide a source.

But to consider such special treatment ONLY for THIS particular country that was created in 1948 reeks of anti-seitism.

The people of this particular country (Israel) are not indigenous, but imports.

How about Pakistan : created at the same time, a thorn in the side of an ancient neighbor and a destabilizer in its region, and it exported nuclear weapons technology!

The people of pakistan have existed there since ancient times, they were not displaced. Britain carelessly redrew the borders during thier colonial pursuits and are the original cause of the upheaval. Following their lead, the US has committed underhanded meddling and facilitated regime changes of leaders not willing to do the US’ bidding.

The nuclear weapons issue is a red herring hoisted by your own petard. Do you really want to get into accusations of the sale of nukes to countries such as Pretoria and China. The exporting of technology by Pakistan has not been proven, and in fact nuclear technology sold on the black market points to Israeli agents, and may or may not have involved the ISI agent Khan. (Read Sibel Edmonds)

How about Palestine (West Bank and Gaza) : created at the same time as Israel and has had a horribly destabilizing impact on the region (see Jordan Sept 1969, see Southern Lebanon between 1969 and 1973).

I don’t understand the point you are making with these dates specifically, but the redrawing of borders and the creation of Israel has had a devastating effect on the region from the beginning.

To say “take the Israelis and move them to Nevada”, but make no such suggestion for any other nation state seems as if there must be something special in the writers attitude towards Jews. (Of course, if he also wants the Arabs of Israel moved to Nevada, then there is no anti-semitism).

This goes again to indigenous populations, and returning property to the dispossessed former inhabitants that are now housed in densely populated jail like structures, lacking basic necessities and proper sewage, let alone the ability to live a decent life.
However, I don’t think it’s a good idea to bring those dangerous settlers in amongst our own population. Maybe Germany can take them back to offset the neo-nazis they most resemble.

Similarly, becoming incensed at Israels purported posession of nuclear weapons, out of all the countries that have or are trying to have nuclear weapons, seems suspect. (In case someone is going to jump in with some comment about Iran, I lived through MAD in the US and can live through it in the MidEast).
Again, if American weapons somehow become immoral when Israelis use them but do not get the same outcry when others use them, it seems like there is anti-semitism present.

The US and Israel are using flechette bombs, which the rest of the world has agreed not to use.
No one here defends their use, except you.
There is a difference between having nukes and threatening other countries with them.
Israel has gone rogue, defying the UN in it’s attacks against Gaza, refusing to comply with NPT, and threats of bombing other states with nukes.

But most here accept a two state solution. Perhaps it gets restarted with a cease-fire, perhaps it requires Hamas destruction so that the PLO can be in charge of the whole of WB and Gaza.

Sorry, but it is not for others to choose the leaders of a people, when pushing democratic principles down their throats. The current elections due to take place in Israel have more to do with attacking Gaza than anything else. Lebanon paid the price last time.

Falk says that Hamas is also violating international law, but this does not legalize Israel’s imposition of “a collective punishment of a life- and health- threatening character on the people of Gaza.”

Each day the 1.5 million people are subject to an unspeakable ordeal. The blockade has caused acute anemia among the children. The sonic booms have caused widespread deafness, especially among the children who will require heaering aids. Malnutrition affects 75% of the population. He said there are widespread mental disorders, especially among young people without the will to live. He claims 50% of all Gazan children under the age of 12 lack the will to live. Now, most of Gaza without power. Hospital deaths occur because of that, even with generators. Medical supplies are dwindling. There is a lot more.

I have been focused on the people killed by the bombing. But the psychological trauma and physical wounding of the survivors is profound.

Intimating one is an anti-Semite to raise these issues is a red herring defense.

My friend told me that in Sderot, the US helps finance 15 second warning systems and fortified rooms. A lot of money and energy for an insecure city whose residents are transient and poor. My friend said that mostly Russian immigrants live there with the intention of moving out to the West Bank as soon as their finances improve and as I said above, a significant number have readily left because of the fear and anxiety.

Israel seems willing to do anything … anything … to guarantee there will never be a 2-state solution.

To withdraw people from Sderot would necessitate overcoming the Israeli collective ego, but it would show that the Israel leadership cares about the very people it claims to be protecting and be willing to embrace an alternative peace-seeking behavior to help save its citizens and the lives of innocent non-Israeli civilians. It could repair international respect and free the US from its financial and political and military collusion with the massacre the corporate medias of Israel and the US are deftly avoiding verbalizing and acknowledging.

I thought it was interesting you said, “separate the battling kids.” That was pretty astute since that is what they are in terms of moral immaturity on a tragically destructive scale, and one kid has exponential super-strength. There are no interceding wise and powerful parent figures on the horizon. Oh that there were. Not the UN. Not the enabling cohort, the US. The Geneva Convention exists, but we see how the US role-modeled profound disregard of that.

So if you were talking about attacks on occupying troops or attacks on settlers or one of the Intifadahs, I would unhappily agree that this is all part of the rules.

But we are talking about Gaza and Hamas. Israel is not occupying Gaza, Hamas is the government there. Israel (and Egypt) control Gazas borders. This serves to both keep Hamas at a fairly primitive level of weaponry, though they may well have some good stuff that hasn’t been seen yet). Yes, it is also to impose enough suffering that Israel can extract better terms from whatever negotiations eventually ensue. This is what Hamas rockets are for as well.

There are many such solutions that can be posited to the Israel Palestinian problem, including “67 borders and right of return for Palestinians”. Personally I see that as an initial position that is going to be subject to negotiation (as I would see an Israeli statement that “Jerusalem will never again be divided”). The 1967 borders were the 1948 cease-fire lines with small changes. There is no reason to think that the 67 borders are sacred after 40 years. Hamas position is “accept 67 borders as a start, and then use whatever territory it has in order to destroy Israel”. The PLO had a similar plan for “stages” that they eventually dropped as part of the Oslo process.

If you believe that the 1948 war is not over, as Hamas seems to, then destruction of Israel is a viable end-game. But to consider such special treatment ONLY for THIS particular country that was created in 1948 reeks of anti-seitism. How about Pakistan : created at the same time, a thorn in the side of an ancient neighbor and a destabilizer in its region, and it exported nuclear weapons technology! How about Palestine (West Bank and Gaza) : created at the same time as Israel and has had a horribly destabilizing impact on the region (see Jordan Sept 1969, see Southern Lebanon between 1969 and 1973).

To say “take the Israelis and move them to Nevada”, but make no such suggestion for any other nation state seems as if there must be something special in the writers attitude towards Jews. (Of course, if he also wants the Arabs of Israel moved to Nevada, then there is no anti-semitism). Similarly, becoming incensed at Israels purported posession of nuclear weapons, out of all the countries that have or are trying to have nuclear weapons, seems suspect. (In case someone is going to jump in with some comment about Iran, I lived through MAD in the US and can live through it in the MidEast). Again, if American weapons somehow become immoral when Israelis use them but do not get the same outcry when others use them, it seems like there is anti-semitism present.

But most here accept a two state solution. Perhaps it gets restarted with a cease-fire, perhaps it requires Hamas destruction so that the PLO can be in charge of the whole of WB and Gaza.