takeo's roadmap for peace (summary)

[abu afak]

Originally posted by takeo
no, there's a big difference!
barak's offer was even a far cry of the rather unclear oslo-agreements, and didn't promise to give back the occupied territories, only scattered parts of it without real borders as any independant state.

of course Arafat should be elected as well during new elections, but I'm sure that Arafat is more willing to commit to the two-state solution than the government-sharon is.....

If the Palestinians/Arafat wanted peace they could have made a counteroffer to Barak like " We accept BUT... After 10 years of peace we get more land back to fill in territorial gaps.. after 20 yet more.... after 30.. Yet more/all";
as a confidence building measure that was needed and only earned by time.

Surely even you don't expect Israel to return to thje 1967 lines in exchange for an Arab Promise!
Surely The Golan heights is OFF the table as a Launching platform.

Resolution 242 called on the parties to Negotiate "secure and recognized boundaries", and recognized Israel's need for more defendable borders. Language proposed to return "all" or "the" terrirories was specifically rejected in favor of just 'territories' in recognition that new boundaries would have to be drawn.
(Lest I have to go tthrough the basics of 242 again)

[Mediocrates]

It doesn't matter what Arafat claims to commit to. His word has always been and will always be worthless. It matters not at all what rigged up crazy noises they call an election to proclaim their once and future king. Mental patients, crackheads, the mafia, people waiting for the silver spaceship can all hold elections. Saddam was elected, so was Kim, so was Stalin and Hoxha and all sorts of dictators. Elections can me meaningless. And all of the claims those 'elected' make are meaningless too.

No the world is paying lip service to not agreeing to assassinate Arafat but you should disabuse yourself of any delusions that anyone or any country thinks he should be involved in any negotiations or that he is capable of distinguishing truth from insanity. The world, your precious EU would be embarassed if they suddenly proclaimed that their annointed Jew killer was a bad man who couldn't 'make peace'. It would make their own contributions of billions of dollars to his cause look too much like blood money and an a 'contract' taken out on a whole nation, a whole people.

Which, if you weren't such a raving antisemite yourself you'd see that for the bald truth it is. So they take a soft middle ground. Don't kill or exile or arrest Arafat but let him degrade himself into his own irrelvant dotage.

[Mil]

Posted by Takeo:


so what about netanyahu not agreeing to the oslo-process?


How did he disagree on the oslo-process?


what about Bush refusing to implement kyoto? etc. ...


1. Bush never agreed to Koyoto
2. The world knew American reaction to Koyoto
3. Do you know why America refused Koyoto?


most democracies as well lack transparancy and predictability.


Really?????? Apparently your experience is really limited to the Democracy you live in. If anything dictatorial regimes with no freedom of press, freedom of speech and any kind of other freedoms of expression are neither transparent or predictable.

I would rather be a businessman in China or singapore than in India or bangladesh...

Good luck. Dude, you started out well on this thread but now you are sinking again. You should go to China and become a businessman - I wish you all the best.

[Mil]

Posted by Tokeo:

no need to, Syria wants the golan heights, that's it.

If anything Syria wants a comprehensive peace treaty with Israel in accordance to its own rules - at least that's would Hafez stood on. As it concerns the Golan at the least Israel would keep the mountains up until Syria exits Lebanon but in reality until there are going to be really serious changes in Damascus.


the japanese and german society were never rebuild from the ground,

Takeo Germany was pretty much rebuild from the ground up, physically rebuilt, mostly on the account of USA and USSR.


and never had foreign masters.


United States wrote constitution for both the Japanese and the Germans. The United States created both German and Japanese governments, jump started their economies, resolved the humangous refugee issue and physically provided the funds to rebuild the completely destroyed country.


the germans and japanese did it all themselves (even the japanese emperor stayed), they just changed sides because the allied could offer them once again an independant and strong state.


Little do you know of you neighbor - I am really suprised.


Israel can't offer anything like this to the palestinians.


You are right Israel does not have the resources? Yet it will be essential to the Palestinian economy.


the case of iraq, and before colonialism, shows that without the population cooperating nd without strong incentives nothing can be achieved.

What are you talking about? What colonialism? What cooperation? You are lost - your command of the English language is better then that.

[takeo]

If the Palestinians/Arafat wanted peace they could have made a counteroffer to Barak like " We accept BUT... After 10 years of peace we get more land back to fill in territorial gaps.. after 20 yet more.... after 30.. Yet more/all";
as a confidence building measure that was needed and only earned by time.

Arafat said on many occasions that the Barak-offer could be a starting point for further discussions, but barak said "no", untill the last weeks of his government, when negociations suddenly resumed but all the sudden ended when sharon was elected.

Surely even you don't expect Israel to return to thje 1967 lines in exchange for an Arab Promise!
Surely The Golan heights is OFF the table as a Launching platform.

Israel need to return to the 1967-borders, if it wants peace at least. not in return for promises, in return for achievements, as elaborated in my "roadmap". if israel ever wants peace with syria it will have to return the stolen Golan-heights, if not Syria can continue to be at war with israel which means it can sponsor all kinds of terrorist organisations as well as continue to sponsor the hesbollah. The principle "peace for land" rules here as well... you can't call Syria a vilain-state if you yourself are still occupying a part of this country, an act which makes your own country a vilain.

Resolution 242 called on the parties to Negotiate "secure and recognized boundaries", and recognized Israel's need for more defendable borders. Language proposed to return "all" or "the" terrirories was specifically rejected in favor of just 'territories' in recognition that new boundaries would have to be drawn.
(Lest I have to go tthrough the basics of 242 again)

this resolution called on israel to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, pretty clear to me!
israel is also called on to return to recognised borders, which of course means the borders recognised by the entire world in 1949, when israel became a member of the un. Any futile attempt to keep part of the occupied territories( without giving anything in return) will make peace impossible, this is a conclusion to memorise!

It doesn't matter what Arafat claims to commit to. His word has always been and will always be worthless. It matters not at all what rigged up crazy noises they call an election to proclaim their once and future king. Mental patients, crackheads, the mafia, people waiting for the silver spaceship can all hold elections. Saddam was elected, so was Kim, so was Stalin and Hoxha and all sorts of dictators. Elections can me meaningless. And all of the claims those 'elected' make are meaningless too.

arafat's election was approved by the un and the us alike, according to the principles of modern multi-party elections. it's not his fault that the plo at that time was tremendously popular.

No the world is paying lip service to not agreeing to assassinate Arafat but you should disabuse yourself of any delusions that anyone or any country thinks he should be involved in any negotiations or that he is capable of distinguishing truth from insanity. The world, your precious EU would be embarassed if they suddenly proclaimed that their annointed Jew killer was a bad man who couldn't 'make peace'. It would make their own contributions of billions of dollars to his cause look too much like blood money and an a 'contract' taken out on a whole nation, a whole people.

the eu, china, Russia, etc. still recognise arafat as the leader of the palestinian people and visited him in this position.

How did he disagree on the oslo-process?

oh man, i could write a whole threat on that! but just visit the website of the israeli peace-movement gush shalom , they made an interactive map on which all the new settlements are indicated build when he was prime minister, as well as the agreed upon withdrawels he didn't achieve.

1. Bush never agreed to Koyoto
2. The world knew American reaction to Koyoto
3. Do you know why America refused Koyoto?

bush didn't, but clinton did, as the president of the us, so Bush should respect the treaties signed by his predecessor. 3, yes more or less.

Really?????? Apparently your experience is really limited to the Democracy you live in. If anything dictatorial regimes with no freedom of press, freedom of speech and any kind of other freedoms of expression are neither transparent or predictable.

nor are most democracies, not even the us. The iraq-crisis was a good example, very few people knew the truth about the WMD, which was not communicated to the outside world.

Good luck. Dude, you started out well on this thread but now you are sinking again. You should go to China and become a businessman - I wish you all the best.

well i know businessmen who had experience on all those countries and he assured me china was paradise compared to some of those "democracies", where corruption is almost legal, the autority of the government week, and every new government completely rids itself of the laws and the policy of its predecessor, which of course leads to chaos.

If anything Syria wants a comprehensive peace treaty with Israel in accordance to its own rules - at least that's would Hafez stood on. As it concerns the Golan at the least Israel would keep the mountains up until Syria exits Lebanon but in reality until there are going to be really serious changes in Damascus.

so in fact here you admit that not syria but israel is refusing to talk about peace!!!

Takeo Germany was pretty much rebuild from the ground up, physically rebuilt, mostly on the account of USA and USSR.

absolutely BS, most big german factories still worked and most cities and houses were still undamaged. the economic structure didn't change much, only eastern Germany was pretty much rebuild from the ground, the West wasn't at all.

United States wrote constitution for both the Japanese and the Germans. The United States created both German and Japanese governments, jump started their economies, resolved the humangous refugee issue and physically provided the funds to rebuild the completely destroyed country.

perhaps but they ruled those countries only very limited time, after which the old parties, this time with a new image and american help, reappeared.

What are you talking about? What colonialism? What cooperation? You are lost - your command of the English language is better then that

I mean in Iraq, the population is not cooperating to the foreign occupiers, who want to reinstall a modern version of coloniasm.

[abu afak]

Originally posted by takeo ]Arafat said on many occasions that the Barak-offer could be a starting point for further discussions, but barak said "no", untill the last weeks of his government, when negociations suddenly resumed but all the sudden ended when sharon was elected.

No he didn't ... until well after he realized he blew a Peace deal and started an Intifada First.
Sharon was elected 4 Months after Arafat started the Intifada against Barak/Israel. .. and because he started it.
You revisionist idiots get your cause-and-effect mixed up.

this resolution called on israel to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, pretty clear to me!
israel is also called on to return to recognised borders, which of course means the borders recognised by the entire world in 1949, when israel became a member of the un. Any futile attempt to keep part of the occupied territories( without giving anything in return) will make peace impossible, this is a conclusion to memorise!

Guess again.
See the 242 'discussion'/Lesson I gave Mil on the first page of this string:

http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...&threadid=3355

arafat's election was approved by the un and the us alike, according to the principles of modern multi-party elections. it's not his fault that the plo at that time was tremendously popular.

That's funny, Sharon was elected too.
They elected him and re-elected him to deal with the Illegal Intifada that Arafat started as a Counteroffer to Barak.

Try again take0.

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by takeo
arafat's election was approved by the un and the us alike, according to the principles of modern multi-party elections. it's not his fault that the plo at that time was tremendously popular.

Arafat is not the elected leader of the Palestinian People. He was
"elected" (the Stalin, Brezhnev or Saddam-style "elections") to a 5-year term in Jan 1996. His term expired in Jan 2001. He has been holding power illegally since then. About multiparty: his only contender was 70-year old woman. She looked illiterate and totally clueless.

the eu, china, Russia, etc. still recognise arafat as the leader of the palestinian people and visited him in this position.

Congratulations to EU, China, and Russia. They support a career genocidal totalitarian dictator. BTW, this is not the first time.

Remember the advice of the Deep Throat: "Follow the money"?
Th PA officials' salaries are paid by the EU, but Arafat and his cronies are skimming off up to 15% in income taxes and using it for their own causes. It's excellent business.

Abbas: "Personally, I don't know where those funds go, when we wanted to cancel them, they said: 'You're harming the intifada.' "

From Arafat's interview of 1968: "We aim to disrupt [Israeli] society. Insecurity will make a mess of their agriculture and commerce. It will halt immigration and encourage emigration. We will even disrupt their tourist industry."

He established FATAH/PLO in 1964 with this goal and has never abandoned it. We are talking not about a supporter of terror, but about the inventor of it as a political mean. The fact that you support him says a lot about you.

[eyl]

Originally posted by takeo
Arafat did do a rather good job in the 90's, restraining terror even if it had quite some sympathy amog palestinian population, perhaps he didn't do the job torough enough, but i surely remember in the 90's AI criticising the PA for putting hamas-sympathisers behind bars...
the failure of Oslo is mainly the responsability of netanyahu and barak, who never really believed in an independant palestinian state by 1999 as promised by oslo.

That's somewhat revisionist. Until 1996, the PA's actions against Hamas and its ilk were rather desultory. In 1996, Arafat did act against Hamas, but that was only following Israeli threats to invade following a series of suicide bombing in March or so that year (want to place any guesses as to how long the "Hamas sympathisers" stayed behind bars?). And about half a year later, PA security forces attacked Israeli troops in a number of incidents.

[Lowell]

Originally posted by takeo
1) a new center-leftwing Israeli government gets elected (a necessary condition for peace) labour-meretz preferably.
2) Israel, together with its allies the US, the EU, Russia and the UN starts to regularly discuss the peace-proces, to assure international backing, assistance and more importantly financial contributions to peace.
3) Israel invites Arafat and his associates to Jerusalem for high-level talks. the message is very clear and the further steps are laid out. Arafat must agree.
4) step one: arafat must start dismantling terrorist organisations immidiately and with all means available, he will get all assistance from Israel and the international community doing so. Dismantling means imprisonment of the entire military wing of hamas, jihad, al-aqsa, etc. as well as severe restrictions and dismantling of the civil wing of those organisations. This action must be torough and well organised, every single local cell of the organisations must be outrooted, any resistance must be dealt with accordingly and 1000's of people will be put behind bars. this must be accompanied by heavy propaganda on pâlestinian television against the organisations who jeopardise peace. the israeli army withdraws from all the territories held by the pa.
5) in the meanwhile, Israel starts to remove settlements, forcefully if necessary, any resistance of the armed settlers must be dealt with accordingly. the pace of the removal will depend upon the pace of the palestinian fight against terror and its successes. it becomes clear to the palestinians that, if they really fight terror, a palestinian state will become reality. the resettlement of the settlers will be paid for by the international community.
6) this step indicates that most settlements have been removed and the terror has been stopped, hamas, jihad and al-aqsa are as good as outrooted and chased upon, no more suicide-attacks inside Israel appear. now the final solution for the area will be discussed upon on an international conference with the un, us, Europe, Russia, the Arab neighbouring countries, etc.
7) Israel withdraws totally from the occupied territories and is replaced by an international force, guarding the borders and assuring the agreements will be executed. some parts of the wb and eastern jerusalem will be annexed to israel while some parts of israel will cease to be a part of israel and get under the autority of the pa and the protection of foreign troops. the agreements include palestinians continuing to fight terror, a large non-military border zone as well as giving free acces to israeli tourists to do holy Jewish monuments.
8) a few 100's of 1000's of palestinian refugees will return to israel from all over the world, if they don't have a terrorist past, papers proving their claim and swear allegiance to the laws of Israel. they will be a very necessary cheap labour because peace made the israeli economy expanding once again. their houses and constructions will be lagely paid for by the international community.
9) the pa and irael sign a non-aggression treaty and treaty of mutual aid in the struggle against crime and terrorism. Also economic treaties and freetrade agreements get signed.
10) israel reconsiders as well with syria and lebanon, promising them to give back the holan-heights and draw a new border according to the 1948 border. Syria in turn has to close all terrorist offices, turn over the suspects, sign a non-aggression treaty and recognise israel.
11) the palestinian state becomes independant, and both neighbours immidiately recognise eachother.

G-d, takeo, this takes the cake, what have you been smoking? I stay away for a while and you get into all kinds of mischief without my stabilizing influence...The one and only way to peace in the Middle East is for Israel to kill the terrorists before they kill Israelis. To paraphrase your motto, Israelis have no friends or allies but themselves. Least of all are the EU, UN and Russia friends of Israel, and next to least of all is the fact that there will never be a 'Palestinian' state- since 1948 the 'Palestinians' have rejected numerous opportunities to have their own nation and it is now abundantly clear that all the Arabs want is to murder Jews, but they do not want a 'Palestinian' state living in peace with Israel. Face reality, takeo.

[eyl]

Originally posted by takeo
Arafat said on many occasions that the Barak-offer could be a starting point for further discussions, but barak said "no", untill the last weeks of his government, when negociations suddenly resumed but all the sudden ended when sharon was elected.

Incorrect. Sharon was elected only several months after the intifada started (and until it had, he was considered to be pretty much unelectable)

Israel need to return to the 1967-borders, if it wants peace at least. not in return for promises, in return for achievements, as elaborated in my "roadmap". if israel ever wants peace with syria it will have to return the stolen Golan-heights,

Are you aware that under the pre-1967 borders, Syria effectively anenxes land it took from Israel in the 1950s? Oddly enough, you'll find few people calling the Syrians on that.

if not Syria can continue to be at war with israel which means it can sponsor all kinds of terrorist organisations as well as continue to sponsor the hesbollah. The principle "peace for land" rules here as well... you can't call Syria a vilain-state if you yourself are still occupying a part of this country, an act which makes your own country a vilain.

Interesting. Are you saying terrorism is a legitimate form of war when sponsored by a state?

this resolution called on israel to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, pretty clear to me!
israel is also called on to return to recognised borders, which of course means the borders recognised by the entire world in 1949, when israel became a member of the un. Any futile attempt to keep part of the occupied territories( without giving anything in return) will make peace impossible, this is a conclusion to memorise!

Resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw to return "territory", not "the territory". The difference isn't a semantical slip; there were intensive negotiations as to whether to include the "the" or not.

bush didn't, but clinton did, as the president of the us, so Bush should respect the treaties signed by his predecessor. 3, yes more or less.

IIRC, Clinton signed the agrrement, but it still had to be ratified by the US Senate to bind the US - which it wasn't.

[Miriam]

I'm OK, thanks


now if you'd only put the names of the people you reply to in your posts..............

Originally posted by takeo
so actually people can't really object to my plan

it's not all too original, hardly "your" plan and a considerable improvement over what I remember from your previous posts

except that they think palestinians will never commit to their promises. But what about Israel,

meaning that if I. doesn't keep its side of the bargain it's OK for the P.s not to keep theirs? ah, but then goodbye to the lovely peace plan one way or other?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re. 1: How can a demand to elect a specific government function in a democratic country? (Imagine an improvement plan for France: "§1 - Jospin gets elected in place of Chirac" )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

nothing new is it? The US doesn't recognise the elected president Arafat, the us openly threated the nicaraguan and bolivian people to stop all economic cooperation if they would elect a left-winger, Allende, ... etc. just some examples, there are many more.

so what, sorry?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re. 8: What makes you think the refugees in question would be interested in performing dirty work in Israel?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

because it would still be a huge improvement compared to their situation today. the once who have a comfortable life probably won't move to Israel but agree upon compensation.

let's hope the'll see it that way, today they seem mainly to harbour hopes to dispossess Israelis once they come into the country

still, I think the crucial point is what I wrote about 4 & 6, that uprooting terrorism might turn out to be too costly even for a well-meaning Pal. government

[Miriam]

Originally posted by eyl
That's somewhat revisionist. Until 1996, the PA's actions against Hamas and its ilk were rather desultory. In 1996, Arafat did act against Hamas, but that was only following Israeli threats to invade following a series of suicide bombing in March or so that year (want to place any guesses as to how long the "Hamas sympathisers" stayed behind bars?). And about half a year later, PA security forces attacked Israeli troops in a number of incidents.

if you were to determine a liveable-with form of Pal. governance, what would it be?

[Lowell]

Originally posted by Miriam
if you were to determine a liveable-with form of Pal. governance, what would it be?

Dead is the only 'liveable-with' form of 'Palestinian' government I can imagine, and BTW it nauseates me to see those barbaric thugs called 'Pals'... I deduce you are a leftist, no?

[Mil]

Posted by Takeo:


nor are most democracies, not even the us.


I know France is an excetional democracy


The iraq-crisis was a good example, very few people knew the truth about the WMD, which was not communicated to the outside world.


Or the French building nukes for Saddam back in the eighties - the same... right?



well i know businessmen who had experience on all those countries and he assured me china was paradise compared to some of those "democracies", where corruption is almost legal, the autority of the government week, and every new government completely rids itself of the laws and the policy of its predecessor, which of course leads to chaos.

Apparently you never owned a business. I'll skip this particular rhetoric of yours to later laugh on the conclusions.


so in fact here you admit that not syria but israel is refusing to talk about peace!!!


You are pretty much right. Not until there are going to be serious changes in Damscus would there be any serious negotiations with Syria.



absolutely BS, most big german factories still worked and most cities and houses were still undamaged.


Actually no. Most of Germany was completely destroyed including all most all of the major cities and industrial centers such as the entire Ruhr region.


the economic structure didn't change much,


I know - by May 9th there was no economic structure...


only eastern Germany was pretty much rebuild from the ground, the West wasn't at all.

Are you for real? If you are trying to prove a point without knowing much on what you are talking about at least try not to bulls***t your way through... My advice is for you to avoid commenting on things you barely know. You compatriot TDier promised us some numbers of the Marshall plan yet he apparently ditched out - so I ask you....


perhaps but they ruled those countries only very limited time, after which the old parties, this time with a new image and american help, reappeared.

US occupation forces left Japan in 1956 or 11 years after the war. United States still holds bases in Germany or almost 60 years after the war. In reality American influence of German politics ended with the coming of Adenauer in the early 50 or in reality around the death of Stalin. Actually if you read the UN charter correctly I believe chapter 4 or 5 deals specifically with Germany and the former Axis - the clause was abandoned sometime around the late 50s. So basically US oversaw Germany for over 15 years post WWII.




I mean in Iraq, the population is not cooperating to the foreign occupiers, who want to reinstall a modern version of coloniasm.

Or rather the occupiers who want to rebuild Iraq in the same fashion to which they did in Germany.

[takeo]

No he didn't ... until well after he realized he blew a Peace deal and started an Intifada First.
Sharon was elected 4 Months after Arafat started the Intifada against Barak/Israel. .. and because he started it.
You revisionist idiots get your cause-and-effect mixed up.

the early launch of the second intifadeh without waiting for more proposals was a mistake, but it was made worse by the israeli violent response: 100's of demonstrators killed, israeli arab demonstrations bloodily oppressed (for which this latest week the Israeli high court blamed the israeli autorities). the intifadeh started because of a general palestinian outrage over the failed osloproces and israeli broken promises, oslo actually made palestinian life worse in stead of better(the formal cause was the visit of ariel sharon to the temple mount). Than both parties however reconciled and new peacetalks started, abruptly ended by the new prime minister Ariel Sharon.

That's funny, Sharon was elected too.
They elected him and re-elected him to deal with the Illegal Intifada that Arafat started as a Counteroffer to Barak.

Try again take0.

yes, as in palestinian society war and violence actually rewards the extremists, this is all over the world.

Arafat is not the elected leader of the Palestinian People. He was
"elected" (the Stalin, Brezhnev or Saddam-style "elections") to a 5-year term in Jan 1996. His term expired in Jan 2001. He has been holding power illegally since then. About multiparty: his only contender was 70-year old woman. She looked illiterate and totally clueless.

anyone could have participated in those elections, hamas refused to do so it was their decision, not Arafat's. since 2000 elections are impossible because of the war going on, israel in the current conditions would make elections impossible.

Congratulations to EU, China, and Russia. They support a career genocidal totalitarian dictator. BTW, this is not the first time.

BS, they support peace between two nations, while you support a war-criminal.

From Arafat's interview of 1968: "We aim to disrupt [Israeli] society. Insecurity will make a mess of their agriculture and commerce. It will halt immigration and encourage emigration. We will even disrupt their tourist industry."

in that time there wasn't peace and israel just declared war upon the entire arab world and palestinian people.

He established FATAH/PLO in 1964 with this goal and has never abandoned it. We are talking not about a supporter of terror, but about the inventor of it as a political mean. The fact that you support him says a lot about you.

arafat was supported by the israeli leades and the us back in the 90's, remember? the establishment of the plo/fatah was a reaction to illegal israeli occupation, an act of war which legitimises acts of violence (but not against civilians)

G-d, takeo, this takes the cake, what have you been smoking? I stay away for a while and you get into all kinds of mischief without my stabilizing influence...The one and only way to peace in the Middle East is for Israel to kill the terrorists before they kill Israelis. To paraphrase your motto, Israelis have no friends or allies but themselves. Least of all are the EU, UN and Russia friends of Israel, and next to least of all is the fact that there will never be a 'Palestinian' state- since 1948 the 'Palestinians' have rejected numerous opportunities to have their own nation and it is now abundantly clear that all the Arabs want is to murder Jews, but they do not want a 'Palestinian' state living in peace with Israel. Face reality, takeo.

so what's your solution, genocide of the palestinian people? my solution is on the contrary a reasonable one, a roadmap were both sides are forced into compliance, unlike Oslo. both sides, that's right, while you would prefere one-sided pressure! people like netanyahu would never again be in a position to postpone or block the withdrawel without facing the consequences.

Incorrect. Sharon was elected only several months after the intifada started (and until it had, he was considered to be pretty much unelectable)

that's right, of course, and a consequence of both palestinian and barak mismanagement of the popular uprising. But sharon couldn't find any solutions, could he? His policy prooved to be even worse than barak's, and the encouraging peacetalks during the last weeks of barak's government have been cancelled.

Are you aware that under the pre-1967 borders, Syria effectively anenxes land it took from Israel in the 1950s? Oddly enough, you'll find few people calling the Syrians on that.

that's right, but this won't be taken into account and was an illegal action, all that matters are the 1949-borders for the international community.

Interesting. Are you saying terrorism is a legitimate form of war when sponsored by a state?

it depends what kind of terrorism, if it's targetting hostile countries but no civilians it can be legitimate. the us by the way is specialising in this kind of terrorist activities for many decades. (afghanistan, Cuba, chile, nicaragua, the list goes on...)

Resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw to return "territory", not "the territory". The difference isn't a semantical slip; there were intensive negotiations as to whether to include the "the" or not.

yes, but the result is the same "territories occupied during the recent conflict" is as clear as it can get...

now if you'd only put the names of the people you reply to in your posts..............

I know, i'll work on it... next post