2 states are better than one?
I'm a favour of a two state solution, it seems like the logical thing to do at this point.
What do you mean, at this point? Where have you been for the past half-century?
In 1948 all the Arabs rejected the 2-state offer. War ensued.
By 1949, the Rhodes Armistice Agreements created the de-facto two-state lines. No Palestinian government came out of it, during nearly two decades afterwards.
In 1967, the Arabs, while
having possession of the major part of Palestine (including the entire lands of the original Palestine Mandate given to the Hashemite Bedouins, with Jerusalem, it should be recalled) decided to go to war and take it all. The Arab march to war was openly declared. For sure, it was no secret. To the Arab's great surprise, the Israelis would not sit still for that.
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Arab-Israeli_Conflict_3_Six_Day_War.asp
After the war, Israel expressed its willingness to give up most of the territory it had won in exchange for a guarantee of peace.
The Arabs took it upon themselves to respectfully decline this offer, and issued the 3-No's of Khartoum.
- no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel and maintenance of the 'rights of the Palestinian people' in their nation (meaning ALL of palestine, without Israel).
In 1973, the Arab nations of Syria and Egypt, those two great champions of the palestinians, who just a few years earlier had their Armies whipped, jumped right back into the fray.
And lost another war that was designed (and designed pretty well, actually) to annihilate Israel. Only a few critical errors from the Arab commanders allowed the Israelis to obtain the upper hand eventually.
Otherwise, the "two-state solution" would have been moot. Israel would have ceased to exist, totally, of that I have no doubt.
In 1993, the two-state solution was brought to the table again, and
agreements signed to negotiate it.
http://www.jafi.org.il/education/100/maps/oslo.html
By 2000, with that 2-state deal in shambles, and Arafat refusing to move ahead and figure out any possible way to salvage things for his Palestinian Authority, Israel was forced back to war.
That war, (a war of attrition, which the Arabs think they can win), is ongoing today. It is not a war fought exclusively by the Palestinian terrorists, it is being fought and supported by islamic radicals in neighboring states as well - (Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Libya, etc).
Two states? Maybe in the next generation, after the venom of this generation is spent.
What do you think, we Israelis are dummies? The status quo is preferable to a HAMASTAN. This is not the first war of attrition we have faced. So far, we're doing pretty well, and winning. If we need to expend additional energy and effort, we will, and the Palestinians will lose even more. For sure.
If the palestinians gather themselves as a people, as a citizenry committed to peace, and a demilitarized State, by publicly opposing the maniacidal, homocidal islamic mujahadeen and jihadists, they have a chance.
If not .. pfffft.
What about that is not clear?
Thank you for playing, as a parting gift, we have the JREF Home Game for you to take with you.