CarolC:

Please don't scream at me with bold capitals, three exclamation points and nine question marks. That's the internet equivalent of what we in Philly call a shit fit. And you know what they say, "if the shit fits, somebody's gonna end up wearin' it!"

I wasn't referring to buying land in Israel. The Palestinian refugees could, for example, buy land in Jordan, which is (have I mentioned this before?) a real nice Palestinian Arab state!

You talk of the "the continuing subjugation, dehumanization, and oppression of a whole people." This is wrong. Not all (or even most) Palestinian Arabs are refugees. They are Jordanian citizens and/or the citizens of many other countries, including Israel, Egypt, Syria and the US. What we have is a specific refugee problem, NOT a question of a "people with no homeland." It is part of the terrific PR job the PLO has accomplished that people like you think the refugees are "a whole people."

Once again, Jordan is a Palestinian Arab state occupying 77 percent of British Mandate Palestine. It is entirely a creation of the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab segments. Its name derives from the British designation transjordan, meaning "that part of Palestine on the East of the river Jordan."   It was the part of Palestine the Arabs got. It is the much bigger part, and the much better part, with all the oil and other natural resources. You never seem to respond to or even acknowledge this in your posts, and you perpetuate the myth that the Palestinian refugees in Israel are the whole of the Palestinian Arab community.   

You said before "Jordan is Jordan." I could equally well say "Israel is Israel." Neither makes any sense in this context. Both countries are just about equally old (Jordan a few years older), and both are in Palestine. Once there was Palestine, now there are two countries, one Arab, one Hebrew. Jordan is Arab Palestine. How many ways do we have to say it?

The Palestinian Arabs claim they have no homeland. What it comes down to is this: some of the Arabs did not want to move about fifty miles away to enter the country the Arabs got out of the deal. They did not accept the terms offered by the British or the UN. Furthermore, some of the Palestinians in Jordan wanted to keep them out. It's a tough situation but it's not Israel's fault.

Frank, indeed I agree with you about many things here. I was not using "kick ass" in an approving way, simply as a description of the outcome of the wars in question. I simply meant to say that it is obvious from the way the wars played out that Israel was not in danger in destruction, and that a General saying so is not the same thing as saying that the war was unjustified. They were attacked and WOULD have been destroyed if they had not fought back.

In much the same way, we are not in danger of destruction by the Canadian military, but if we offered no resistance they could still take over the US (if they wanted to , that is!) Therefore if they attacked us we would fight back. I daresay we might even kick ass (not that I would approve of such an action!) Luckily the Canadians are very polite neighbors.

The main problem with the UN on this issue is structural: there are many Arab countries, many more Muslim countries in Asia and Africa that vote with the Arab countries, and other historically anti-Jewish countries (for a time, the USSR) that have a ball making Israel defend its right to exist annually. These nations have found that by voting in a bloc they isolate Israel so that only US support keeps Israel afloat. I agree that in theory the UN should work out this problem, but they have failed to do so many times and I'm not sure it's realistic to think they can achieve it. I hope that they can.

As I've said, I am in favor of a two-state solution, with hostilities ending on both sides. I think the West Bank is more trouble than it's worth for Israel, and it would be fitting and logical to give it over to another Palestinian Arab state, or else to give it to Jordan with the understanding that the Palestinian Arabs currently stateless could become Jordanian citizens.

I also agree that Sharon's government is a big step backwards. I think there are younger people in both communities who are frustrated with Arafat and Sharon and the whole lot of Dinosaurs running both groups. Unfortunately, there are also young people in both countries who are religious fanatics and wish to kill everyone on the other side.

The only thing I don't agree with is that the Jews should give up or share sovereignty in Israel. I want to see it partitioned for the time being, not shared. The problem with a sharing scenario is that one group will inevitably become a minority, and that will likely lead to injustice again. Remember, though, that we are not talking about vast distances. For Palestinians to move from their ancestral spot to the west bank, while a disruption, is not really that big a move. I moved further than that for grad school.

I'm in favor of a world with no state religion and no religious intolerance. Sadly, that isn't the world we live in yet. It is the world we need to work toward, and solving this thorny problem would be a big step.

Fred, thanks for your kind comments. I too often come across as overly strident on Mudcat, so I'm making an effort to embrace my inner dumbass!