>>>You are ignoring the question. Israel pulls out of occupied territory and continues to get attacked. What did the pullout accomplish?
>>
>>Almost six years of peace on that border.
>
>What peace? Hezbollah lobbing rockets and mortars and Israel not responding? That's your idea of peace?

Lebanon wasn't in a war, which was much better than in the 80s. Or now.

>OK so we agree then. Hezbollah has lost the moral high ground since they continued their attacks after Israel pulled out.

Pulled out of Lebanon, pulled out of Gaza but left it surrounded, isolated and drained, and still keeps the settlements - or, as mainstream media call them, neighborhoods, on West Bank (correct me if I'm wrong on this). Somehow Palestinians in Lebanon are supposed to not have a care about other pieces of Palestine?

> And since Israel started the withdrawl from Gaza in 2005 and the attacks continued, what should we conclude?

That it just wasn't enough.

>>The distance between any two neighboring countries is always zero, you know.
>
>The range of a mortar is finite, you know.

I know - that's why the whole "buffer territory" theory doesn't hold water. If the occupied territories were buffer zones to protect people of Israel, then why put these same people in danger by creating settlements in these zones. Doesn't make sense to me, except as a message that these were intended to be annected in the end.

>Ahh the old jewish media argument. I commend you for not firing this one earlier.

I didn't say jewish media, but you can read that so, in a way. Muslims have proven that they can master the western media to their favor (case of Bosnia and Kosovo and Chechnya to an extent), but in this case they seem to have far less success in pushing their message deep into the west. When an Israeli soldier dies, you get to know his name and that he was a gifted violinist; you never know the other side personally. (this is about "CNN as a weapon" two miles upstream this thread)

>My circle is older than yours. Jewish slaves fled Egypt thousands of years before Muhammed arrived on the scene. :)

So you then agree Serbia should retake Kosovo? It wasn't really absent from there except the last seven years, and the history is more than a thousand years long, it should qualify.

>>When you negotiate something, don't you start with some extra requests that are to be discarded in the process? Ask for fifty and be glad with twenty? It's clear to Arabs that Israel will stay; the "push into the sea" is, IMO, just flaming rhetoric, playing to the sentiment of the people. But I think their politicians are willing to trade for peace.
>
>Like Arafat? Like Hammas? What in the world makes you believe this?

It has happened before. I've heard Arafat willing to recognize Israel in exchange for territories, and Hamas was almost there just a day before this latest.

>>And they know that any international support they may have would vanish once they try to grab more than the 1967 borders.
>
>It is disappearing now. Notice the arab states' meeting?

No... too busy reading UT :).

>Did you see the pro-Israel rally in San Francisco, of all places?
>The fact remains that Israel pulled out and was continually attacked. The same will happen in Gaza and the West Bank unless the terrorists are destroyed.

Trying to destroy them will only create more. That never worked as long as they had a justifiable cause. Snatch the justification out of their hands first.