>>Correct on every point. Last week, on the 40th anniversary of the 6-Day War, I heard some people commenting that it was bad for Israel, it was a mistake, and it got them into a bad situation for the last 40 years. Nonsense. If Israel had lost that war, there would be no Israel today.
>
>I've read that a bit differently (maybe different sources?) - as "it was a mistake to strike first", and "it was a mistake to take territories". That's where the high ground was lost, and the general goodwill of the world was also somewhat lost.


Do not agree. By striking first, when intelligence told them the attack was imminent (and it was), they effectively took Egypt's Air Force out. Without this and other pre-emptive strikes they could not have widthstood the combined attack of Egypt, Syria and later Jordan (who they had asked to stay out but King Hussein felt pressured to invade anyway, hence they lost the West Bank).

After the war, Israel offered to trade land-for-peace in more than one ocassion. Witness the return of the Sinai in exchange for peace with Egypt (Sadat, not Nasser). They were ready to talk to Syria, but al-Assad was not interested in peace. They offered the best deal they could to the Palestinians in exchange for peace, but Arafat did not sign and caused the Barak-government to fall. Remenber that most of the regions governments, Lebanon and Egypt excepted, always had more interest in keeping the palestinians out of reaching an agreement and getting a state. Having Israel as oppressor and an enemy sells well with their populace and helps them rally their people against a common enemy (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi, they all used the situation for political gain at home ever since).