>>>>>>Yes I am one actually I think the state of Israel (if it had to be established) should have been smaller and made up of one block of territory. Those who wanted to be in it should then have moved into it. It also would have been more easily defended.
>>>>>
>>>>>Okay, another fallacy that needs to be answered. The state of Israel, as created by the UN, was tiny and contiguous. The map on the Israel page of Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) does a pretty good job of showing just how small.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's a pretty good map that shows the region: http://www.mapsofworld.com/middle-east-map.html
>>>>>
>>>>>And here are comparative sizes: http://www.mideastweb.org/countries.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>Israel is about 20,000 square KM. Egypt is over a million square KM. Jordan is 92,000+. Syria is 185,000+.
>>>>>
>>>>>One last data item. At the narrowest point of the 1948 borders, Israel is less than 10 miles wide.
>>>>>
>>>>>Tamar
>>>>
>>>>Obviously, 10 miles is too much for Nicholas. Smaller number, by his words again, would be easier to defend, i.e. he tries to help, actually. Most likely, he means that in case of less than 10 miles Hamas rockets would go further and landed in the next state. It is very bad, Nicholas that you don't show care for that 'next state' that would have to absorb rockets.
>>>
>>>Edward you are ridiculous. You know what I mean.the original state was two large areas connected by a narrow vulnerable corridor.
>>
>>Please, note that I didn't give estimate to your mental abilities yet.
>>I still would like to see your answer how much land would you give to Israel, e.g. in percentage terms. We could talk about the corridor later, though you could learn a bit from geography before doing it.
>
>I can't be bothered. I think you are deliberately provocative. if I had time I would play but right now I don't.

I am not deliberately provocative. I am just asking simple questions that you are not able to answer satisfactorily to yourself. Simple questions are the best way to disclose opponent weaknesses when they exist and, frankly speaking, Nicholas, you are not the most formidable opponent. Paradoxically, every person is able to talk about high matters, put up zillion of words and touch all issues at once and in shades. Talking by simple answers is possible only in the case of concise positions and clear logics.