Palestine being recognized as a separate state page 4

195 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:No. The condition of recognizing Israel as a State was never a real reason for any refusals. The PLO and the PNA did in fact recognize the State of Israel. Arafat personally already in 1988.

This is the deal brokered by Clinton, right? The one where there was to be a cessassion of hositilities, and then working up to mutual statehood? Yes, I remember it. I remember Arafat continuing the attacks. This agreement was a ruse to get Israel to put up with one sided attacks for a while. You might as well cite when Hitler agreed with Neville Chamberlain to work toward peace. Arafat was lying.

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory. I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

In before Israel shouldn’t be there anyway, and Israel isn’t perfect. Oh wait, no I’m not.

 
Flag Post
I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

the latter has nothing to do with the former.

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory.

because? because when they weren’t granted such they fought for it? that’s circular logic. if i kick you out of your house, and you try to take it back by force, am i gonna use your “force” as an argument for why you don’t deserve autonomy over the region i now pushed you in to?

the amount of bias you so carefully try to talk around is sickening.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:No. The condition of recognizing Israel as a State was never a real reason for any refusals. The PLO and the PNA did in fact recognize the State of Israel. Arafat personally already in 1988.

This is the deal brokered by Clinton, right? The one where there was to be a cessassion of hositilities, and then working up to mutual statehood? Yes, I remember it. I remember Arafat continuing the attacks. This agreement was a ruse to get Israel to put up with one sided attacks for a while. You might as well cite when Hitler agreed with Neville Chamberlain to work toward peace. Arafat was lying.

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory. I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

In before Israel shouldn’t be there anyway, and Israel isn’t perfect. Oh wait, no I’m not.

Puking sound

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

the latter has nothing to do with the former.

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory.

because? because when they weren’t granted such they fought for it? that’s circular logic. if i kick you out of your house, and you try to take it back by force, am i gonna use your “force” as an argument for why you don’t deserve autonomy over the region i now pushed you in to?

the amount of bias you so carefully try to talk around is sickening.

Yeah. They are there inappropriately. Now give me a solution to this problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide. Simply pointing out that both sides are wrong doesn’t make your solution the correct one.

Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Puking sound

Uh… any supporting arguments or should I just report your post for trolling?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
They are there inappropriately. Now give me a solution to this problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

Recognise Palestine as an independent state, and set their current borders up as official. The UN kicks out any settlers that have illegally crossed the borders, and turn the blockade into a formal border. Supply aid packages to the people until they can get their infrastructure up and running again.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by MyTie:
They are there inappropriately. Now give me a solution to this problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

Recognise Palestine as an independent state, and set their current borders up as official. The UN kicks out any settlers that have illegally crossed the borders, and turn the blockade into a formal border. Supply aid packages to the people until they can get their infrastructure up and running again.

This ends in a war, and likely a world war. After Palestine gets its own border, and shipments of weapons, and continues its attacks, this time uninhibited against Israel, with several allies, the US will be forced to come to the aide of Israel, and then Syria to the aide of Palestine, then Russia to the Aide of Syria, then China to the aide of Russia, then economic collapse of the US due to the China angle, then Europe missile defense against Russia, then US to the aide of Europe, then Iran against the US, then North Korea vs the US, then Europe vs North Korea, then Iran vs Europe… etc etc etc.

Give Palestine the power of war, when it has no intentions of peace? Like I said, give me a solution to the problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

 
Flag Post

Any claim that giving Palestine its own borders leading to a world war is flying fantasy at best. They’re in no shape to wage a war, they just need the oppression to stop, so they can pick themselves up and rebuild their nation.

 
Flag Post
Uh… any supporting arguments or should I just report your post for trolling?

There are some posts on this forum which have such an ass backwards logic that words can’t describe the disgust one feels about them.

Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by MyTie:
They are there inappropriately. Now give me a solution to this problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

Recognise Palestine as an independent state, and set their current borders up as official. The UN kicks out any settlers that have illegally crossed the borders, and turn the blockade into a formal border. Supply aid packages to the people until they can get their infrastructure up and running again.

This ends in a war, and likely a world war. After Palestine gets its own border, and shipments of weapons, and continues its attacks, this time uninhibited against Israel, with several allies, the US will be forced to come to the aide of Israel, and then Syria to the aide of Palestine, then Russia to the Aide of Syria, then China to the aide of Russia, then economic collapse of the US due to the China angle, then Europe missile defense against Russia, then US to the aide of Europe, then Iran against the US, then North Korea vs the US, then Europe vs North Korea, then Iran vs Europe… etc etc etc.

Give Palestine the power of war, when it has no intentions of peace? Like I said, give me a solution to the problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

And what makes you so sure of that?
EDIT:-“Israel is banning arab parties from election” :http://news.antiwar.com/2012/12/09/israeli-election-committee-nears-mass-bans-on-arab-candidates-parties/
so much for democracy

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:No. The condition of recognizing Israel as a State was never a real reason for any refusals. The PLO and the PNA did in fact recognize the State of Israel. Arafat personally already in 1988.

This is the deal brokered by Clinton, right?

NO. 1988 Clinton became President 1993.

The one where there was to be a cessassion of hositilities, and then working up to mutual statehood? Yes, I remember it. I remember Arafat continuing the attacks. This agreement was a ruse to get Israel to put up with one sided attacks for a while. You might as well cite when Hitler agreed with Neville Chamberlain to work toward peace. Arafat was lying.

Sorry but currently i don´t give much on your “memories”. The ones i checked so far have been totally off and when they make no sense i don´t see any reason to believe them. What realistic profit could Arafat have hoped to gain by pulling such a ruse? Killing some Israelis, without immediate retaliations? Seriously, that can´t be your answer, can it?

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory.

Yes, it actually does make them eligible. Especially since they are still there and the land is currently being illegally occupied. The alternate possibility is a one state solution which Israel certainly does not want. One of the greatest parts of the Problem is that the Israel wants to conquer the land but not the People.

Also remember the solution that i advocated would not even give them immediate autonomy and control over their territory, but instead a UN government would take over. Until the basic institutions necessary for a modern country are installed. It would strongly reduce the illegal and militant measures both sides take leading to a durable peace.

I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

Sorry but your sprouting plain bullshit now. Israel has been no less aggressive. As can be seen by the simple fact that they have killed many times more civilians than the Palestinians have.

In before Israel shouldn’t be there anyway, and Israel isn’t perfect. Oh wait, no I’m not.

Ah but no one here says that Israel should not exist peacefully within its 1967 borders. But thats not what it wants.

Originally posted by MyTie:

WTF. I already explained why that can´t happen. Israel can invade Gaza and Palestine anytime it wants. It has shown this power repeatedly.
Syria is currently in the middle of civil war if you have not noticed. But even without that none of the Neighboring countries have enough military power to challenge Israel even in case of a surprise attack(which is a lot harder to pull off today).
Why should the Palestinians try such shit, if it means just getting occupied again? To kill a few Israelis. Seriously?

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Give Palestine the power of war, when it has no intentions of peace? Like I said, give me a solution to the problem that doesn’t involve mass genocide.

How about you giving me a solution which doesn’t involve lifting the blockade, like I asked you yesterday?

If lifting the blockade is out of the question for you, what would you suggest that Israel gives them by way of a quid pro quo? And bear in mind that agreeing to a ceasefire takes away Hamas’s only real leverage, so they would expect something big in return.

We all know what you wouldn’t do, so a constructive viewpoint would make a nice change.

 
Flag Post

something for you mytie

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Over 1,456 rockets were fired at Israel between November 14 and 21. Notice the difference when there is a war going on? The extra rockets in October (wiki says 17 rockets and 8 mortar shells in September from Gaza)where themselves already a retaliation against an Israeli air strike that murdered Abdullah Mohamed Hassan Maqawi and injured 11 others.
The Hamas does not control all militant islamistic groups. Having a cease-fire does not mean 0 attacks.

The scale of the war being small does not make it a cease-fire. You said Israel broke a cease-fire, and I asked you to specify what cease-fire.

My point here is simply that you cannot fault Israel for the air strikes while not faulting Palestine for the rockets. You can’t decide who started it, because there has never been an actual cease-fire, since both sides (Israel and Hamas) refuse to negotiate with each other. Don’t let your feelings towards Palestine cloud the truth, like punisher has. There is no right side here. Israel has illegal settlements, and Gaza is a breeding ground for terror. The solution is not “Israel should leave the Palestinians alone and let them be a country”. This isn’t a one sided affair. Both sides are in the wrong and need to stop being in the wrong.

If Israel leaves Gaza alone, Hamas wouldn’t have a reason to attack Israel. And if Hamas stops all attacks on Israel, and denounces terrorism, Israel won’t have a reason to attack Gaza. But neither side is willing to do that.

This of course is VERY difficult as the majority of the Palestinians and the Israelis are unfortunately against peace. I really don’t know what sort of catastrophic event needs to happen to make all these people realize how stupid they are, but until then, the governments of the Palestinians and the Israelis will continue to reflect the popular opinion of their respective people, which is to not cooperate with the other side.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by beauval:How about you giving me a solution which doesn’t involve lifting the blockade, like I asked you yesterday?

Don’t have one. I don’t have a way to get a two state solution that doesn’t end in genocide. That’s kind of why I argue against Palestine being a state.

Originally posted by thepunisher52:

something for you mytie

Actually, this brought to my mind something I had recently seen. Take a look at this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonashansel/4735658572/

That picture is of Palestinian rooftops in the area of Hebron Hills that the article you linked refers to. I saw this picture, or a similar picture in a newspaper recently. It then occurred to me that the area must not have access to plumbed water. It occurs to me, that when Israel recently bombed parts of Palestine, water towers on tops of these buildings would be destroyed in the process. All it takes now is a journalist to point to the destroyed “water suppy” as a violation of international law, and you’ve got a story. A lot of those buildings have home use satalite towers on top of them too. Why not also argue that Israel is destroying “communications towers” in an attempt to isolate them and hide the genocide? I’m not saying the bombing is right, nor that the loss of water is good. I’m saying that trying to paint the loss of some shitty water jugs on the top of some buildings that were bombed to kill the suspected militants inside, as some sort of mass water shortage genocide, is such an obvious grab at straws that it took me 2 minutes and a picture to figure out what was really going on.

You’re going to have to try harder to paint Israel as a genocidal maniac power grabbing land grabber. Even if you could, which you can’t, but even if you could I wouldn’t all of a sudden think Palestine a land of saints.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pereking:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Over 1,456 rockets were fired at Israel between November 14 and 21. Notice the difference when there is a war going on? The extra rockets in October (wiki says 17 rockets and 8 mortar shells in September from Gaza)where themselves already a retaliation against an Israeli air strike that murdered Abdullah Mohamed Hassan Maqawi and injured 11 others.
The Hamas does not control all militant islamistic groups. Having a cease-fire does not mean 0 attacks.

The scale of the war being small does not make it a cease-fire. You said Israel broke a cease-fire, and I asked you to specify what cease-fire.

My point here is simply that you cannot fault Israel for the air strikes while not faulting Palestine for the rockets. You can’t decide who started it, because there has never been an actual cease-fire, since both sides (Israel and Hamas) refuse to negotiate with each other. Don’t let your feelings towards Palestine cloud the truth, like punisher has. There is no right side here. Israel has illegal settlements, and Gaza is a breeding ground for terror. The solution is not “Israel should leave the Palestinians alone and let them be a country”. This isn’t a one sided affair. Both sides are in the wrong and need to stop being in the wrong.

If Israel leaves Gaza alone, Hamas wouldn’t have a reason to attack Israel. And if Hamas stops all attacks on Israel, and denounces terrorism, Israel won’t have a reason to attack Gaza. But neither side is willing to do that.

This of course is VERY difficult as the majority of the Palestinians and the Israelis are unfortunately against peace. I really don’t know what sort of catastrophic event needs to happen to make all these people realize how stupid they are, but until then, the governments of the Palestinians and the Israelis will continue to reflect the popular opinion of their respective people, which is to not cooperate with the other side.

Very well said!

 
Flag Post

I’m saying that trying to paint the loss of some shitty water jugs on the top of some buildings that were bombed to kill the suspected militants inside, as some sort of mass water shortage genocide, is such an obvious grab at straws that it took me 2 minutes and a picture to figure out what was really going on.

That’s not what the water problem is about at all. Try reading this document from the UN. It’s a long one, but it’s worth an hour of your life if it gives you a better grasp of what’s really going on out there. Israel is coming very close to adopting a scorched earth policy to get rid of the Palestinians living in the areas which they wish to take over. This is most definitely not about the loss of a few domestic water tanks.

 
Flag Post

Jesus fucking christ.

Readin MyTie’s posts in here is like reading a manual for self-delusion and cognitive dissonance.

I’m going to go back to this one:

Anyway, I don’t agree that their existance there first makes them eligible for complete autonomy and control over their territory. I don’t buy the argument “they were there first”. I don’t buy it because they are aggressive, and antagonistic, and more so than Israel, and intentionally use children as soldiers, bombers, target civilians intentionally constantly, and say their desire is to wipe Israel out.

You realize, of course, that you’ve just described Israel.
Like, they’re there based on a “it was ours first!” claim, are ridiculously aggressive, and while they don’t use children in their military, they have killed more children than they have militant enemies.
They are effectively wiping out Palestine in its entirety.

You speak of genocide, and ignore the fact that it’s fucking already happening.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by softest_voice:Readin MyTie’s posts in here is like reading a manual for self-delusion and cognitive dissonance.

Entertaining. If only there were forum signatures, this would be my first.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pereking:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Over 1,456 rockets were fired at Israel between November 14 and 21. Notice the difference when there is a war going on? The extra rockets in October (wiki says 17 rockets and 8 mortar shells in September from Gaza)where themselves already a retaliation against an Israeli air strike that murdered Abdullah Mohamed Hassan Maqawi and injured 11 others.
The Hamas does not control all militant islamistic groups. Having a cease-fire does not mean 0 attacks.

The scale of the war being small does not make it a cease-fire. You said Israel broke a cease-fire, and I asked you to specify what cease-fire.

My point here is simply that you cannot fault Israel for the air strikes while not faulting Palestine for the rockets. You can’t decide who started it, because there has never been an actual cease-fire, since both sides (Israel and Hamas) refuse to negotiate with each other.

No they refuse to negotiate lasting peace, cease-fires and prisoner trades are pretty common. Usually negotiated by a third party intermediate or unofficially by one side deescalating their attacks and the other following suite.

And yes i can fault Israel for the air strikes without faulting the Hamas and other radical militant groups for the rockets. To understand this you have to know that by international law an occupier(which Israel claims the rights to, even over Gaza after leaving and locking it up from outside) is solely and ultimately responsible for the policing of the territory. This means two things:
1. if it delegates this power to institutions made of people of the occupied territories like the PNA, Fatah and Hamas then its responsible for the actions these groups take or not take in regards to the delegated power.
2. As the one responsible for policing the streets, using air strikes except on a target thats an immediate threat, is simply murder. Israel is actually obligated by the status it claims as occupier to go and send the police(which maybe military police and equipped as such) to arrest and bring to trial the suspect terrorist.

Don’t let your feelings towards Palestine cloud the truth, like punisher has. There is no right side here. Israel has illegal settlements, and Gaza is a breeding ground for terror. The solution is not “Israel should leave the Palestinians alone and let them be a country”. This isn’t a one sided affair. Both sides are in the wrong and need to stop being in the wrong.


If Israel leaves Gaza alone, Hamas wouldn’t have a reason to attack Israel. And if Hamas stops all attacks on Israel, and denounces terrorism, Israel won’t have a reason to attack Gaza. But neither side is willing to do that.


This of course is VERY difficult as the majority of the Palestinians and the Israelis are unfortunately against peace. I really don’t know what sort of catastrophic event needs to happen to make all these people realize how stupid they are, but until then, the governments of the Palestinians and the Israelis will continue to reflect the popular opinion of their respective people, which is to not cooperate with the other side.

Your correct that both sides are doing wrong. I don´t think either side will agree to peace without outside force being applied in some form and stopping both sides from continuing to do wrong for some time.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

And yes i can fault Israel for the air strikes without faulting the Hamas and other radical militant groups for the rockets. To understand this you have to know that by international law an occupier(which Israel claims the rights to, even over Gaza after leaving and locking it up from outside) is solely and ultimately responsible for the policing of the territory. This means two things:
1. if it delegates this power to institutions made of people of the occupied territories like the PNA, Fatah and Hamas then its responsible for the actions these groups take or not take in regards to the delegated power.
2. As the one responsible for policing the streets, using air strikes except on a target thats an immediate threat, is simply murder. Israel is actually obligated by the status it claims as occupier to go and send the police(which maybe military police and equipped as such) to arrest and bring to trial the suspect terrorist.

Israel does not claim to be occupying Gaza. In accordance with the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority took over the administrative authority of the Gaza Strip (other than the settlement blocs and military areas) in 1994. After the Israeli withdrawal on 12 September 2005, the Palestinian Authority had complete administrative authority in the Gaza Strip. The whole point of this was to let the Palestinians govern themselves and end the occupation of their land.

Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel Tzipi Livni stated in January, 2008: “Israel got out of Gaza. It dismantled its settlements there. No Israeli soldiers were left there after the disengagement.”

There is no legal basis for maintaining that Gaza is occupied territory. The Fourth Geneva Convention refers to territory as occupied where the territory is of a state party to the convention and the occupier “exercises the functions of government” in the territory. Gaza is not territory of another state party to the convention and Israel does not exercise the functions of government in the territory.

Article 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly states that “the Occupying Power shall be bound for the duration of the occupation to the extent that such Power exercises the functions of government in such territory….” In other words, what creates an “occupation” is the existence of a military government which “exercises the functions of government.” This is a confirmation of the older 1907 Hague Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, which state, “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.” The Hague Regulations also stipulate: “The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.” What follows is that if no Israeli military government is exercising its authority or any of “the functions of government” in the Gaza Strip, then there is no occupation.

As I said before, if Hamas denounced terrorism and policed Gaza, Israel wouldn’t have a reason to air strike Gaza, and would suffer international backlash if it did. But neither side is willing to back out of this stupid war, so no, I don’t think Israel is more at fault here then the Palestinians.

 
Flag Post

Wait…you mean the Zionists think they’re right, and what they’re doing isn’t an occupation?
Gee, nevermind, I guess we were all wrong guys!
Lock it up, this one’s done!

/sarcasm

Consider your sources.
Because they’re propaganda.

 
Flag Post

Entertaining. If only there were forum signatures, this would be my first.

So you’re not going to refute my point that your entire description of Palestine and why they’re in the wrong is equally applicable to Israel?
Shocking.

Oh, and as far as signatures go, I think you’d be well served with something along the lines of
I’m right, and no amount of facts will ever change that.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pereking:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

And yes i can fault Israel for the air strikes without faulting the Hamas and other radical militant groups for the rockets. To understand this you have to know that by international law an occupier(which Israel claims the rights to, even over Gaza after leaving and locking it up from outside) is solely and ultimately responsible for the policing of the territory. This means two things:

Israel does not claim to be occupying Gaza.

But thats exactly what it is and does claims the rights of an occupier:

Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in September 2005, and declared itself no longer to be in occupation of the Strip. However, as it retains control of Gaza’s airspace and coastline, it continues to be designated as an occupying power in the Gaza Strip by the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly and some countries and various human rights organizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

The link gives even more explanations why according to international law, the Gaza is still considered occupied territory by the UN.

The whole point of this was to let the Palestinians govern themselves and end the occupation of their land.

No, the point was to make some people believe thats what was happening. That Israel is no longer responsible and is no longer bound in regards to what kind of force they are allowed to use when hunting Terrorists and no longer has a responsibility towards taking care of the occupied people.
It also creates a largely contained conflict that can be used as a scape goat for land grabs in the West-bank.

 
Flag Post

Article 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly states that “the Occupying Power shall be bound for the duration of the occupation to the extent that such Power exercises the functions of government in such territory….” In other words, what creates an “occupation” is the existence of a military government which “exercises the functions of government.” This is a confirmation of the older 1907 Hague Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, which state, “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.” The Hague Regulations also stipulate: “The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.” What follows is that if no Israeli military government is exercising its authority or any of “the functions of government” in the Gaza Strip, then there is no occupation.

The grandiosely named Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs was set up with private money, and seeks to give Israel a positive image. That seems to be pretty much its sole purpose. It is openly hostile to any notions of Palestinian statehood. Since both the United Nations and the International Court of Justice maintain that both Gaza and the West Bank are occupied territories, it doesn’t really matter what some pundit with an agenda claims.

In case anyone is interested in finding out what the ICJ thinks about the West Bank, here is the full transcript of their 2004 ruling on the matter. Each page in French is followed by the English translation.

 
Flag Post

I never claimed my sources were not biased, only that they represented Israel’s stance on the matter. I understood Johnny’s statement wrong, and was responding to Johnny’s claim that Israel claims to be the occupier of Gaza, while he in fact meant that he thinks of Israel as an occupier of Gaza.

Now that I understand his statements I can respond to them:

Yes, you can fault Israel for the air strikes if Israel as the occupier of Gaza is responsible for policing of the territory. But I disagree that you can fault them while not faulting Hamas. What you are saying is that there are two solutions to this problem: Israel re-invades Gaza, either to bring down the Hamas and delegate power to Palestinian institutions or to enforce its own military policing, and Israel dropping all control of Gaza’s airspace and coastline.

But you are ignoring the fact that Hamas is not powerless in this. Thinking that they are justified to resort to terrorism is preposterous. Hamas has the option to cease all hostilities towards Israel, denounce terrorism and accept Israel as a country by its 1967 borders. This is a viable and possible option for Hamas, but they choose the option of terrorism instead. They are equally as guilty in wanting this conflict to continue as Israel is.

The only point I am trying to make in this thread is that both of these factions are guilty of the situation they are in. Both of these factions have ways in which they can end it, and both of these factions refuse to take them, and refuse peace. That is all.