Maale Adumim, a city of 30,000, is hardly a settlement. Read John Podhoretz's column in the NY Post today.

Sharon has made significant concessions to the so-called 'Palestinians' far more than they deserve. He has agreed to remove the unauthorized settlements and he has agreed to remove the Gaza settlements. What precisely has the greasy Abbas done? Zippo.

But then I keep forgetting, in this best of all possible worlds, Jews are always held to higher standards than Gentiles.

Personally, I doubt Bush cares where the border between Israel and Palestine is drawn. His opposition is solely driven by the need to maintain US respect and influence among Palestinians. Sharon may win this fight, but eventually he'll have to reach a deal with the Palestinians directly.

bart - Good people are always held to higher standards than bad people. That's the way it is, and a good thing too, or we'd all be bad. It has nothing to do with the Jews.

bart:

It's not up to him.

Both sides were posturing for different audiences. Bush was doing it for the europeans, who think the US is in someway responsible for the Israeli palestinian peace deal, and Sharon for the right-wingers in Israel, who don't want to give up an inch of Sammara or Judea.

The fact is that the US needs to do nothing, the peace will come because the palies now understand that they lost the war. And the Israeli right wing will give up much of Judea and Sammara because they really don't want to be responsible for the arabs, who are a rum lot, but the border will run where Israel wants it to, they have already put up the border fence.

But don't careless statements from the President designed to placate the Euros have a tendency to aid the irredentists among the so-called Palestinians? As long as they get the sense that regardless of how many Jews they butcher, that the US will always compel Israel to make more concessions, where is the incentive to stop the killing?

Where's the incentive until they have their country?

That's what Gaza separation is for.

There incentive should be staying out of prison or being shot by the IDF. But because they want death more then life they really have no incentive except to kill as many Jews before they themselves are killed. This entire conflict has proven one thing, terrorism works. Kill endless amounts of women and children and get your own state. Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Israel invaded a few times and the invaders lost?! Why Israel puts up with any of it is beyond reason. Maybe Germany should get its land back.

Here we go again....

1. They don't want a country, if the country they are "given" or forced to accept must co-exist alongside Israel. Nope, no thanks, sorry, no can do.

2. They don't need an incentive. They already have one. Their goal is to erase and replace Israel. In other words, "incentive" for you is not "incentive" for them. (Actually, what they need is a genuine disincentive, but that really hasn't happened, nor do they believe it will ever be allowed to happen.)

3. They also don't care much for the US, nor do they trust the US. For them, all the US has done for them is to ensure that Israel continues to exist. As far as they're concerned, the US will continue to do so. Thus, the US is compromised; and the only way the US can redeem itself is to stop enabling Israel to exist. (Will they continue to pressure the US to Europeanize its position? Of course!)

Now, for those lovers of the absurd, those connoissieurs of paradox:
4. If Israeli policy doesn't abide by the roadmap, then:
* the US may lose prestige among the Palestinians.
* the Palestinians may have to decide to erase Israel.

But!
1. The US has to show that it's a fair arbiter. And Israel has to provide Palestinians with a "viable state."
(Answer. The only fair outcome, the only just outcome, is for all Palestinian refugees to return to their homes within Israel and for Israel to return all lands captured in 1967. Actually, make that 1948-9. In preparation for the final outcome. In preparation for true justice.)

Remember the Alamo (make that, Nakba)!

And this conflict will assuredly continue until it is demonstrated that no peace can ever occur while Israel remains on the map. Enabling the civilized world, the progressive world, to arrive at the conclusion already arrived at by so many.

Barry:

Of course they don't want one, that's why you force one on them.

BJW:

That's not an incentive for people with a cause.

OJ - "a cause" is something I would not call it. All causes are not equal and should not be treated as such. Per Mr. Meislin above, how is there "cause" any different than Nazi Germany's? Both want to rid the world of Jews.

If a ME peace accord is signed I would give it about as much credence as the piece of paper that the "peace in our time" one was printed on.

BJW:

They are an occuppied people.

They aren't a 'people' merely a crowd of illegal aliens, who immigrated into the area from what are now Syria, Iraq and Egypt, after the Jewish settlement began in the late 19th century, and their descendants. (See Peters, From Time Immemorial).

They are no more occupied than are the illegal aliens of the American Southwest.

The Israelis are vacating territory because they do not want to be Spartans, ruling a helot class through fear and intimidation. The separation will be made, but it must be made solely on terms that are militarily sensible for the protection of the Jewish state, and politically salable to the citizenry of the Jewish state. Thus, any surrender of any significant part of Jerusalem is a non-starter, and many of the close-in settlements like Maale Adumim must remain.

The plan in Israel is no Arab guestworkers by 2008, and a sealed border, ending the threat. What the so-called 'Palestinians' do with their newly Judenrein territory is their business, whether they want to form a reasonable state or whether they merely want to butcher each other, to the world's betterment, for a change.

Abbas is proving to be no more a negotiating partner than the cockroach Arafat. Statements like the ones from the Bush Administration of late only serve to muddy the waters, and to prevent a unilateral imposition of a settlement on a party that has chosen not to negotiate.