Nice summary of all the illusions you and the "progressives" labor under.
I do agree with you that there is no point in pretending there is a major differences between Abbas and HAMAS, there isn't. They want the same thing, i.e. the eradication of Israel, but they have different ideas about how to go about it and they each want the incoming aid money for themselves and their cronies, and they may disagree about the role of Islam in their societies, but ideologically, regarding Israel, there is no signficant difference.
Your claim that Abbas can sign a peace agreement with Israel is nonsense. Even if he wanted to (and he most certainly does NOT), he couldn't because he is not a free agent. All the neighboring Arab states plus Iran have their fingers in the pie. If he really were to sign such an agreement giving up vital Arab demands like a full "right of return" he would be denounced as a traitor and everyone would be demanding his head. What the Arabs want, including Egypt, with its phony "peace agreement" is an ongoing war of attrition with Israel (note Egypt's ongoing flooding of the Gaza Strip with weapons, for example).
You claim he could sign an agreement based on the Taba talks in 2001 or the Geneva document. ARAFAT TURNED THE TABA TERMS DOWN FLAT. Why do you think Abbas could accept them? He would be accused of betraying Arafat's legacy.
Your claim is that "Abbas could deliver". FANTASY. This is because "HAMAS is no longer in the gov't". Who cares who is sitting in the Palestinian 'government'? IT HAS NO MORAL AUTHORITY among the Palestinians. Bismarck once stated something like "blood and iron determine a nation's future, not majority votes in parliaments". HAMAS has a strong presence with weapons even in Judea/Samaria and Abbas has ALWAYS refused to disarm them or crack down on them, even before they won the election to their parliament when he still had total control of their gov't.
MJ then says there will be a "referendum" to ratify this supposed agreement. Who has the right to vote? The Arabs in Judea/Samaria/Gaza or do we have to include the supposedly millions of Palestinians outside these territories. Many will say they have the right to vote since it involves their fate as well, by giving up the "Right of return". And what if it passes, will the losers accept it, or will it ignite a civil war. After all, Abbas himself has ignored the results of the elections that brought HAMAS to power by illegally disbanding their gov't. Even after they won the election , FATAH refused to hand over many levers of power. Thus, a referendum over such a sensitive matter could never be held or honored if it was carried out..

MJ and his fellow "progressives" refuse to see the truth...there is NO possibility of there being a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians in the foreseeable future. Most Israelis understand this. It is about time that MJ do so as well.

This General Oron you quote seems to be as deluded as the other "progressives". She says she would "encourage Egypt, Saudia Arabia and South Africa (?!) to bring about a FATAH - HAMAS reconciliation". What does she think has been going on for a year? Didn't the Saudi's with their gigabucks negotiate an agreement between the two leading to forming a "national-unity gov't". How long did that last? Did it ever work? She is typical of Israeli Leftists in the Establishment--they project their own hopes and dreams onto the Arabs and then convince themselves "if I were an Arab, I would do what the Israeli Left thinks is in their best interests". This is typical of the old Labor Party Socialist ideology (and that of the "progressives" here) that says "really, everybody in the world is the same and has the same values and if we just educate them they will end up being like us". A good example of these delusions is the belief that the Arab intelligentsia would be for peace because the Israeli intelligentsia is for peace since it is (wrongly) believed that educated people are more "universalistic" or less "nationalistic". That may be indeed true in Europe, the US, or Israel, but it is NOT true in the Arab world. In reality, the Arab intelligentsia is MORE extreme than the less educated parts of Arab society.

Two in a row!

To me, MJ's analysis seems naive.

There's no reason to assume that Bush's speech had anything to do with solving the Israeli-Palestinian controversy. To the contrary -- it's intention is to further isolate Hamas and to be able to later charge it -- and especially, Iran -- with undermining the "roadmap" or the "peace process" or whatever it will be called this Fall when it all, as expected, falls apart.

One more black mark against Iran to put in its "permanent record."

I suspect the speech will prove most effective in achieving the goals it was intended to achieve.

Deluded peaceniks ALWAYS refuse to honestly debate skeptics like bar_kochba or myself.  Time and again, we rebut point by point the fallacies, fantasies and fictions posted virtually every day here and elsewhere.  The typical response is either an ad hominem insult or else ignores the arguments altogether.

Still a pathetic coward.  And now one guilty of moral equivalence as well.  So supporting the Jewish communities in the West Bank is now the same morally as supporting al Qaeda.

Disgusting.

The fact is that bar_kochba overstates his case.  But he debates honestly and engages your arguments.  You are too much of a wuss to do the same.

Hey, brave Brad, what's your real name and who do you work for? We all know you have a high enough testosterone level to produce kids, but seemingly not enough to sign your name to your posts. For all we know, you are a plant who posts here only to help disprove the canard that all Jews are bright.

HA!

Damn it!

I can't do this today; real work beckons like a screaming baby at 3 am. Will everyone just chill!!!!

MJ has drafted a comprehensive overview of what is going on with respect to current peace efforts. There are lots of different viewpoints.

Everybody, take a deep breath, think of little sugar plums and stuff, and rethink where we want this weekend thread to go.

Man there is a lot of stuff in this piece. As just one example I haven't read Michael Oren's latest piece in the WSJ that MJ cites too. Has anyone else? Maybe somebody else has and can tell us about it.

Who says I am against peace?

Certainly, not I. I said you were against a "peace agreement."

bar_kochba: I would oppose such an agreement . . . as much as I might object.

That may have been where I got the idea. Ya think?

I'm throwing the bullshit flag on this, but I hardly think it's necessary.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but all of bar_kochba's posts generally come across as vile and insane. They're also remarkably monotonous, which is the big sin.

The typical bar_kochba post is usually involves a rant about evil and corrupt palestinians, evil and corrupt arab governments which oppress their own people, some paranoid ode to impending genocide, an apocalyptic vision or two. Kochba saves particular ire for those traitors within Israel and America (the 'left') who undermine Israel by projecting their own delusions onto Arabs, not realizing how awful and subhuman they are. Of course, the left is itself awful, subhuman and hate filled. And usually there's room left at the end for a personal attack on MJRosenberg.

Bar_Kochba's posts only accidentally relate to the topic he's posting on. It seems that he's obsessive in his message and doesn't care all that much about the details he's allegedly responding to. He's merely repeating his message.

To be truthful, the only significant variation in Bar_Kochba's posts is his length. Sometimes its a hundred words, sometimes its a few hundred. It's tedious and uninteresting. Having read a few dozen, I realized that they were all the same that that they would be the same ever after. So I stopped reading them.

I do, from time to time, post an acknowledgement so that Bar_Kochba will not feel that he's speaking into a void. So basically, I'm trying to be nice to him.

But generally, I don't think that should go so far as to actually have to read his stuff.

For you, Ellen...

When oh when will you guys get it - Israel does not want peace. Israel wants land.
Here, take a look at this map (link) and let the facts speak for themselves.

Please back off, Valdron. You're taunting him.

The only thing that map says is that the Palestinian Aabs should have accepted the offers of statehood in 1937 and 1948. By constantly rejecting every single offer they end up with less and less.

And you're just as much of a wimp as MJ Rosenberg.  Engage the arguments.

The evidence that the Arabs aren't serious about a true peace with Israel is MUCH stronger than the thin wisps of evidence that they are.  Why is it "bullshit" to point that out?

And please don't respond by saying that Israel does this or that, or isn't serious itself.  That's changing the subject.  The topic is Arab attitudes.  Why do you think they are ready for peace?

That's it! Chickenhawks like BradtheDad will never tell it to the Marines! Keep pressing him to tell us his name. Any guy whose only claim to fame is his sperm count must be one tough hombre.

Absolutely no one should be challenged at this site to give up his anonymity, give his "real name" or do anything that would identify himself and cause possible harm or retaliation upon himself. Brad has never claimed to be anything but a private citizen as most posters at this site are and for you to torment him and accuse him of cowardice is wrong. This is your job, you've made yourself a public figure and you must take the negative comments about your work as well as the positive comments. Brad is under no obligation to do the same and neither is any other poster.

This isn't your site, and you have no right to demand that posters be barred, give up their anonymity, be censored or be ignored by other posters in any way, shape or form.

Bev, I can't demand anything. But I can point to the obvious distinction between those of us who stand by our work and those who don't. And I will.

This is a blog, Bev. It ain't life or death. If I
wasn't the clever phrasemaker that I am, I would resort to the utterly trite, "get a life." But I won't.
Have an intense weekend.

PS. You ask where it will all end. I can only respond with the famous poem that addresses the issues raised by my calling for a ban on the talented BradtheDad. Where, indeed, will it end?

Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Kommunist.

Als sie die Sozialdemokraten einsperrten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Sozialdemokrat.

Als sie die Gewerkschafter holten,
habe ich nicht protestiert;
ich war ja kein Gewerkschafter.

Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnt

I often disagree with bar_kochba132, and provacative as he is, he does provoke thought. What do you offer, Valdron? A clever turn of an occasional phrase, you are indeed blessed with the ability to articulate some degree of humor in written form. Not an easy talent to cultivate. Unfortunately, this particular manifestation of talent is wasted on an otherwise mean and insipid dullard. You add nothing of substance to the discussion in terms of reasoned perspective, supported argument or enlightened observation. Some great insults, though -- if that's one's idea of a good time.

I guess it's not part of the software, but I really wish this forum had Ignore User functionality.

Yeah its their fault that Israel kept taking their land from them...

Of course, you're LYING again, bar_kochba132.

According to Israel's own chief negotiator Gilad Sher, at Camp David the Palestinians presented a map of the West Bank as they envisioned it in a peace accord, as reported in his Just Beyond Reach: The Israeli-Palestinian Peace Negotiations 1999-2001, published in Hebrew in Israel in 2002. Contrary to popular belief and American-Israeli spin, the Palestinians did in fact make a counter-offer at Camp David. It was Barak who rejected the Palestinian proposal...
A similar Palestinian counter-proposal was also presented at the final round of peace talks in Taba on Jan. 23, 2001, showing Palestinian acceptance of Israel's annexation of 3.5% of the West Bank (compared to Israel's Taba proposal of 6%). The Camp David map also showed that the Palestinians accepted the idea of a land swap, under which Israel would incorporate West Bank settlements in exchange for land of equal size and value. Barak had proposed larger settlement blocs, and an unequal exchange of territory.

SOURCE: Barak’s Chief Negotiator Gilad Sher Explodes The Myth of Camp David: The Palestinians Made A Counter-Offer, [PDF] Analysis and Translation from the Hebrew by Gidon D. Remba

Proof yet again that Israel does not want peace, Israel wants land.

Brad, I don't understand why you are so angry. I have never in my life heard anyone say that Israel would be amenable to the peace terms that BK proposes. That is what I thought was bullshit. It is not a criticism of Israel, just a misrepresentation of the state of the world--in other words, bullshit.

I'm not going to get in an argument with a troll. It's a waste of time for everyone involved.

I disagree and I'm sure you're not beholden to that position either. Everyone who has access to the internet does not have a right to post on this site. Sites like these, i.e. political sites, really don't function unless the community is coherent. Trolls like davai, bar_kochba, and abdul-hass are just here to destroy the coherence of the community. I wouldn't be in favor of banning Bradthedad, but those three need to go.

MJR, I've a lot of complaints about Brad's opinions, but I don't think it's at all fair to raise the anonymity issue. (He also keeps a less loony level of dialogue than BK, although he did wrongly lose his temper here and call you a name.) Plenty of posters make up a screen name, and there's plenty of conventional support for it.

Brad gives his first name, which is all one could ask. It's at least as explicit as the abbreviated names most of us fall back since we figure registering demands it. Nor do I worry about people who go further to come up with a cute or ideological identifier. At least we know what extreme Zionista belongs to, right? I admit that the "the Dad" has an implicit claim of moral high ground that grates on me, but again that's entirely his prerogative. I think we'd a discussion when Etzioni used screen names as an excuse to avoid us.

John

http://www.haberarts.com/

I have never in my life heard anyone say that Israel would be amenable to the peace terms that BK proposes.

Then you just don't know very much, do you?  Four times, in 1937, 1947, 1979 and 2000-2001, Israel has been amenable to a partition of the land.  Four times it was rejected by the Arabs.  The Arab world is unstinting in its demonization of Israel.  Bar-kochba's point is that if there were evidence that Arab attitudes had really changed, Israel would be ready immediately to make peace.  That's ALWAYS been true.

Why did the Camp David Accords happen in 1978-1979?  Do you think Israel would have given back the Sinai if Egypt's leadership took the same attitude as the current Palestinian leadership?  No f**** way.  What made Camp David possible was Sadat.  He went to Jerusalem.  He spoke to the Knesset.  He engaged Israelis and said he understood their fears and was ready to make peace.  No other Arab leader, with the possible exception of King Hussein of Jordan, has EVER done that.  Why?  Well even if they wanted to, all they have to do is look at what happened to Sadat.

I admit that the "the Dad" has an implicit claim of moral high ground that grates on me

LOL!  Actually it's just what my Dad called me when my first child was born.  No claims of moral superiority need be inferred.

The demand that I reveal my real name has to be, hands down, the silliest, most infantile thing I've ever seen on this or any other site that purports to discuss issues seriously.  It's illustrative of why I maintain that MJ Rosenberg is a pathetic coward - intellectually unserious, sanctimonious and immature. 

What's sad about all this is that underlying all his cant, there's a serious position waiting to come out.  One that is worth engaging and debating on the merits.  But every time anyone does that forcefully, he doesn't respond, choosing instead to play to the peanut gallery and call you a "Likudnik" or a "neocon".

It is long overdue, keep hope alive.

So, on Israel-Palestine, I will not address anything written by fact-free ethnic nationalists like Bar Kochba, Davai, BradtheDad, the now disappeared Daniel Greenbaum, and a few others.

What makes you think this represents a change?  You are already too much of a wimp to address anything that doesn't conform to your already fixed in stone beliefs.   

Furthermore, only someone trapped in a far-left bubble would call me a "Meir Kahane type".  Kahane, let's remember, advocated the forcible removal of all Arabs from the West Bank and Gaza, something that I and everyone else here would consider a moral travesty.

But it's all the same to you isn't it?  Anyone to the right of you is a Nazi.  Anyone who isn't for immediate unilateral surrender to the Arabs is an "ethnic nationalist". 

What's hilarious about the "ethnic nationalist" charge is that you call yourself a Zionist.  It's pretty hard to be a Zionist and not be an ethnic nationalist of some sort.  I'm reminded of the quote attributed to F. Scott Fitzgerald: "The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."  By that standard, you are Einstein.

What thoughts does bar_kochba provoke? Are there actually ideas behind his invective laiden diatribes? Is there a glimmer of a notion here or there that makes it worth wading through the spew?

What do you offer, Valdron? A clever turn of an occasional phrase, you are indeed blessed with the ability to articulate some degree of humor in written form.

Isn't that enough?

Unfortunately, this particular manifestation of talent is wasted on an otherwise mean and insipid dullard. You add nothing of substance to the discussion in terms of reasoned perspective, supported argument or enlightened observation.

Insipid dullard? Wow, keep that up and people will start telling us to get a room.

What is there to add to this discussion, Zionista? Seriously. What is there that is meaningful for anyone to contribute that can be heard over the incessant hate-filled screeching of a bar_kochba, the unthinking racism of a davai.

For pity's sake, Zionista, have you paid attention to any of these endless Palestinian/Israel threads? Haven't you noticed that they always go the same way with the same cast of characters arguing over the same buzzwords, throwing the same lies and accusations. Has there been a single f*cking palestine/israel thread that ever turned out to be contructive, that didn't amount to voices shouting past each other?

And what about you? Aren't you in there occasionally shouting past, raising the same old same olds, staking your ground and dishing out the usual worn out arguments. What the hell do you ever bring to the table that anyone ever needed to hear, much less wanted to hear?

So kiss my ass. You want insipid dullards, look to a mirror. The difference between you and Bar_Kochba is merely that you're slightly more sane and civil. It's a difference I approve of, but don't push me.

Every goddammed Israel/Palestine thread degenerates into farce, and it will keep on degenerating into farce, largely because of the efforts of posts like those of Bar_Kochba, and with the eager and willing toleration of those posts by people like you who enjoy the spew but don't have the guts to indulge it themselves.

Well cry me a river.

In a situation like that, do you know what the only meaningful contribution is? What the only meaningful contribution can be?

Mockery and contempt.

So fill up.

So we can have a sympathy party of all like-minded folk here? MJ is not going to engage with those who "are entirely driven by their ethnic identity?"

It is precisely those who are motivated by their partisanship who are creating a good part of the problem and it is their arguments that need to be addressed.

Abdul Hass at least engages Bar-Kochba. Bar Kochba relying on conventional wisdom and the then foreign minister states that Arafat turned everything down flat and just waited for concessions. Hass retorts that Israel's negotiator states publicly that Arafat made a counter offer. What I need to know was this a 'real' counter-offer which could possibly lead to a real agreement or was it a retreat to initial demands or poisoned by something known to be unacceptable? I am not an expert on this but what is the expert opinion on this point? Who is right and on what evidence?

Abdul Hass argues that Israel did not take land after the 1967 War because it did not want to take more land that it could digest. It is true that Israel could not have 'digested' as much as it could have taken but it is also true that Israel ended up with far less land than it could have then digested and did return some of it for peace.

Engage, engage and engage. If people are wrong in their opinions state why and provide your evidence. Simple name calling is school yard stuff and while I enjoy clever name calling and engage in it myself it most often solves nothing.

jhaber,

At least we know what extreme Zionista belongs to, right?

Do tell.

You call names, hiding behind a silly label.

Says "madison1776."

Brad - Egypt demanded the entire Sinai back in order to do a peace deal. Israel agreed and we had a peace agreement.Do you think Sadat would have done the deal with only 90% of the Sinai? If Israel offered the entire West Bank back including East Jerusalem, I believe we would have a peace agreement with the Palestinians. However, keeping the Ariel and Ma'ale Aduumim settlement blocks along with those surrounding Jerusalem makes a deal MUCH more difficult. You might think 91% of the West Bank is a good deal but not everyone agrees.

Now I am not suggesting we necessarily give up Ariel and Ma'ale Adumim but it should be on the table. Right now, Israel thinks it's bargaining position is stronger so it does not have to make as many concessions as Taba represented. If Israel and the Palestinians picked up where Taba left off, I think a deal would be concluded within a year.

MJ's article is hopelessly optimistic. Bar_kochba's conclusion "there is NO possibility of there being a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians in the foreseeable future. " is unfortunately a closer approximation of the current reality. There is something else about Bar_kochba that I think we should all understand: His views are close to the mainstream of Israeli public opinion. His views also represent the thinking of such people like Eliot Abrams and the Aipac lobbyist that really control US ME policy today.

In terms of internal US politics, I think the best course for progressives to pursue is simply to pressure the US to withdraw its military presence from the ME. As time goes on we must pressure the post-Bush US government the let Israel fight its own wars. We should eventually let Israel know that she is an independent country who controls her own fate but that when she gets into future wars over Southern Lebanon, seizure of West Bank lands and whatever retaliations against Gaza, that she is on her own. We will not fight with her.

There should be a recognition that the US cannot be an honest broker in these conflicts. We should simply step aside.

But challenge the CW on the Middle East and academe quakes.

Lord with so much money and time spent honing that Middle East CW into a Israeli lance challenging it seems like...well...a communist plot?

…no wait a Nazi plot? It gets so darn confusing.

And here I though spewing tepid, obviously overstated and too, too dramatic CW was an integral part of McCarthyism. He was on the political right wasn’t he? With the revisionist set it's so hard to tell.

The things I don't know could fill a book or two.

Pre-1967 borders weren't on the table in 2000. A "partition of the land" is not what BK said. He said, any "gov't would agree to withdraw to the pre-67 lines."

BTW, I don't know what word this is: f****. Since you're removing some letters, I assume it's something bad, but "fuck" only has 4 letters. And in this case, it would be conjugated "fucking."

Why limit it to conjugation?

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I agree the BK crew gets to be distracting and ends up bringing down the level of the discussion.

I want to go back to syvanen's point.

MJ's polyannaish views can sometimes leave you scratching your head. Is the man serious?

However, if Abbas can show Hamas supporters that he has achieved a final status agreement with Israel, he would likely gain full legitimacy with almost all Palestinians.

This is not just absurd: it's doubly absurd.
First, because Abbas/Olmert will never achieve final status agreement. If you believe that Olmert has the political capital to decide the dismantling of Ariel, Har Homa, Kiryat Arba, Hebron, etc, and the relocation of over 100,000 settlers, then I know a guy in Brooklyn who has a nice bridge for you. And, remember, Olmert is supposed to do all of that with a Bush administration breathing down his neck that won't even allow him to talk to Syria!

Second, MJ seems to forget that Abbas has lost most of his legitimacy among Palestinians. He's their al-Maliki.

Look, I'd love to share MJ's optimism, but I fear it's based on too much wishful thinking.