Is Israel or Palestine in the right?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What's interesting is that a contributing factor to the current troubles is the attempt by some Jews to assert property ownership in East Jerusalem that was under Jordanian administration from 1949-1967 and has recently been annexed by Israel. In order to prevail, they either have to assert that there is such a thing as a general "right to return" or that Jews have property rights that Arabs don't. I can't see either assertion as being in Israel's long term interest. Acknowledging a right of return would seriously impact the Jewish nature of Israel. Conversely, making explicit the concept of Arabs having fewer rights in Israel makes more likely the possibility of Israel losing what little international support it has and puts in serious jeopardy its recent efforts to normalize relations with the Arab states.

Of course Hamas was no doubt looking for any excuse to restart its rocket attacks.

The whole Middle East has been a series of examples proving the validity of the proposition that two wrongs don't make right.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In order to prevail, they either have to assert that there is such a thing as a general "right to return" or that Jews have property rights that Arabs don't. I can't see either assertion as being in Israel's long term interest. Acknowledging a right of return would seriously impact the Jewish nature of Israel. Conversely, making explicit the concept of Arabs having fewer rights in Israel makes more likely the possibility of Israel losing what little international support it has and puts in serious jeopardy its recent efforts to normalize relations with the Arab states.

You are correct up until the last sentence.

Israel actually needs little international support and what it does have is pretty solid.

Whilst ever Palestinian military activists carry on like the Benny Hill Show, israel will obtain legitimacy to defend itself more vigorously and make their expanded real estate goals a reality.

Bethlehem, here we come.

If you really think Israel would be anything like it currently is without U.S. military technical assistance, you're crazy.  I'll admit that currently support for Israel is fairly solid in the U.S. However, what had once been a solidly bipartisan position has become ever more partisan.

Yes, so long as it's just Israel versus the Palestinians, Israel doesn't have much to worry about. But the idea that the Arabs will permanently remain disunited and militarily inferior to Israel is ludicrous and not supported by history. Given current Israeli policies, it's basically a question of when, not if, the State of Israel goes the way of the Crusader States a millennium ago. Israel is likely to last until at least the 22nd century.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In order to prevail, they either have to assert that there is such a thing as a general "right to return" or that Jews have property rights that Arabs don't. I can't see either assertion as being in Israel's long term interest. Acknowledging a right of return would seriously impact the Jewish nature of Israel. Conversely, making explicit the concept of Arabs having fewer rights in Israel makes more likely the possibility of Israel losing what little international support it has and puts in serious jeopardy its recent efforts to normalize relations with the Arab states.

You are correct up until the last sentence.

Israel actually needs little international support and what it does have is pretty solid.

Whilst ever Palestinian military activists carry on like the Benny Hill Show, israel will obtain legitimacy to defend itself more vigorously and make their expanded real estate goals a reality.

Bethlehem, here we come.

If you really think Israel would be anything like it currently is without U.S. military technical assistance, you're crazy.  I'll admit that currently support for Israel is fairly solid in the U.S. However, what had once been a solidly bipartisan position has become ever more partisan.

Yes, so long as it's just Israel versus the Palestinians, Israel doesn't have much to worry about. But the idea that the Arabs will permanently remain disunited and militarily inferior to Israel is ludicrous and not supported by history. Given current Israeli policies, it's basically a question of when, not if, the State of Israel goes the way of the Crusader States a millennium ago. Israel is likely to last until at least the 22nd century.

Militarily, you are right. But Israel has one trick up its sleeve.

You know, nukes. As long as the Arab states don't have them, Israel is good. And, Israel was militarily outmatched in the 1948 war, but won. Arab armies and politicians are plagued with corruption, and that won't change anytime soon.

Just because it won't change soon doesn't mean it won't change.  The idea that the Arabs won't ever gain nukes is ludicrous, and Israel is far more vulnerable to any potential nuclear exchange.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In order to prevail, they either have to assert that there is such a thing as a general "right to return" or that Jews have property rights that Arabs don't. I can't see either assertion as being in Israel's long term interest. Acknowledging a right of return would seriously impact the Jewish nature of Israel. Conversely, making explicit the concept of Arabs having fewer rights in Israel makes more likely the possibility of Israel losing what little international support it has and puts in serious jeopardy its recent efforts to normalize relations with the Arab states.

You are correct up until the last sentence.

Israel actually needs little international support and what it does have is pretty solid.

Whilst ever Palestinian military activists carry on like the Benny Hill Show, israel will obtain legitimacy to defend itself more vigorously and make their expanded real estate goals a reality.

Bethlehem, here we come.

If you really think Israel would be anything like it currently is without U.S. military technical assistance, you're crazy.  I'll admit that currently support for Israel is fairly solid in the U.S. However, what had once been a solidly bipartisan position has become ever more partisan.

Yes, so long as it's just Israel versus the Palestinians, Israel doesn't have much to worry about. But the idea that the Arabs will permanently remain disunited and militarily inferior to Israel is ludicrous and not supported by history. Given current Israeli policies, it's basically a question of when, not if, the State of Israel goes the way of the Crusader States a millennium ago. Israel is likely to last until at least the 22nd century.

Militarily, you are right. But Israel has one trick up its sleeve.

You know, nukes. As long as the Arab states don't have them, Israel is good. And, Israel was militarily outmatched in the 1948 war, but won. Arab armies and politicians are plagued with corruption, and that won't change anytime soon.

Just because it won't change soon doesn't mean it won't change.  The idea that the Arabs won't ever gain nukes is ludicrous, and Israel is far more vulnerable to any potential nuclear exchange.

What did we do to Iraq when we thought they had WMD's? Also, mutually assured destruction.

Israel is a lot easier to destroy. It would only take a few purchased nuclear weapons (supposedly to give Arabs a mutually assured destruction capability to prevent the use of Israeli nukes, or even actually for purposes of MAD) for the Arabs to have enough and they would be no threat to whatever major power sold them.  If you don't think a hostile Arab power would be willing to undertake a nuclear exchange with Israel, then please explain why Hamas engaging in their idiotic rocket attacks the past few weeks would argue against a hostile Arab power being willing to hazard a nuclear exchange.