Oh. Okay.

I didn't realize that 'realistic' was a qualifier for this thread.

In that case, we can forget about your solution too, Dave. Because it ain't realistic and it's never gonna happen. Sorry.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-...o_Israel1.html

Not bullshit, overstatement. Four wars and various other actions before 1974.

Hubris, even if the US did stop all aid to Israel ( which won't happen) I think you underestimate the resources of the Jews around the world. They would rather the US pay the bill but if necessary I think they could do a credible job on their own.
If we blocked arms sales, we've already seen the world market will pick up the slack quite handily.
There are many Jews working in weapons technology careers in almost every country, that would come to Israels aid. How do you think they got nuclear weapons.

Sorry, Tony. According to your source, US military aid to Israel began in 1959, and flat-out 'economic' gimmes began in earnest in 1952.

If memory serves, the wars Israel has fought to date:

1) 1956- The Sinai War
2) 1967- The Six Day War
3) 1973- The Yom Kippur War

I don't count "The War for Independence" because that was just a bunch of Irgun thugs with guns. I'm also leaving out the occupation of southern Lebanon because that fiasco didn't start until '82. So, which three wars did I miss?

War of Attrition, 1968-70

It should also be noted that before 1974, military "aid" was actually loans. Grants did not begin until 1974; loans were phased out some time thereafter.

Does anyone know if those loans were repaid or forgiven?

I did count the War of Independence. There's this guy:

http://www.historyguy.com/arab_israeli_wars.html

...who is as generous as I was with the definition of "war"...

BUT, the original point remains. Before Nixon, the US didn't really have much concern with Israel; they were a minor matter to us. During that time, they fought and won major conflicts with major military hardware against a good sector of the Arab world, and they kicked ass and took names.

It's my understanding that the Arab world makes really crappy militaries, partly because their culture requires them to get clearance from the very top of their command chain for every little decision. (Thus, perhaps, the failure of the Iraqis to blow up the mined bridges this time around: once their communications was cut on day one, the grunts had no way to get the order to blow up the bridges, and would not take the initiative to do it on their own.)

I wonder if the Islamic soldiers (at least the grunts) feel they just have to go through the motions and obey orders because it's all in Allah's hands.
Whereas the Jewish soldiers know it's up to each and every one of them to do the best they can or they're all toast. :confused:

The Israeli Arab conflict will most probably end when one of the fighters will die. Today Israelian state is much stronger but never knows tomorrow. The history was always harsch.
The conflict, I believe it's religious and cultural. There is no way to kill the members of Hamas for example, because the hate is in the minds of all the muslims in this world and it is reinforced by Quran. There will always appear muslim extremists with Quran in their hands sustaining their terrorist acts. Should we kill the muslims? It's absurd! The only acceptable solution would be to modernise a Middle Age stucked religion and this is ISLAM. But this could last (if it really works) for centuries.
I see no wonder solution.

Those that have said American disentanglement from Israel won't work have it right. Jews form one of the core voter blocks of the Democratic party, as do the Christian Right (and their ties to the Holy Land) with Republicans. The chances of our cutting Israel off are actually slightly less than having a third-party President.

Okay, I've spent about a half hour staring at this map of Israel, I think I have (at least the rough outlines of) a plan. Poke holes where you can, global problem-solving is an evolutionary process.

First of all, we need to eliminate the friction area - the West Bank. To start with, I propose relocating everyone out of the area - Israeli and Palestinian alike - and place the land tract under the jurisdiction of a UN peacekeeper force. Essentially make it neutral territory. Should either side attempt to encroach, it will be held against them later on. Jerusalem would remain Israeli, but under the auspices of a similar UN force.

Next, we need to give the PLO land that they can call their own: after looking at the map, the best possible stretch I can determine is this: Start at a point on the eastern border, just south of midway between the Dead Sea and that lake to the south of it - say 10-50 miles. From that point, draw a line southeast that skirts the northwest coast of the lake. Continue the line until you reach the 31st parallel. When there, run along the parallel west until you hit the Sinai. Everything inside Israel's borders and south of that line becomes Palestine - essentially, it's the Negev desert, with access to a water source. Run a similar line maintaining the 10-50 mile distance I mentioned earlier, but north of the new border. This space becomes a buffer, controlled by the UN, for a period of however long is necessary.

Okay, now the problems. Here's what I see thus far:

1) I know Jerusalem is the declared capital of Israel, however, most of the world maintains their embassies in Tel Aviv. Is this an instance of de facto / de jure capitals, or are the Israelis seriously entrenched in Jerusalem?

2) The land grant is a huge concession, which means Israel would have to get something serious in return. I'm thinking the handover of the top x number of leaders from Hamas, IJ, and AAMB, with the PLO's assurance of no terror attacks for x number of years. The treaty clearly states that one infraction will result in a hard-line retaliation by Israel, however they see fit. Has to be that language. They want to send in every man, woman, child, tank, and fighter plane - fair enough. They want backup assistance from the UN - fair enough. They want to use nukes...negotiable.

It was stated that it's a cultural thing "Hey, we've bombed them and gotten this much, now let's kick it up a notch.", but I have to think that the public leaders of the PLO will recognize that they are being handed an honest-to-God victory here and will seize it with both hands.

3) The PLO may bitch about not having a direct land access to the Mediterranean coast and, through that, the Suez. This may be difficult, and can be revisited. It's 2 AM, and I'm not at my most miraculous this late in the day.

Okay guys, Tha Troubashoota needs him some sleeps. See you tomorrow...today...Kwanzaa...whatever it is now.

Watching the events unfold on TV, the thing that strikes me about the landscape of Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan is a zillion square miles that all look alike. Nobody there. Desert. No water.
Providing water would make all this land viable living space with room for everyone. Expensive? hell yes but what are we, and others, spending now on weapons and aid.
Would this solve everything? Hell no. The cultural clash and deep seated hate would still be there, but that could be addressed. It's like the 'hood, the cultural rubs are exerbated by physical rubs.

BTW, I read Isreal gets 40% of it's water from captured lands.

THIS is the only way the Middle Easy conflict will end:

http://nuketesting.enviroweb.org/hew...90MS640c10.jpg