Damn, i do apologize. Harper's statement was circuitous and i ended up getting the wrong message out of it (partially because i wanted to)

Sorry.

Still, a call for teh Palestinian state to be demilitarized is worrisome. Its not like their military could actually be a threat to Israel, and Israel's put up with neighbors with militaries up to this point...

what need for a military does a country of palestine have?  they may or may not even be in control of their own borders for years if palestine ever becomes a country  and israel would not likely just allow another country to invade that terroritory.  additionally an agreement would likely include pledges to support against external harm from at least a dozen countries. 

a lot of these other arab countries would probably be better off without militaries too, since they seem to be only used against their own populations or attacking israel. 

Not really, I mean one of the issues is that peace would be seen as just a pretext for building up an army with which to attack Israel.  They could EVENTUALLY build up enough to be a threat, espiecally supported by other middle eastern countries.

Heck, it's like that Egyptian guy who was on here back when Mubarek was being put down who was happy so they could declare war on Israel eventually in revenge for losing a war he thought they should of one, but lost due to one tactical mistake.

For an analous situation... say your working in Washington DC, and suddenly the south gets REALLY anti-north again and the civil war states all decide to cede again and talking about how they should run the ENTIRE country.

does this make sense to allow?  Espiecally since they would be just miles away from our nations capital?

The strength gap with Israel has only grown since the Six Days war. It would be hard for Syria to do anything meaningful right now, and the Palestinians would start basically from zero. A Palestinian state would have to acknowledge Israel's right to exist from the getgo, which would sunder them from the Iranian alignment immediately. It would take them decades to build up to that level, and in the hangtime they would be afraid enough of disastrous defeat to hold off.

Independence should come with a mutual nonagression pact, but an independent Palestine has to have all the rights of a sovereign state or else its not proper independence, similar to if they got "independence" while they were still crisscrossed with Israeli-controlled "restricted zones."

The thing is some kind of military force is essentially required for a sovereign state. Israels conditions basically would give Palestine faux-sovereignity but leave Israel still holding de facto control. It'd basically be the status quo with a different veneer.

Exactly. It would actually be a better position for Israel, because if they accepted "sovereignty" under those conditions, Israel could just say "well, you've got sovereignty, so what are you bitching about now?"

That's why the right independence is critical. Wrong independence will either maintain the status quo or lead to further civil strife within Palestine

Tell that to Lichtenstein, Costa Rica, Microneisa, Grenada, Iceland...

That... sounds like a bunch of idealized nonsense.  The Palestine state akcnolwedges Israels right to exist... ok.  How does that actually ever stop them from attacking Israel?

Why would that sunder them from Iranian alignmnet?  Like, seriously, why?  Because they were forced to say something to get their own country?  You don't think Iran understands having to lie to the international community?

What i'm really getting at here is that it would entail a political shift to the point where these possibilities would cease to exist. The moderate political alliance (with more inclination towards the Hamas way of thinking than currently exists, but not so much as to be truly damaging) would as a matter of course be disinclined towards violent options or towards the Iran-Hezbollah bloc. I'm foreseeing a more toothless alignment similar to Jordan, or at most Egypt who might pay lip-service to a more anti-Israeli action, but won't do anything

I'm not being naive, i'm saying that the conditions necessary to enact the two-state solution will also lend themselves towards a lasting peace, according to the political movements and attitudes necessary for that to come about.

Well Costa Rica, Grenada and Iceland all have paramilitary forces of some kind, even without a proper military. Lichtenstien as a microstate is a bit different.

Micronesia is a good example though, with their security carried out by the USA. However there is a different in having your security carried out by a ally in a mutually beneficial arrangement and having your security carried out by a historic enemy by their demands. The second one is essentially occupation.