Isreal are more likely to take over more parts of the middle east and commit genocide then give up land. 

I'm not saying they would have to join Palestine, i'm saying free International Zone.

Israel's slide to the right is all the more disturbing. The less they act like a partner for peace, the more violence they're going to get...

For the first part - only if we get attacked first (which is the only thing that ever happens).

For the second - although there are some here who would like to genocide the arabs, most Israelis will never, ever, wish or act for something like that to happen, ever.

So Obama is recycling the Saudi initiative back in 2002 which the US and Israel immediately rejected back then.

Anyhow it seems like the US is finally coming round to what the rest of the world has been saying fo decades which is no peace without a return to the 1967 borders with mutually agreeable land swaps. I'm not sure how it will be implemented though. Too many settlements in the West Bank to many Israelis West Bank is part of biblical Israel (Judea and Samaria). To complicate matters futher the Israeli lobby is very powerful in the US and a very large part of the US population take the Bible literally so need Israel to exist in it's biblical form in order for the rapture to take place.

Both sides will have to make great sacrifices. Israel will surely have to give up many of the settlements in the West Bank and the Palestinians will have to forgo the right of return to Israel proper.

The thing is though according to leaked documents courtesy of Wikileaks and AL-Jezeera, just a few years ago the PLO made very serious concessions in secret that would've given Israel more than there fair share. But it was rejected because it did not include some of the settlements in the West Bank.

Also wonder where the Golan Heights fit into this.

The Heights i imagine are a private matter between Israel and Syria, and Syria has no sympathy or bartering power to speak of lately

Except those people want to be Israelis.

As for the move to the right... I agree... except what is forgotten is that Israel's slide to the right happened in response to Palestines slide to the right by electing Hamas.

Aside from which.  If you believe the leaked documents.  Why would you expect Israel to even remotely except any of this when they just recently had deals that were better that they didn't take.

See the way you go about it though is all wrong too. Because there was a time when Jews weren't local either, and they just happened to settle on the land.

However who exactly are the Palestinians? I may be wrong but I thought they were descendants of a religion very close to the jewish one, I forgot the particular name right now. Furthermore if I remember, they ended up converting to Christianity then to Islam as the region changed control, it could have been straight to Islam it was a bit ago. The point is however, that those people just happen to have lived there and changed relgion based on whoever was in control. Meanwhile the original jews did not begin to come back to the region until much later, and then with WWII and all tha, even more so. My point being, what are currently called Plestinians seems to be a mix of arabs, crusader/Byzantine, and jewish blood, mostly being mixed up in that very region. That is exactly why I believ it is far mroe their land, than the jews who just came back to it when they noticed they were unwanted absolutely anywhere else. (speaking of which, I find it interesting that the ST. Louis never tried to dock in Africa or something if they were so desperate to get out of Europe. I guess they chose to risk it than have to put up with such an "uncivilized place" or some other bullshit).

Er, no I'm not.  They lived there and were the local rulers.  By local ruler... I mean who's country can be constituted as being based out of that geographical location.

Also... they were planning to go to Africa.  Before the British agreed to give them Israel, the British were going to offer them Somalia.  However they said they would prefer to go back to the home of their ancestors... and the british agreed and gave them part of palestine rather then all of Somalia. 

As for "just decided to come back" do you mean... had the first time to come back ever because well... it was the first time they had any power to effect any positive change in any large number?

They didn't just notice they were unwanted absolutely everywhere else... to claim that is to seemingly not understand basic history.  There had NEVER been a time where jews have been openly welcomed anywhere before then... and very very few places even now.

As for the "mixed blood" arguement.  It's actually quite the opposite.  Palestine was not ruled locally... there is actually very little "mixed blood" in the palestinian population.

Unlike the jews who faced constant diasporias.

.I can't understand why you think such a case is logical.  Two groups of people live under a tyrant... one refuses to comply and is banished, the other group complies.  Eventually the tyrant is overthrown... and the group that complies deserves more compensation?

Additionally, you somewhat undermind your point with the whole "changing religions" thing... afterall that's not all they changed.  They changed everything.  Culturally they are no longer what they were back when the region was ruled by the indiginious people they did adopt the customs of their conquerers. 

It also generally ignores that presently Israel is there... and they hold all of the cards.

Even if the US were to turn against Israel it wouldn't change anything... and Israel isn't likely going to agree to borders that put their cities within bottle rocket distance of the Palestinians, and feel justifably nervous about sharing their holiest city with a group of people who employ sucide bombers and think they should be "driven into the sea."

The problem is, Palestine's leaders are generally stupid and or corrupt... things are NEVER going to break there way until, like Israel.  They have an established country.

If they were smart and gave a damn about their own people they would sign the best deal they could get today, no matter how bad a deal it was.  Build up their infrastructure, feed and clothe their people, get control of their borders from Israel and get aid in building their military...

and then Go to the UN argueing that Israel forced them to sign that treaty under duress while occupied and try and get more land.

They'll have more support, and even better, there people won't be in such a shitty prediciment and with any hope they'll have actual buisness and economic power so they will get more support from the middle east and other nations then they do now... with countries like Syria just paying lip service.

I mean, you can tell by how poorly Palestinian refugees are treated in their "allied" states like lebanon and Syria.

As I said, the British fucked everything up, and they should have just given up some spit of land in England if they were so eager to make a place for the jews.

The jews were slowly trickling in the region from well before Israel, due to tolerance. I didn't try to make it sound like they just realized they were unwanted, that was a fault on my part. I am also aware that Palestine has not been ruled locally in a long time, between the Byzantines then all the different Turkish. At the same time what we call Palestenians are those people who just happened to be in the region and they changed their culture depending on whoever was in control then.

See this is where I think your logic falls apart. Why do people who didn't have the will to stay and figure something out should be able to just come back and have back their land? They didn't fight for it when it was needed, nor did they assimilate to keep its claim. The ones that did have a much bigger claim to the land than the ones that just left and therefore deserve control over it. In one case you have "fuck my beliefs, let me have my land," and in the other you have "fuck my land, le me have my beliefs." The jews that were banished made their choice clear they don't care as much for their lands, so they don't deserve them.

Edit: I do agree more or less on the course of action you outlined, however I am just arguing how much claim Palestenians actually have to the land.