As it is, neither side wants to admit that it was that far, and I believe at least one Israel official went as far as to say "If they offered that, we'd have a deal right now."

The "Hamas attacks first" analogy is flawed, but that's far from the point.

As for the quoted, all I can say is "lol". We made the mistake of trusting anyone these days a long time ago, examples being the Oslo Accords, the Camp David Accords...we have a problem of gazing through papers quickly, and not realizing the consequences until it becomes a reality.

And trust me, a Palestinian state can never be prosperous until the Arab world cleans up the foreign influence that's widespread in it.

Should of read the rest of it.  One actually said that as far as I remember, so if they're saying that... if the PA really wanted to make a deal.... they would say "OK then we'll take the deal exactly as outlined in the Palestine Papers."

Afterall, if Israel really wouldn't accept such a deal back then... Palestine is never going to get a better deal, and really things will only get worse.

If that was a deal your willing to make, why wouldn't you take the oppurtunity to make it?

Yeah... they'd probably get official statehood within 5 years, be fully autonomous in under 10....

not sure how much land they'd gain back after that... but i'd rather have 90% of my country and prosperous, then have 0% of my country with a longshot of having it all and being poor.

Me... I get it though.

The Palestine Authority is greatly disliked and only in the West Bank because it's seen as the best chance for a negotiation.  Once the negotiations actually happen, chances are the PA bigshots will be powerless in the new government and a lot of them are corrupt and don't want to lose said power.

Hamas... gets it's support political wing wise based on the sole issue of "Israel is the enemy."

Such a position is not teneable if Palestine were a true country with all the consequences such stances like that would have on the world stage.  I think the only reason most governments don't recognize Hamas as the true leaders of Gaza is because then all the rockets being shot are very clearly acts of war that would give Israel far more leeway in everything they're doing. 

That said though Hamas' power would also fall apart in a realized Palestine that had to focus on real solutions and not on "We all hate Israel."  Well that and likely the disbanding of Hamas would be a requirement for peace.  What with them basically being behind all the terrorist attacks.

It's actually pretty simple.

The whole thing is the UK's fault.

Which lead to an imperfect solution that Israel accepted and Palestine didn't.

As such, the wars etc, and the fighting has just continued since despite claimed ceasefires.... and Hamas is almost always the one who fires first.

If what the concessions in the Palestine Papers are true, then the Palestine Authority should in fact state that openly and say that is there deal, and have Israel explain why they won't accept it.

As it is, neither side wants to admit that it was that far, and I believe at least one Israel official went as far as to say "If they offered that, we'd have a deal right now."

As for why Israel wouldn't accept such a deal, the fact that the PA is denying that was an offer kinda explains why they would doesn't it?  If it's a deal they can't even admit to their people they'd make what's the point?

The expectations of the Palestine people are unrealistic and have been maintained that way throught the entire history.

There were much better deals on the table for the Palestinians and they walked away because their people wouldn't accept it.

Like Ireland, they need to realize, they lost a war,(they basically started, well them or the UK.) are not on an equal playing field, and in fact the more time they waste, the more uneven the playing field becomes.

Right now Hamas and the PA's goal seems to be to make the Palestinians as pathetic as possible to try and garner international sympaty and keep poking israel with a stick hoping despite Israel being way more powerful.

Versus the Irish way of taking as much as you can, building up your nation and then arugeing you were forced into a bad agreement by durress.

Neither strategy is likely to work... but only one of them leads to a ton of deaths and poverty for basically all.

As long as rocket attacks are practicallly a daily basis you'll never get enough support to stop any of the things Israel is doing.

Could you imagine if Cuba strated firing missles into florida?  Or Laos into China, or even Latvia into Sweeden?

It'd be no different.

Yes it's the UK's fault way back then. And it's completely understandable why most of the Arabs rejected the partition plan. Despite being the overwhealming majority, they were to only accept 45% of Palestinian land with the rest going to a population mostly consisting of recent European Jewish immigrants fleeing from persecution in Europe. Israel then unilaterally declard independance something they are currently having issues with the Palestinians from doing. And you have to remember the Palestinians want a return to the 1967 borders, not 1947.

It's actually incorrect to assume Hamas breaks ceasefire terms with Israel. It's normally Israel carrying out airstrikes on Hamas members or other Palestinian factions firing rockets, factions that Hamas has been trying to rein in. It was after all Hamas who proposed a long term ceasefire with Israel years ago and under such long term deals a viable peace could have been established just like in Northern Ireland. Israel rejected the deal back then.

If you had read the Palestinian Papers then you should know why the PA kept it a secret and why the Israeli Government at the time rejected them. The concessions were pretty shameful but Israel wanted more. Both parties would have been embarassed but for opposite reasons. Since Israel rejected them there was no point the PA going public with them and it was after all leaked by a disgruntled Palestinian lawyer. The closest the PA and Israel came to a comprehensive settlement was in Taba, Egypt between Arafat and Barak but Israel called them off early.

One of the major hurdles the Palestinians face are the settlement projects which continue unabated to this day and exasperated by the Israeli Law of Return (ironic since the Israelis want the PA to completely drop the Palestinian Right of Return). And I don't think Ireland is a fair comparison. Ireland after all got the vast majority of it's land back with only the North Eastern part with a large Protestant Loyalist population remaining part of the UK. It would be much more wise to compare it with the South African Apartheid era Governments 'Bantustans' where non continuous chunks of land are set aside.

The PA and Hamas don't have to make the Palestinians look as pathetic as possible. Israel is doing that for them. And the rocket attacks pale into comparison what Israel is doing. Gaza is one large prison camp. More and more of the West Bank is being settled by Ultra Zionists. Cuba, Laos and Latvia are not occupied so I don't see the conmparison. If the PA should accept whatever the Israelis offer then they might as well not bother having a negotiator. I guess the South Africans should have just accepted the Bantustans on offer from the Apartheid Government. Luckily for them they kept on resisting injustice and it eventually paid off.

You're pretty much dead on, but I just want to add, in regards to the bolded:

This is why right-wing politicians in Europe (like that douche Geert Wilders) must NOT make any headway. They're exploiting the impoverished immigrants (mainly Muslim) in Europe for a bigger plan. I mean, notice how all of them are strongly pro-Zionist, and even have strong ties with Israel. Coincidence? Nope.

What astonishes me about the likes of Geerts Wilders and the EDL is the level of hypocrisy involved.  On one hand they are strongly anti-Islam and anti-immigration (particulary Muslim immigration) but yet they are huge supporters of Israel which is and has been doing what they fear Muslims might or will be doing in the near or long term future. So on one hand they want Muslim immigration to stop and Islam banned but yet support Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and the settlement projects. They are essentially lending support to one immigrant community (and one that is committing crimes far in excess of whatever crimes the Muslim population of Europe is committing) but oppose it in their own backyard.

Yes it's the UK's fault way back then. And it's completely understandable why most of the Arabs rejected the partition plan. Despite being the overwhealming majority, they were to only accept 45% of Palestinian land with the rest going to a population mostly consisting of recent European Jewish immigrants fleeing from persecution in Europe. Israel then unilaterally declard independance something they are currently having issues with the Palestinians from doing. And you have to remember the Palestinians want a return to the 1967 borders, not 1947.

It's actually incorrect to assume Hamas breaks ceasefire terms with Israel. It's normally Israel carrying out airstrikes on Hamas members or other Palestinian factions firing rockets, factions that Hamas has been trying to rein in. It was after all Hamas who proposed a long term ceasefire with Israel years ago and under such long term deals a viable peace could have been established just like in Northern Ireland. Israel rejected the deal back then.

If you had read the Palestinian Papers then you should know why the PA kept it a secret and why the Israeli Government at the time rejected them. The concessions were pretty shameful but Israel wanted more. Both parties would have been embarassed but for opposite reasons. Since Israel rejected them there was no point the PA going public with them and it was after all leaked by a disgruntled Palestinian lawyer. The closest the PA and Israel came to a comprehensive settlement was in Taba, Egypt between Arafat and Barak but Israel called them off early.

One of the major hurdles the Palestinians face are the settlement projects which continue unabated to this day and exasperated by the Israeli Law of Return (ironic since the Israelis want the PA to completely drop the Palestinian Right of Return). And I don't think Ireland is a fair comparison. Ireland after all got the vast majority of it's land back with only the North Eastern part with a large Protestant Loyalist population remaining part of the UK. It would be much more wise to compare it with the South African Apartheid era Governments 'Bantustans' where non continuous chunks of land are set aside.

The PA and Hamas don't have to make the Palestinians look as pathetic as possible. Israel is doing that for them. And the rocket attacks pale into comparison what Israel is doing. Gaza is one large prison camp. More and more of the West Bank is being settled by Ultra Zionists. Cuba, Laos and Latvia are not occupied so I don't see the conmparison. If the PA should accept whatever the Israelis offer then they might as well not bother having a negotiator. I guess the South Africans should have just accepted the Bantustans on offer from the Apartheid Government. Luckily for them they kept on resisting injustice and it eventually paid off.