That's my point. Both sides have a sizable minority with a lot of will and fire power to continue this forever.

lol, you're over simplifying it.

Difference is the actual agreement. Under an actual agreement you would have some built up trust, probably minimal to any attacks from either side. You would probably have international groups and most importantly Israel themsevles assisting Palestinian infrastructure to be built to slowly take full control of power/water needs. Under a bilateral agreement you would get a safe and stable Palestine.

The route I think Israel is taking is unilateral and will just make this conflict continue forever.

Thanks for the source.

However, the attack just today on the apartment building was far more than the 4:1 "terrorist" vs "civilian" death toll. Regardless of anything else, we should not accept US made arms being used to destroy apartment buildings killing one bad guy and numerous innocents.

Plus, this is ignoring the 2000+ others who have been wounded. A lost leg, arm, eye, etc is almost as bad as death.

1.  But now you seem to be defending an attitude of wanting to destroy the state of Israel, not denying it, as you did here:  "not recognizing its existance in maps, etc, is not the same thing as calling for its destruction".  It's a pretty fine line between wanting it to be gone, knowing that it will never leave unless it is destroyed, and calling for it to be destroyed. 

2.  I'd need to look into this more to be able to address the specific issues you mention.  But what do you mean by "still expanding"?  What new areas have been settled recently? 

3.   So you admit that genocide may have been the wrong word.  OK. 

Suggestions?  Callous is a good one.  Warlike would be accurate but probably too obvious; civilian casualties have been a sad byproduct of war forever.  Murderous would be too much of a stretch IMO since the civilians are not the target in your example, but an attack aimed at no particular target other than population centers is obviously trying to kill civilians and could be fairly called murderous. 

[edit:  "indiscriminately deadly" is kind of a mouthful, but sounds appropriately bad.  I don't know if it's actually accurate though; occasionally they kill a lot of innocent bystanders, but usually not many.]

Just pointing out the oversimplifications already there.  Your refined position has some merit.

1. I have never called for the destruction of Israel. I do think that history shows it shouldn't exist, that the land should be 100% arab controlled, however, Israel is a soveign state and does exist. The millions of Jews living there deserve a peaceful home to prosper just as the Arabs do. I just recognize that Arabs would be shooting themselves in the foot to cede its existance on maps etc before Israel declares Palestine a state as well.

2. No *new* settlements, just expanding existing ones. i.e. taking more Palestinian land into already existing settlements.

1.  I never said you did. 

I don't see how that kind of silliness helps their position.  Why would it shoot them in the foot?  Why don't they just show maps with them having all the green line stuff you say they should have, instead of laying claim to the whole of Israel?  It's sheer madness to think they'll get any more than that, isn't it?  So there would be nothing lost by conceding it. 

2.  But they have physically increased in size, i.e. expanded the geographical area of the settlements? 

- And yet that is part of the US military's SOP. It was certainly done in Iraq when they were trying to kill Hussein and other high value targets.

- It may surprise you to know that the US military considers civilian population centers to be valid targets.

- It may also surprise you to know that the US has always held that it retains the option of a first strike with nuclear arms for any valid military or political reason/necessity.

Frank, he said US made arms... Israel uses US made arms, we use arms made in China.

One hand washing the other. But yes, Mattel does manufacture their stuff in China.

It's all the saddest of sad things as far as I'm concerned. I blame the Balfour Declaration. Unfortunately assigning blame isn't going to help at all.