You want to know what a real contradiction is (just out of fairness of couse), is stating that Palestinians deserve compensation (or return), but denying Jews the same right.  Jews throughout the Arab world were driven out the Arab nations due to the 1948 war that was instigated by the Arabs. 

Why are the Arabs so concerned with giving the Palestinians their just dues, but their own Jewish citizenry (who were not involved in the war) were driven out of the Arab nations that they were citizens of without a cent of compensation.  They had their assests and property stripped from them, and they received nothing in return except a swift kick in the ass. 

So if we really are serious about fairness for the Arabs who lost land and possessions due to the war, than we have to give Jews the same... am I wrong?

Certainly, if we are to have a fair and comprehensive peace initiative, then we have to give the proper dues to both the Jews and Arabs who were victimized by the war.  Right?

So, if the Geneva Initiative is the route to go, then who plans on implementing this?  Both Israel and the Palestinians will not allow a foreign power to send troops to their lands, so how would one initiate such a plan?  Sending a foreign army on either groups' soil is a recipe for disaster, because both people would wipe out any "peace keeping" force that attempted to raise their hand to them. (this has been proven many times since 1967).

I am playing the devil's advocate here of course...  but for arguements sake, assuming that such a plan would work, I think it is impossible to implement because neither party will accept the requirements of the agreement.

Highjacked?  Those are some strong words.  You asked a direct question in your thread, and each of us whom you listed as the "highjackers" merely answered your question.  Are you suggesting we are forum terrorists because we answered honestly?  If the purpose of your original thread was to have only people whom agree with your position answer, then that should have been stated in your post.

As for the rest of your comment...

Israel destroyed a rocket installation that was positioned at a school, and hence a school was destroyed because Hamas decided to place it there.

I do enjoy the humor of your insinuation that Hamas is not to blame for using a school as a military hideout.  Considering that Hamas was using a UN installation, I also find it quite interesting that the UN is not throwing a fit that a terrorist group is using their installation as a place of death rather than the house of education that it was intended to be. 

But, as Hamas has admitted before, they do this on purpose to cause civilian deaths for PR purposes.. so I am not shocked by their actions at all.

And because Israel has less deaths, this suddenly makes them evil?  What, do you really suppose that in war that each side is supposed to "keep it even" and allow their troops/civilians to die at an equal rate as their enemy?  I hate to school you on the history of warfare, but no nation in the recorded history of mankind has ever followed such a logic.  So I fail to see how Israel protecting their people and hence, having fewer casualties has anything to do with the conflict.  Once again, Hamas readily admits that they place civilians in the middle of combat and bombing zones for the purpose of them dying. 

Just as a reminder:

Hamas MP Fathi Hammad said:

The enemies of Allah do not know that the Palestinain people has developed its methods of death and death-seeking.  For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry, at which women excel, and so do all the people living in this land.  The elderly excel at this, and so do the mujahideen and the children.

This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine.  It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy:

"We desire death like you desire life."

So, I hope we are finally clear on why the Palestinian death toll is always disproportionantly high.  They do it on purpose to gain the sympathy of the West.  Once again, don't call me a liar, as it is not me saying this, but the Palestinians who proudly admit this.

Lastly, Bush is gone in 2-weeks, so impeachment is kind of a null point now, don't ya' think?

Yes, I readily acknowledged the unfortunate obstinacy of both sides and the dismal chances any peace initiative has at succeeding. I chose the Geneva Initiative because it is a realistic solution. If it were chosen and had to be enforced, it seems as if enforcement based on economic aid would be the desired direction. Both the Palestinians and Israel receive substantial amounts of foreign aid. The UN would send an observation force, similar to UNTSO, to ensure that both sides were implementing the terms of the agreement. If either side was to violate the terms, the foreign donors would be able to force the obstinate party through the threat of decreased aid. Also, the aid to the Palestinians would have to include a measure to eliminate corruption within the PA. The culture of corruption that has plagued the PA has undermined its authority and popularity with the Palestinian people. Anyway, given the nature of the conflict, I know it is: A) an unlikely solution B) likely to fail. Nevertheless, we would be in the current situation if it failed, so why not attempt something different?

Nope. Your certainly right. That should be factored into the deal squashing the Right of Return.

OMG, you and I actually agree on something for once?  Wow, if you and I can agree on something involving the peace process, maybe there really is hope for the planet! ;)

Seriously though, I do agree with you, as I have been saying the same thing for sometime.  So, I'm actually quite impressed with you logic.

We've sort of agreed on other principles, I just feel at times we don't want to say it.

True... I have a great deal of personal feeling for the Palestinians as you, I just think we place more of the blame on different parties.

I know it's a non-factor now, but if I was all powerful (and could snap my fingers to make it happen) I would overthrow the Hashemite throne and give the Kingdom of Jordan to the Palestinians, and let the Israelis keep all of Israel from the "river to the sea".

I've always supported the idea of a 100% Palestinian Kingdom east of the river.. I've never been a fan of the Kingdom being run by the decendants of Abdullah. 

Actually, the original mandate long before 181, spelled out this precise plan... The Palestinians (or Arab's of Palestine as it was originally described, but same difference) were supposed to get that.

While that idea may seem fair in nature, its still isn't right to displace people from their homes.

The best policy would have been to allow Palestine to exist as a state under the conditions that the migrant Jewish Europeans be protected by law and their legally purchased lands stay as such.

However, I realize that the realism is that too much anger had already fostered between the two segments and the Jews probably would have been under constant aggrivation or at best considered 2nd class citizens.

If I was a god I would turn back time and force those europeans to learn to live with the jews and wouldnt let them create Israel and send them to another place just because they dont like them. Both the jews and palestinians where victicms of the world powers of the time, but both arent innocent at all, meaning that I can understand why they would want to blow each other.
Now, I dont support the US giving such militay support to Israel. There is gonna be conflict for years, and I dont think its fair that one side is fighting with tanks and airstrikes and the other one just with trashy weapons.

And I dont support the attack on the schools or hospitals, whatever the reason, if u see people attacking you from there u cant jst think people inside are all in agreement with it and blow them all together. There where surely innocent people that just wanted to escape from the conflict. And from what ive read recently the only defense to this attack was that hamas usually attacks from schools, or have done it before, but it didnt say anything of the circumstances that where happening in that particular case, maybe Im wrong but Im too lazy to look up some more info.