That's one way of putting it.

Of course, given the extreme hostility of many Arabs towards any minority and especially Jews; given that non-Arab minorities in Arab countries have been persecuted, discriminated against, and gassed in the last century; and given that most Arab countries have murdered and expelled their original Jewish minority populations any solution that would hand over the remaining middle-eastern Jews to those same Arab nationalists might indeed find little support among the Jewish elite.

The leader of the Arabs in "Palestine" (or southern Syria, as he saw it), Muhammed al-Husayni said in 1944, in Berlin:

After both wars he wrote in his memoirs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Amin_al-Husayni

So, yes, I agree with you. The reason there is a conflict in Israel between Jews and Arabs, actually in the entire Arab world between Arabs and all minorities but specifically Arabs and Jews, is the refusal of the Ashkenazi Jewish elite to support the obvious solution.

I am fully confident that if the Jewish elite had supported the obvious solution, the conflict would be over by now, and "Palestine" would be as Jew-free as the rest of the Arab world (sans Morocco). And there would be no conflict and we would have perfect peace in "Palestine" (except for the odd major war between Islamic fundamentalists and Arab nationalists and the like).

Note that al-Husayni is still revered by the PLO. Yasser Arafat (al-Husayni's nephew) called him his mentor and the father of the "Palestinian" people.

So how do we convince Israel's current elite (which includes Jews that fled Arab countries) to support the "obvious solution"?

After 6 million died in the Holocaust perpetrated by the Arabs' German friends and several Arab attempts to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews and millions of Jews expelled from all Arab countries (except Morocco), an "obvious solution" that depends entirely on the good-will of those same people seems a bit problematic to me.

I can tell you that I won't support the "obvious solution"; although when Hassan Nasrallah called on all the Jews in the world to assemble in northern Israel so he could kill them all, I did go to northern Israel and had I not been evacuated, the "obvious solution" would have allowed me to find peace.

Why is my statement anti-Semitic? Anti-Semitic would suggest that i dislike Jewish people, would it not? Let's say i am wrong, and that you are right. Why would my misinterpritation of events make me dislike people of a certain faith?

How dare you insult me in such a way, it's like saying i'm a racist because i didn't fully understand the issues surrounding the abbolition of slavery.

Well the UN didn't single out Israel, they've made requests to the likes of Iraq (for their invasion of Kuwait), Sudan (for their invasion of Darfur),   It's just that these countries didn't have a hugely succesful lobby in America that allowed it to get away with clearly disregarding the UN.

Either way, to put into context what is happening, let's say Britain and France went to war tomorrow. In a conflict lasting six days, the French forces were pushed out of Normandy before finally sueing for peace.

British forces remainded in Normandy, which you know isn't all that unusal after winning a conflict. Then the French went to the UN asking for Normandy back, and the UN agreed with them. Which in some respects may not of been the right thing to do, whats to say that after giving Normandy back the French just wouldn't have another pop at us? Regardless the UN has voted, it is the closest thing we have to a global democarcy (which i think can only be considered a good thing) and as such should be adhered to.

Britain at this point refuses, and maintains an occupation of Normandy against the will of the French people living there, and the French people in the surrounding area, The French goverment, the UN and international opinion (whatever good that is).

The British then start moving British citizens across onto Main land Europe and settling in Normandy, more importantly removing French families from their homes, bulldozing them and then building a new house on top of it for the new British settlers (All this in the areas with good access to water and other rich resources).

Ask yourself this, if the French in occupied Normandy opted to rebel in this enviroment, would you consider them lazy Dr Guy?

Leauki may contest the issue of bulldozing, as he has previously with me. I've not been to Israel, nor the Gaza strip or the West Bank. I've only information i've obtained from journalists and members of organistations such as the UN.

I spoke to my fathers friend, an expert in peace negotiation for the UN from Northern Ireland. He was in Ramalla and witnessed a Palastinian home having it's occupance evicted and finally bull dozed. Several days later work began on brining in mobile homes for a new Israeli settlement. I believe this happend fairly recently.

The Arabs are not blameless in the history of this conflict, but the more i find out about it, the more i can in the very least understand their contempt for their Israeli neighbours.

The "Palestinians" have a higher standard of living than Egyptians and Jordanians. When the border between Gaza and Egypt was open they literally bought the Sinai empty.

The "ruthless blockade" started when Hamas declared war. The border to Egypt was open until Hamas frightened the European border officials away.

Israel didn't force the "Palestinians" to vote for Hamas and war.