How about I just jump ship on this one and post a solution here since this obviously isn't going to get anywhere.

Each side makes concessions. That's called diplomacy. You all I hope know that.

Israeli Concessions:
1.) West Bank - apportion the West Bank and all territory within it (excl. Jerusalem; TBA) to Palestine as land for a new state.
2.) Settlement halt - all settlements in the West Bank should be immediately stopped and transferred to Palestinian governance. Any Israelis should be relocated.
3.) Removal of troops from West Bank - goes without saying.
4.) 50-year peace agreement with Palestine - Israel never got time to establish themselves as a nation. Frankly, they were awfully lucky. If they want permanent peace, they have to allow Palestine to establish themselves.
5.) Yearly aid to Palestine - only until they have a stable nation and can provide for themselves.
6.) Immediate recognition of Palestine as a sovereign nation.

Palestinian Concessions:
1.) Complete abolition of all military force - all weaponry should be destroyed or sold to neutral nations (i.e not the US, Russia, or Arab nations).
2.) Return Gaza to Israel - having a split population will only lead to problems. Centralization will be critical for early development.
3.) Immediate recognition of Israel as a sovereign nation.

Arab Nations Concessions:
1.) Immediate adoption of all Palestinian-Israeli refugees - the fact that they haven't already done this on their own accord suggests just how much they actually care about the welfare of the people (none) and how much they want Israel to look bad to the world (a lot). Allow them to emigrate to Palestine without delay or penalty.
2.) Unilateral recognition of Israel as a sovereign nation - duh.
3.) 50-year peace agreement with Israel - hopefully the generation 50 years down the road can hold it up.
4.) Yearly aid to Palestine - match Israel. They need to demonstrate to Israel that they care about this as much as the western world does, and the western world will certainly be throwing aid around all over the place.
5.) Abandonment of nuclear weapons programs - the deal with Iran is a great step in this direction.

International Concessions:
1.) UN-led/sanctioned peace agreement - there's no way in the world we can simply hope they hold the agreement themselves.
2.) Partition of Jerusalem - it's not going to ever be international territory. It's too valuable to both Israel and the new state.

There's probably more that could be done, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

@Mendax -
1. You have google...you're a big boy. Look 'em up. You want to talk about kill ratio's in conflict, maybe you ought to **educate yourself** so you don't look like an uninformed fool...

2. Really? Ridiculous. You telling me it is impossible to attack someone if you are the lesser power? So when an inmate attacks a prison guard and the prison guard retaliates, it is really the prison guard attacking the inmate? THAT is your logic?

3. Sigh....exactly BECAUSE they are cramped and KNOW for a fact civies will die in the *retaliation* by Isreal they are **knowingly endangering the lives of civies**....thus they are **exactly** using them as cannon fodder.

That's about as good a two-state deal as you're going to get, I think.

So you say I'm ignoring comments, and then you tell me that the comments aren't here so I should be googling for them? Seriously? Because that's just plain dumb as an argument.

That's what they could do if they would stop trying to demonize each other and recognize each other as potential partners for a long time, mendax, the same thing you should do.

"So you say I'm ignoring comments, and then you tell me that the comments aren't here so I should be googling for them? Seriously? Because that's just plain dumb as an argument. "
Good lord, mendax, grow up, seriously

I **did** mention the kill ratios in other wars, I just didn't give you teh specific numbers because I thought you were a big enough boy to look them up on your own. You ignored the comments.

Bump.

It's easy for people sitting behind two oceans to call people in the Middle East "children". When was the last time you were afraid of a rocket attack or a plane dropping a bomb on your residence?

@Putin33 "When was the last time you were afraid of a rocket attack or a plane dropping a bomb on your residence?"

What does that have to do with anything? You yourself have a *lot* of strong opinions about things that don't directly endanger you.

What does having strong opinions have to do with anything?

The problem wasn't the strong opinion, the point was calling the fighting 'childish' from the security of the United States.

Why shouldn't he call the fighting 'childish' from the security of the United States, if that's what he thinks and that's where he is?

"When was the last time you were afraid of a rocket attack or a plane dropping a bomb on your residence?"

2006, when I stayed a month a half hour north of Eilat and could hear the military training in their compound just off the kibbutz and was trained in exactly where to go within 60 seconds if the sirens went off, which they only did once.

Because infantilizing people when you don't have to deal with the same problems yourself just makes you look like the child, not them.

Putin, honestly, if you're going to criticize me for calling a 2000-year-long fight "childish" under the "security of the United States" then you should stop calling people on this site random bullshit names from the security of your computer screen. The bombs and missiles can't reach me in the United States and the fists of people that could beat the living crap out of you can't reach you through your computer screen. So shut the fuck up.

Go get 'im Bo. Putin does indeed have the mind of a child...a spoiled brat, at that. Ever notice that whatever side anyone takes, he will take the opposite and criticize. If instead of saying the fight was childish you had instead said it was a very mature war dealing wtih complex issues, yadda yadda yadda, he would have called you a name and told you the war was childish.

Putin is just a truly sick and angry person, who's sole purpose is to attack people. You should just mute him. I've found it incredible refreshing!!

hey Bo - truly, I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving, by the way. We butt heads sometimes - but you're good people. Have a great day.

You're whining about me calling others names?

Rich, coming from someone who can't even disagree about baseball without cussing people out.

Putin, come to Indy sometime, let's see how your big fancy degree holds up.

Hint hint ... it won't help you.

I don't have a big fancy degree.

But thanks for threatening me with physical violence, thug.

You're more like Draugnar than you realize.

And why would I visit the toilet that is Indianapolis? Can't even drive through your shithole of a state without getting a flat tire.

A flat tire?

Is that supposed to...

Fuck it, whatever.

Anyone else want to say something useful?

By useful you obviously mean calling entire countries of grown adults children. Because you're what, 18, grandpa?

@Putin33 What is the point of making so many public arguments that no one finds convincing?

What is the point of your endless grandstanding and lame appeals to your (non) popularity?

Wrong question, tendmote.

You should be asking what the point of making so many arguments about nothing that no one else gives a shit about is.

Putin, if you don't like me, mute me. You wouldn't be the first.

I just looked up grandstanding, wiktionary.org says

"To behave dramatically or showily to impress an audience or observers; to pander to a crowd."

Holy shit man, now *that* is projection. Your forum posts often introduce such dramatic subjects as Rwandan genocide, assassination attempts, and whatever other high-impact/low-probability consequence that could follow from something you disagree with. "Grandstanding" is your strategy, not mine.

Deeper still it's not a "lame appeal to popularity" (I have none.) It's accepting that the opinions of others are a valuable reference point to check your own ideas against. Now, once in a great while some individual is correct in a "one-against-the-world" situation. But if so many people's common sense rejects your line of reasoning... well maybe that common sense has some value, even if it doesn’t “win the game” in the framework you develop.

Tendmote, BoSox, if you're so morally superior to arguments why do you constantly make them?

Tendmote's supposed aversion to political threads is particularly amusing. In the same category as Draugnar's "mutes".

"Putin, if you don't like me, mute me. You wouldn't be the first."

That wasn't a response to you.

I wasn't the one who started this personal attack-fest, Bosox. So why don't you take your own advice, for once. Surely muting would be a lot less unsavory than threatening to beat people up.

This is why reading wiki definitions is not useful. Because you still don't understand the definition.

How am I pandering to a crowd, while simultaneously ignoring the "common sense" of the crowd?

Can you not be incoherent, for once?