Israel doesn't want a two-state solution??

[Crazy Eddie]

I did not expand the definition. I simply said that slapping a badge on a soldier doesn't make him not a soldier.

Absent from your fictional scenario is any evidence that indicates he was a soldier in the first place, let alone one to which a badge was "slapped."

Do you have such evidence, or just more assumptions?

No. They go out of their way to pretend combatants are civilians. If we knew the guy was in a vehicle hit by an assassination rocket we would correctly identify him as almost certain combatant.

Exactly. "Innocent until proven guilty." This is a circular argument, especially when you dig into the incident report and discover that Khaled Hafeez was seven years old at the time he was killed.

Although I suppose throwing a rock in the general direction of a UAV six months earlier would be evidence enough of his combatant status... which we can assume without any evidence at all probably really happened because Jihadism.

If it simply says he wasn't taking part in combat operations he looks like a civilian.

Or he was an activist or public servant whose role in the Palestinian government was well known to B'tselem.

Or he was a child. That happens QUITE A BIT in Palestine.

I suggest actually reading.

Take your own advice, because he didn't. The author who QUOTED a comment by an interior minister during an interview interpreted it as such, despite what he actually said: that 250 police officers were killed on the first day, that 200 to 300 Hamas fighters were killed, plus 150 people from "other organizations and security forces." This only adds up to 600 to 700 if you assume that police officers are equivalent to "fighters" with neither Hamas nor B'tselem do, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. Unlike Israel, they also do not include activists and government clerks.

 

[Ger1956]

There has never been a Palestinian state prior, to partition it was a British mandate before that part of the Ottoman empire, before that part of the Byzantine Empire, before that Roman empire, before that Persian,Egyptian Etc. While the Palestinian people have much to be frustrated with, the object of their frustration should not be Israel but their own leaders , who have thrown away opportunity after opportunity.

1/ The UN in 1947 (resolution 181) voted for partition of Palestine into an Jewish state and an Arab state, the Arabs refused and attacked Israel and lost. Fundamental facts remains had the Arabs accepted the resolution,there would be today a 70 year old Palestinian state next to Israel and NO Palestinian refugees.

2/ In 2000 President Clinton hosted PLO leader Arafat and Israeli PM Barak at Camp David. The Proposal was for Israel to return all Gaza and most of the west bank with Israel annexing East Jerusalem. Also no Israeli control of Palestinian borders between Egypt and Jordan. Plus a right of way between Gaza and the West bank. Israel accepted Clinton Proposal but Arafat did not, returned home and the start of the second Intifada

3 /In 2008 talks between Olmert and Abbas took place. Olmert's plan was to annex Israeli settlements into Israel and in return the same amount of Israeli territory would be handed over to Palestine and would have divided Jerusalem. Plus a right of way between Gaza and the West bank. Again the Palestinian Authority instead of taking the initiative refused the plan.

The 1978 accord between Egypt and Israel , President Sadat begged the PLO to accept and negotiate with Israel and called on Moderate Palestinians to take the lead. Arafat would not listen and did everything to undermine the accord. PLO gunmen even murdered moderate Palestinians who supported Sadat's appeal.

Just like today as in 1948 Arabs seem more concerned with opposing and attacking Israel ,than with creating a Palestinian state.

 

[Arctish]

There has never been a Palestinian state prior, to partition it was a British mandate before that part of the Ottoman empire, before that part of the Byzantine Empire, before that Roman empire, before that Persian,Egyptian Etc. While the Palestinian people have much to be frustrated with, the object of their frustration should not be Israel but their own leaders , who have thrown away opportunity after opportunity.

1/ The UN in 1947 (resolution 181) voted for partition of Palestine into an Jewish state and an Arab state, the Arabs refused and attacked Israel and lost. Fundamental facts remains had the Arabs accepted the resolution,there would be today a 70 year old Palestinian state next to Israel and NO Palestinian refugees.

2/ In 2000 President Clinton hosted PLO leader Arafat and Israeli PM Barak at Camp David. The Proposal was for Israel to return all Gaza and most of the west bank with Israel annexing East Jerusalem. Also no Israeli control of Palestinian borders between Egypt and Jordan. Plus a right of way between Gaza and the West bank. Israel accepted Clinton Proposal but Arafat did not, returned home and the start of the second Intifada

3 /In 2008 talks between Olmert and Abbas took place. Olmert's plan was to annex Israeli settlements into Israel and in return the same amount of Israeli territory would be handed over to Palestine and would have divided Jerusalem. Plus a right of way between Gaza and the West bank. Again the Palestinian Authority instead of taking the initiative refused the plan.

The 1978 accord between Egypt and Israel , President Sadat begged the PLO to accept and negotiate with Israel and called on Moderate Palestinians to take the lead. Arafat would not listen and did everything to undermine the accord. PLO gunmen even murdered moderate Palestinians who supported Sadat's appeal.

Just like today as in 1948 Arabs seem more concerned with opposing and attacking Israel ,than with creating a Palestinian state.

Hello Ger1956. Welcome to the forum.

Your post has references to several different periods in the history of the region. I'd be happy to discuss any of them with you. I have some solid reference material to share, too. But for now I'd just like to point out that there's a lot of disinformation circulating about what went on at the Camp David Summit. If you want to understand why Arafat refused to budge you should check out what was promised under the Oslo Accords and compare it to what Barak wanted him to accept in its place.

Anyway, there wasn't an 'Israel' for a couple thousand years so I don't see what the official name of the homeland of the Palestinian people has to do with anything. The region was called Palestine, or variations of that name, since before the Roman Empire showed up. Who cares what it was called way back then, and who cares what it's called now? The could call it Bob; it wouldn't make any difference. It would still be the homeland of an indigenous population that goes back 10,000 years and can be grouped into three major religions and a dozen or so minor ones.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Just like today as in 1948 Arabs seem more concerned with opposing and attacking Israel ,than with creating a Palestinian state.

No. The actively oppose the creation of a Palestinian state because that would greatly reduce their ability to use the Palestinians as pawns in their war against Israel. Just look at 1948--the Palestinian lands were annexed so they couldn't be turned into a Palestinian state.