Submitted by Dave Levy, Jun 24, 2007 03:31

I disagree with Irving D. Cohen completely. Many proposals have been suggested since the start of the Intifada 2, starting with Oslo. They have all failed miserably. I recall Mitchell, Saudi, Zinni, to just mention a few. The Palestinians have repeatedly commited some sort of violence which derailed any possibility of a negotiated peace.

But the real shocker was at Camp David, when Barak gave the Palestinians everything they wanted, except for the so-called right of return (millions of Arab moving to Israel itself).

Why should negotiations be any different now? Israel has two sets of goverments to deal with, Hamas and Fatah, making all this far more complicated. Without both on board, nothing can be accomplished.

What can Blair do that others have tried and failed at? Sure, he is articulate, and forceful, but so what?

His involvement guarantees nothing more than a repeated attempt to force Israel to withdraw back to the 67 borders and relinquish at least East Jerusalem. The Palestinian-Arab worlds will insist on the right of return, without compromise. They will also demand Israel stop all it's security pre-cautions.

No, this is not about Blair, Mitchell, Carter or anyone else as a facilitator. Dennis Ross tried, and did not accomplish anything. Blair will not succeed, except build up anticipaton.

The solution to the M.E. problem is for the so-called territories to become autonomous entities, under the supervision of Egypt (Gaza Strip), Jordan (W. Bank) and Israel of course. Jerusalem must remain united, and the right of return UN resolution adhered to.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.