[Ifroham4]

It will be interesting to see Hamas' supporters in the west confront the fact that they are at heart a Sharia inspired radical Islamic group. I sure hope all the Rachel Corries' in waiting don't:

Smoke
Drink
Do drugs
Are gay
Considering women's rights

That of course would all be criminalized under the Hamas brand of stern Sharia and would have to be punished.

[softy54534]

When we start to negociate the initial position is to be compromised sooner or later probabaly these clauses does not justify the abondonment of negociation it will be more ideal if exteremists group in Israel win the coming election because anyaccord signed between two opposit exterems without any pressure from outside will probabaly bring everlasting peace

we will have to see if they are capable to compromise and then make our own decision.

[Beerinkol]

When we start to negociate the initial position is to be compromised sooner or later probabaly these clauses does not justify the abondonment of negociation it will be more ideal if exteremists group in Israel win the coming election because anyaccord signed between two opposit exterems without any pressure from outside will probabaly bring everlasting peace

The problem though is that by their own admission Islamists don't feel obliged to honour any agreements with "Kafirs". They view such agreements as a temporary convenience which they can break as soon as they feel that they become stronger than their hated enemy. They point to historical precedents during Muhammad and during the crusades where the Muslim armies concluded truces with their enemies only to break it at a time of their choosing. So I ask you, why should Israel trust such people? This war has already lasted about 100 years and unfortunately IMO, at this rate, it's likely to last another 100 years so the sooner Israelis recognise and accept this bleak conclusion, the more likely it is that they will be able to factor it into their lives and accept it.

[brraverishhh]

Mohammad(PBH) never broke any treaty

Maybe not a treaty, but he sure broke a cease fire, or Hudna as they're called. 2 years into a 10 year cease fire agreement, he took Mecca.

[Beerinkol]

Mohammad(PBH) never broke any treaty but any opponant who broke the treaty was never spared,now if i am not wrong truce is treaty forced upon a losing side by victorious army and now whole west is talking of truce if i am not wrong it means ''the right of existance on the conditions and terms prescribed by west under westeren dominance''which might not be acceptable to muslims in anycase it amounts to accepting westeren dominanace wher as the the peace can only prevail if the treaty is on equal terms and acceptable to both the parties.The day people in Israel will accept the reality of fully soveriegn state of palistine with own armed froces manning their own borders and palistinian would accept that jews need a country in this world too which happens to be israel things will start moving in positive direction

I thought we were talking about Israel and the Palestinians not the whole west.

You don't seem to be aware of history. Let me remind you that the Palestinian/Arab side was the first to reject Israel and it's right to exist. It was the Palestinian/Arab side that first attacked the newly formed Israel in 1948 and tried to destroy Israel then, as well as subsequently. Unfortunately for them they were unsuccessful and their failure resulted in the loss of the Palestinian state. Israel however has been willing to allow the establishment of a Palestinian state if they in turn accept Israel's right to exist and live in a secure recognised Jewish state (the only Jewish state in the world as compared to how many Muslim/Arab countries?). Of course the Palestinians never accepted this and given this history, it should therefore not be a surprise if Israel does not agree to allow any new Palestinian state to fully arm and pose a threat to Israel. They would however agree to the establishment of an independent demilitarised Palestine under the right circumstances (as stated above).

[Ifroham4]

You mean, you offer a Hudna and then make up some elaborate imaginary reasoning as to how to blame your enemies (wait, shouldn't that be peace partner?) and then once you've regained a strategic and tactical position you say they breached it first, so you can go back to wartime. Yes that is how it happens today, you're correct.

there was no imaginary reason it was other party who broke hudna in reply to prophets letter for qasas of his allied tribe banu khazaa,h at the hands of qoresh and banu bakar but qoresh who were bound by the treaty not to attack prophets allies abrogated the treaty instead of explanations so the case was simple breach of agreement and refusal to negociate