Shebaa farms should be part of a peace agreement with Syria and/or Lebanon. It shouldn't be given up for anything less. What will Israel have to trade with Lebanon for a peace agreement. Peace for Peace has never worked and probably never will. The idea that Hezbolla will somehow lose their legitimacy because you give them Shebaa is ridiculous. They have their patrons in Teheran and they have their missiles. They will do with them what they want. Shebaa farms has nothing to do with it.

Israel liberated its historic land from the Islamist-Jihadist occupiers. What makes the Islamist-Jihadists think that they have a right to ravage and occupy other countries and Israel has no right to liberate its historic land?

Prof. Zeevi is a smart guy but I don't think he really believes that we can negotiate with the Hizbollah on any subject. We gave back the entire Gaza Strip and what did we gain there? And I agree with all the respondents here: weakness does invite agression and losers give away land - not winners.

islamofacism is the main problem in the world today. Add that to the hate felt by so many toward thee jews, and the self-loathing that many leftnik jews have as well. Throw in some politics and some ynet and presto the final solution is almost here!

Leaving aside the question of who legally owns the Sheba farms or the rest of the Terretories, I would just like to remind you of what happened in a couple of instances where the UN "controled" areas on Israel's border. First let's go back to the end of May 1967. Throughout the spring of that year President Nasser of Egypt was making his intentions to destroy Israel clear in terms that make Ahmedinijaind look mild-mannered. He also ammassed a hundred thousand soldiers in the Sinai for the purpose of Israel's destructon. He had one problem though, the UN "controled" a dimilitarized zone between Israel and Egypt. So Nasser called the Secretary General of the UN and asked him to get his peacekeepers out of the way, and they were gone within hours. Then we advance to 2000, when after the Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon UNIFIL "took control" of the area Israel vacated. over the next six years Hizbullah constructed a network of military bases in the UN "controlled" territory and used them to kidnap Israelis. When in the summer f 2006 Hizbullah started shelling Israel, the UN soldiers did nothing except act as unwilling human shields for Hezbullah until a few of them got killed, at which point they left. PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW YOU CAN EXPECT THE RESULT TO BE ANY DIFFERENT WITH SHEBA THAN IT WAS IN THE TWO ABOVE EXAMPLES.

Right Now Israel has two terrorist Armies in its Northern and Southern borders and the remeannants of one on its Eastern border. That's a very bad situation, but at least those three armies are at a tactical disadvantage because the one in the South has to smuggle in its weapons and is dependent on Israel for food, water, and power, the one in the North is vulnerable to Israeli artillery in Sheba and the Golan, and the one in the East us unable to rebuild because it is hamstrung by checkpoints and Israeli commandor raids. Your idea of "advancement" would be for Israel to free those armies of their handicaps in the hope that they'll decide not to do what they did every time Israel has even slightly loosened its strategic grip (Oslo, the Lebanon withdrawal, and the post Camp David 2000 retreat from West Bank cities) which is start slauhtering Israeli civilians.