WELL... DUH!!!!

Better the chinless dictator stay in his palace in Latakia where our IAF can buzz him to remind him that he's in our sights, than put Israel's northern civilians in mortal danger from both Syria and Lebanon.

surely a deal with syria would bring the EU into orgasic throbs of delight--and Olmert and Assad can share the $$$ from the nobel prize for peace (as Olmert gives up Israel peice by piece)--as is usually the case--only the lawyers will profit--0lmerts' criminal attorneys. Oh how long must we continue to "count the Olmert"

How dare you invade and occupy for a short time, (thus the Jewish soldiers were emasucated), in the 73 War by the Syrians. From 48 to 67Syria bombared northern Israel. Guerrillas were active. Syria accused Israel of massing troops in 67..Israel showed Russia the opposite. The war started. Syria demanded ALL the heights...in exchange for nothing. Israel balked. Now it again wants ALL..iSRAEL saying okay, US, fund a desalination plant and water from Turkey. Olmert doesn't get it at all. This article says it all. Israel is feeling the tightening of the noose around it's neck..Lebanon (Hez), Gaza Strip (Hamas), W. Bk, (Fatah and Islamic Jihad), Tehran (Ahmed's Guards), Syria ( Muslim Brotherhood), Egypt, (Muslim Brotherhood). What will happen next: Olmert will be freed of any charges, then it's bye bye Golan, and hello 1m potential and active terrorists....backed up by those 700 Scud Cs and Ds, and maybe another nuke plant..guarded next time by Rusky missiles (and personnel-for defensive purposes only). "Oh how we dance by the night...".

Ramon, Olmert, Barak and Beilin all know that what Guy Bechor says is true but they keep trying to give Assad the Golan. Can Bechor explain why?

Not all of the Golan will be repopulated, most places will be in sight of the IDF and let's not forget the huge minefields in the region

Occupying a region for decades and terrorizing its populace before leaving UNILATERALLY like in Gaza and Lebanon is not the same as leaving as the result of a peace deal (like Sinai). See if that may help you out.

Olmert, Barak and Livni, along with the congenitally deluded on the left. Even Shas knows this, but they're bought and paid for.

Golan belongs to Syria. Give it back or live with the consequences.

Hate to admit it but.. he is right. Unless Israel nukes the place before they leave.. wow good idea, no? Nahh, let's just not leave

Apart from the clear operational advantage that the Golan’s topography provides the IDF, the intelligence gathering value of the area – particularly the ridge of hills on its eastern fringes and from atop Mt. Hermon (aptly dubbed “the eyes of the country”) is indispensable. There is wide agreement among experts that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to find adequate substitute to compensate for the loss of the intelligence installations stationed there. Nowadays, the Golan is an integrated region of Israel

JJohnson says "Golan belongs to Syria. Give it back or live with the consequences." Do you even know where you LIVE? The Turks and Caicos were originally populated by the Carib Amerindians. It was held at various times by the French, the Spanish and the Brits. You're obviously living on stolen land, so give it back! The Golan was Jewish 2,000 years ago, and originally assigned to the Jewish homeland under the League of Nations Mandate. Moreover, it's an established principle in international law that land captured from an aggressor in a defensive war can be claimed by the defender. Israel has more claim to the Heights than does Syria.

Mr. Bechor seems to believe that once again the rogue Syrian regime is negotiating some sort of peace with Israel, when they are again, simply buying time. First of all, the Syrians are nothing less than an Iranian proxy, no less so than Hizballah in Lebanon or the Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Secondly, Syria, Hizballah, and Hamas, just like their Iranian sponsor, will never, ever sign a formal and legitimate peace treaty with Israel. And finally, Iran, by way of Syrian/Israeli talks, is buying time to strengthen her Hizballah and Hamas proxies, preparing for the takeover of Yehuda and Shomron by Hamas, and trying to prevent any unilateral Israeli attacks on her nuclear program. But when Iran, as is inevitable, achieves nuclear capability to use as a ballistic "umbrella" for those terror groups she is now positioning to surround Israel, she will order a surprise attack from all four fronts at once and and launch a war to achieve the genocide of all the Jews, for the second time in our recent history, and place the Jewish State of Israel in existential danger. The Israeli/Syrian talks are not now, nor have they ever been, nor will they ever be, about peace.

Too bad you both dont understand the history of the Golan! Israels history there goes back thousands of years.....Syria only goes back 60 years. Do not confuse the ancient Assyrians with the current day French placed Syrians......no ancestral relation at all. Syria only had control of this area for 24 years till the 6 day war. During that short period of time, they constantly attacked Israel from this high vantage point. Israel re-captured this land and for the last 40 odd years there has been peace at that border. Syria had no right to the land in the first place as the Balfour declaration clearly states its in Israels province. It was given illegally to the Syrians by the English and French. Israel just took back what was theirs to start with! Go learn history you fools.

"...the Golan Heights, which is sovereign Israeli territory in every way..." Honestly Professor Bechor, Israeli law also allows for the belligerent oppression of ~ 4 million Palestinians; I wouldn't look to Israeli law as the beacon of legitimacy. However, I would on the other hand look to international law and see how the Golan Heights fits into the 'Israeli picture'. I shouldn't be surprised by your article and your blatant disregard for the facts and your constant ad hominum bickering to frighten your peers.

It would be asking for real trouble down the short road! "Don't forget the Russian Mafia Arms Merchants" who would sell their old lady for at the drop of a hat? And instead of us looking down & listening on Syria with the latest hardware, it would be vice versa ! Israel would have to contend with SSyria and their allies waiting to strike at the right moment! In the end Israel's enemies the quartet {ISHH} only know the big stick! Real Peace will come one day but not until they teach their children about peace instead of hatred. but what do I know?

Nobody recognizes Israel's claim to land it occupied during its 1967 attack upon Egypt, Jordan and Syria, so giving back the stolen land is not an in question. Israel's occupations of the West Bank, Golan and Gaza were not instigated for security reasons as the Zionists try to imply, but solely to capture water resources that without Israel today would not today exist. Olmert and the other sane Israeli leaders recognize that the lack of water is a greater threat today that it ever has been due to Israel's overuse and pollution of existing aquifers, and that only by making peace and working together with neighboring states can Israel to obtain the water it needs to survive as the region dries up. Israel faces a far bigger crisis over water than it does from Hezbollah, Hamas or Iran, and the sooner the Israelis recognize the true threat and reduce their water usage to reasonable levels instead of the wasteful excess they consume today, the better chance that Israel will have to survive as the ME dries up.

unless the rest are playing a dangerous game.. Anyway, our leadership is in for a big surprise. They will find a very big loud and active oposition to any attempt to cede OUR Golan to the Jihadis. Golan is not Gaza. We will not let delusional "leaders" give away our assets.

You write, and I quote in talkback N° 16: "... the Golan Heights, which is sovereign Israeli territory in every way... However, I would on the other hand look to internationl law and see how the Golan Heights fits into the Israeli picture". So Mr. Bret, here we go, but I am devasteted by the fact that what your are going to read, you never learned at school or tried to acquire information by yourself. THE GOLAN HEIGHTS WERE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE MANDATE AS DECIDED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE 51 MEMBERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS THE 24TH OF JULY 1922. ARTICLE N° 5 SAYS: "THE MANDATORY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SEEING THAT NO PALESTINE TERRITORY SHALL BE CEDED OR LEASED TO, OR IN ANY WAY PLACED UNDER THE CONTROL OF, THE GOVERNMENT OF ANY FOREIGN POWER". NEVERTHELESS, BRITAIN IN A TREACHEROUS AND BRUTAL WAY BREACHED THIS ARTICLE BY CEDING, IN 1923, THE GOLAN HEIGHTS TO FRANCE, THE MANDATORY OF SYRIA. BRITAIN'S SOLE INTEREST WAS TO SECURE MOSUL'S OIL FIELDS TO IRAK. ISRAEL'S DECISION TO IMPOSE ITS LAWS ON THE GOLAN HEIGHTS ON DECEMBER 14, 1981, HAD RIGHTED THE WRONG THAT WAS COMMITTED BY THE BRITISH IN MARCH 1923. SYRIA CANNOT MAKE A STANDING CLAIM IN AN INTERNATIONAL COURT OF LAW. THE GOLAN HEIGHTS AS THEY ARE KNOW TODAY WERE NEVER PART OF SYRIAN REAL ESTATE, BUT PART OF THE PALESTINE MANDATE.

I still can't believe the unprofessional style of writing of this article. Even though I agree that handing over Golan is extremely risky (and probably not worth it), why can't ynet find someone who professionally constrasts the pros and cons. This article shouldn't make it into any highschool student magazine...

I didn't advocate to relinquish the Golan Heights but to call it sovereign Israeli territory would be a lie; The Golan Heights is still considered disputed territory. I knew that the Golan Heights was given to Syria as part of the Mandate, however it does not give Israel the right to move its citizens into that land prior to any agreement with the neighbouring country. It would be more appropriate to halt construction of residential housing until an agreement is made (hopefully to keep the Golan). I agree that this article was written unprofessionally, yet I am not surprised by the lack of quality coming from this author.

STOLE what was NOT THEIRS. If you wish to remain on a land you seized through war, then you remain at war with Syria. ((During that short period of time, they constantly attacked Israel from this high vantage point)) But here is this quote by Moshe Dayan: "many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland. They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land. We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was. The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us"- The New York Times, May 11, 1997. For some reason I beg to differ Jay3. And the Balfour declaration does not mean s--t; read the second part of the declaration and see what I mean...

The Golan is not part of Israel just because Israel voted a law saying so. Granted, any country in the world can attack a neighbor and occupy its land and put settlers there. It's the law of the most powerful. That does not make it legitimate in a moral sense, but that's fine; pretty much all countries extended their land in such way. Nothing forces Israel to withdraw from the Golan. In fact, unlike in the West bank (or in Gaza, a few years ago), Israel is not subjecting the "native" people living there to an oppressive occupation in order to satisfy the will of a handful of settlers; almost no Syrian live in the Israeli side of the Golan. That said, the main point is that this situation does not make the claim that Syria has over Golan illegitimate. They just want back their land. They would be completely in their moral right to try to get it back by force - as Israel got it from Syria by force - since it would just mean getting back their territory. They are more than in their moral right to ask for this territory in the context of peace negociations. In essence, what they are saying is "we will continue to be at war with you unless you withdraw from the territory you captured at the beginning of the war. otherwise, we will continue to fight you for it". Where is the problem? They are evil, so they don't deserve this territory back? Giving it back is dangerous? Fine, then. Continue to fight.

But, we can't expect anything like the truth to come from brainwashed fools such as they to whom you responded so eloquently. Shalom.

And will remain so. Syria lost what Israel retook, her own land. Syria bows to Israel due to Israels air strikes, Syria cowers like a girlie.

It wasn't stolen. It was earned in a war Arabs started. By the way is that Dayan quote provided by the same media that claimed Israel killed little al-Dura? We know that turned out to be a lie as well. This wouldn't be the first misrepresentation of a quote by Dayan that I've read either.

Syria has no rights to Golan at all. Golan is a Jewish name. Jews lived there all the time. Syria is an Arab state who was named Syria by French. There is no difference between Syrian Arabs and Saudi Arabs. No Arabs live in the Golan now and never lived.

((By the way is that Dayan quote provided by the same media...)) I'm sure, Mr. Thomas, that the New York Times is a newspaper that quite frequently adds touches of pro-Israel bias. Why? Is it too damaging to your adamant views that you display in your posts, for example, ((It was earned in a war Arabs started?)) Dream on buddy.