I do not agree with your main argument: B. Netnyahu is right and clear: recognition of Israël as the nation-state protecting the tradition and culture of Judaïsm, and demilitarisation of the future Palestinian State alongside Israël in peaceful cooperation.

Dear Martin, Try reading my post more carefully. I agree with you that he should have "stood up" for what he was elected for. My point is, with the international pressure being what it is, which we can't understand all the factors, I think he IS standing up for most of our beliefs, hanging onto an ally (which we're assuming we can't make it financially, at least at the moment, without) and still standing up for our beliefs, as he knows there is no way the arabs will agree to this, and he can claim IF the US can pull it off with all our "red lines" so gezunterheit but that is like a .00000001% chance! While I don't know if it's the media's fault for portraying things this way, or it's actually the israeli government's fault - but I would like to see Israel as being tougher and more clearly standing up for it's beliefs....but again, this is the price for a financial ally, IMHO. That being said, if he would continue to "give in" beyond the red lines to an unreasoonable extent, at that point I would agree he no longer deserves to be called a leader and we should get someone tougher with rightest views in there...

Did Netanyahu campaign on the pledge - "two states for two peoples" - he enunciated at the cabinet meeting Sunday? His support of a Palestinian (no question, terror) state in Israel's heartland is a huge betrayal. It is being reported there may be a compromise - a 'temporary' freeze on settlement building - in the works. A few days back, Mr. Netanyahu said Obama's demands were unreasonable and they were. What you appear to be saying is this. Because we assume we cannot make in financially, at least at the moment, without US aid, then we will have to bend on our moral and ethical principles. Back in 1996 then candidate Netanyahu pledged he would begin weaning Israel off American aid. He made this pledge to the Israeli voter and to the American people. He never made good on his pledge. Once elected, Netanyahu did not try to make good on his pledge. It seems to me, this should be one of Israel's central and fundamental policy goals; to wean herself off of U.S. largess and dependency. There is no reason why this goal cannot be achieved. Even though America's interests deviate from Israel's security interests, we have a prime minister who believes in the essential goodness and in the virtue of American foreign policy, when nothing could be further from the truth. It's time for Israel to become a more independent and self-respecting Jewish state; not a vassal of the "American empire." "In September 1982, Prime Minister Menachem Begin rejected the 'Reagan Plan,' which called for an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria, by throwing the official envelope in the lap of the US ambassador and announcing that 'we are not a banana republic.' " Enough is enough.

if you want a peaceful, negotiated solution.

is a statement that is very difficult to understand. It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and criticize without offering ONE solution to end this conflict. And end the conflict we must, if it is within our ability. Bibi is the elected PM and has outlined the conditions under which this country can compromise with the Palestinians. And compromise we must. I did not vote for him, but I support his approach. Until you are in his position, you should consider some temperance of extreme statements. The solution to this complicated problem with a history of legitimate beefs on both sides is not simple. It will require creativity. I would love to be the one to sit at the negotiating table with the position that a Palestinian state must be demilitarized, as lots of countries have been after loosing wars. I don't think any truly neutral arbitrators will have a difficult time understanding this. In my view, you lack the creativity that this process will require. I don't know if Bibi has it, but I think his position on negotiations with the Palestinians is correct. We must insist that they make concessions for what we will be asked to do.

I believe PM Netanyahu is correct in one respect. There is no solution to this conflict apart from Muslim world accepting Israel right to exist in the region - in our own land - as a Jewish state. That is what make his approach to this conflict all the more puzzling, apart form Ain Od Milvado's explanation (above) that Netanyahu is bowing to Obama's unreasonable / immoral demands in order to avoid a confrontation with Washington; a confrontation that needs to come unless the Jews in Israel are ready to commit national suicide. Do you think the Jews are willing to commit collective suicide?

Why is a negotiated settlement the only route to go? In most conflicts the fighting really ends when one side defeats the other. Even if a negotiated settlement is the way to go then why is there a rush? I would say now is exactly the wrong time to negotiate. Hamas and Hizbollah feel they have an upper hand, we have the worst PR in history - which is entirely unrelated to the "occupation", look at the coverage of Lebanon War 2 - and there is an Iran in the background to cause all these problems. Also the way negotiations have worked to date is that the Arabs pocket the concessions Israel makes and give nothing in return and so only increases pressure on our side and not on theirs. In the near future, almost certainly the Iranian regime will fall, so will Assad's, Middle East oil will either disappear or cease to be of importance, North Korea and Pakistan will probably fall too. With that Hizbollah and Hamas will start rapidly losing funding and with that arms and training and propaganda support. The UN and the "human rights" organisation are going full speed ahead on discrediting themselves as soon as possible.... Obama almost certainly won't get another term, once the american people realise what a moron they have elected. We could spend the time getting some PR people who are not incompetent and/or lazy and whose reaction isn't call people "anti-semitic" - even if they are - or continuous references to the Holocaust. Iran, Hizbollah and Hamas are bad enough without comparing them to Nazis. I want someone who will sue for libel the newspapers who simply make crap up about Israel. I want reporters who file fraud to be hounded out of work and the reputation of their employers destroyed. I want fraudulent "academics" to be the Middle East Studies equivalent of "Intelligent Design", a laughing stock to all but the most crazy. Once this is all done and Hamas and Hizbollah have undeniably, indisputably been defeated then lets talk.