The American Middle East "Solution"

• (Another) Carl says:
  
  The ambassador falls off the reasonable wagon with a big thud in his very last sentence, when he says: ". . .The PA should acknowledge the necessity of a two-state solution that can be achieved only with Israel’s willing participation . . .”
  
  I think it very likely that over decades of eyeball-to-eyeball contact with the Israelis, one thing is crystal clear to the PA, and that is that the Israelis under practically any leadership have no intention whatsoever of EVER being willing to take part in a two-state solution. The PA is in the best position of anybody to know that the Israelis seem to have bought whole hog into the original “American Solution,” which is to pull off a fait accompli by slowly and inexorably shoving the inhabitants of the most recent several thousands of years off their land, as was done wholesale in the “settling” of the Wild West. It all just takes time, and for that the Israeli policy has shaped up to be expressed with only one word: “stall.” Stall all day today, this month, this year, and for many years to come if need be.
  
  
  The above is a comment that I had the temerity to post about a week ago on Juan Cole's remarkably informative and civilized site, Informed Comment.   In it Cole had posted a guest column by a former ambassador to the U.N. on European Affairs, G.B Helman.  The title of the column, "The Palestinians Seek U.N. Recognition," as well as the first paragraph in my comment, give the general gist of the column.
  
  I noticed the column and posted my comment much too late, and there was only one subsequent comment, a reply that went as follows:
   
  
• Dr. blc says:

  
  

  it’s not at all clear that the Israelis are unwilling to agree to a two-state solution. the record shows that it’s been the Palestinians and the Arabs that have been opposed to it far more than the Israelis.
  at present there’s little hope of it being realized and that’s not all on the Israelis. Hamas also opposes a peace-and-partition deal which means that the Palestinians can’t deliver their end of a deal.
  
  Though I never got around to answering the reply above, it was easy to see how severely flawed the reasoning in it was, besides being out of date.  Hamas, after originally saying it would not take part in the U.N. initiative by the PA, then seems to have changed its mind and had said that it would go along, and I guess that's the reason why next to nothing is being heard from Hamas during this current fully justified application by the Palestinians to be recognized as a state. 
   
   But even if Hamas hadn't done that, what they said in opposition to the PA would've been of small account, because the West Bank is the big prize, and not at all Gaza, the tiny strip of land presided over by Hamas and from which, just to give the appearance of doing something for the cause, Hamas stupidly permits the lobbing of  a few rockets now and then, which damage Israel hardly at all, though it does allow the Israelis to use Gaza as a sort of punching bag and gives them the excuse to scream "Murder!" to the high Heavens and to commit all sorts of injustices and get away with it, with the abject collusion of the U.S., including real murder on the high seas.