It continues to be astounding that Martin Raffel suggests that a two-state solution would be best for Israel, the Palestinian Authority (PA), and residents of Gaza (Raffel’s Riffs, “Asking for a healthy debate on Israel, without the slings and arrows,” Sept. 19). Israel completely pulled out of Gaza in 2005, uprooting 22 beautiful settlements and evicting 10,000 Israelis. The thanks that Israel received afterward continues to be rockets and fire balloons, which damage cities in southern Israel.
In addition, the Palestinians were offered a two-state solution three times: in 1936, 1948, and 2000. All three offers were rejected with violence. Still, Raffel continues with his two-state solution mantra expecting a different outcome if Israel tried again. That’s fantasy.
Palestinian poverty and unemployment are the fault of the PA alone. It keeps its citizens in a perpetual state of destitution so the world will continue to blame Israel. At the same time, the PA pays terrorists or their families enormous sums of money after killing or maiming Jews. In fact, these killings are causes for celebration.
When SodaStream, an Israeli company, opened its factory in the West Bank it employed many Palestinians who received the same wages as Israelis. Along came the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement (BDS), which insisted that SodaStream leave the territories. The company complied and relocated to the Negev, but in so doing, all the Palestinians who worked at SodaStream lost their jobs.
Therefore, to continue criticizing Israel and encouraging Jewish youth to be critical of the country is to invite disunity and misunderstanding, especially when those young people have never been to Israel nor know the truth.
It would behoove Raffel to take a long, hard look at what he is suggesting, and then to study Israel’s history, not the revisionist kind, and learn the facts that are a reality.