Um, if we're going to take the treatment of the Germans and Japanese after WWII as a model here, I'm thinking you need to give the Palestinians much more than what Floffe and I said, not less. After WWI people saw where things can lead if a peace treaty is exaggeratedly harsh towards the loser, and so they didn't repeat their mistake after WWII. Both Germany and Japan lost their conquests, but none of their own territory, regained their autonomy remarkably soon, and were in fantastic economic shape barely twenty years after the war.

If you're not listening, no offense, then it's no wonder that you haven't heard that. The Palestinians have been saying for a long time now that they accept a state within the 1967 borders, with possible exceptions if those are compensated elsewhere. Even Hamas has said as much at one point, in spite of all their foolish rhetoric elsewhere.

Here you're right - the Palestinian leadership realizes that the right of return is mostly a fiction, but they're not so keen on stating that out loud.

Yes, but that part isn't all their fault. It's not the Palestinians' fault if Lebanon and Jordan keep treating them like second-class citizens and keep the "refugees" in camps (albeit not in tents anymore) while denying them citizenship and the right to lead a normal life.

"Until that happens"? It has happened many times - and to a large extent is happening now. If you mean giving up violence permanently, disarming and all that, it'd be fairly foolish to do that except as a part of a comprehensive peace deal, considering that it's pretty much the only bargaining chip they have left.

Nobody's asking Israel to hand over control over its part of Jerusalem - it's the part that doesn't belong to them and that they are occupying that is contested.

That's a problem, yes - that they can't really win more by peaceful methods than by violent methods. You can't really give them less than what Floffe listed, no matter what, not in an actual peace agreement. Yet if tomorrow they disarmed and only used peaceful resistance anymore, they couldn't get much more than that, either.

The terms of that "reasonable peace deal" are long known, see above. There's two parties that are to blame for the deal not yet being reached, though. It's not as if the Israelis were always willing and the Palestinians weren't; there have been times that things went better, but Israeli politics weren't right for negotiations. The last Knesset elections come to mind - there were good odds for negotiations, but since there was a campaign to run and the hawks were doing well in the polls, the politicians figured a war would gain them more votes than negotiations.

If you're going to sit and wait for some kind of Nelson Mandela or Gandhi, you can wait a long time. Perhaps that was once possible, but it ceased to be so a long time ago - such people might exist, but they wouldn't have the influence to bring the entire people to peaceful resistance. What happened just yesterday is a good example - at a time when Hamas is calm and doesn't try to attack, extremist groups still do it, avoiding Hamas attempts to control them.