Anyone question why the map Naethyn posted starts in 1946 when the area we are talking about has a historical background back to biblical times? The answer to that question is it's pure Palestinian propaganda bs.
Of course if we really want to go with the who was there first argument we'd sure want to start with the oldest maps at which point you'd never find even leading up to the present a nation called Palestine. You would however run across in the earliest maps nations called Judea and Samaria... guess who inhabited those?
The problem with the map you posted Naethyn is that it assumes all unsettled land controlled by Brittan to be "Palestinian" territory, which is completely inaccurate. Of course there have been people displaced, however that is not the complete fault of Israel. It is interesting to note that when talks about establishing Israel were in the works, a two state solution for the purposes of minimizing any clashes between peoples was proposed, that idea was flat out rejected by arab countries by enlarge. Of course within a day of Israel declaring it's independence as the last British forces withdrew Israel came under attack by the arab nations surrounding it. There are no officially verifiable numbers, but I have to wonder how many "Palestinians" fled the area to avoid the conflict, how many more fled areas that Israel captured and occupied as a result of that war. Of course later on you have the rise of the PLO, which is about the time the term "Palestinian" came into common usage as a way to try and legitimize the goals of the PLO. Of course leadership of the PLO had ties ideologically to those portions of the arab world that allied themselves with the axis powers in WWII with the express purpose of purging the Jews (Israel) from the middle east. I've posted pictures here in the past showing the Grand Mufti sitting beside Hitler, this very man was referred to by Yassar Arafat as Uncle (I've still never been able to determine if there was an actual blood relationship there, but it's clear Arafat respected him to a very high degree and with the PLO was seeking to further the same ideology, expulsion of the Jews from the Middle East). Of course the PLO later become the Palestinian national authority currently headed by Mahmoud Abbas, with whom Israel is supposed to deal in peace talks.
So does Abbas seek peace, is he a man looking for a peaceful solution rejecting the ideology and goals of the past parent organizations the PLO and Axis powers? As late as April of this year Abbas stated "I say this clearly: I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will" after which this picture was taken:
There he is smiling at the true goal, which is notably not a two state solution. If you zoom in you'll see a map where Israel is distinctly absent replaced by a country called Palestine. The very same evil ideology that was compatible with Hitlers world views is still held today. There will be no peace until either Israel or this evil ideology is destroyed. Even the leader of the semi legitimate organization Israel is forced to deal with deep down doesn't want a peaceful solution.
In regards to foreign aid, anyone bitching about that is quite frankly like the school bully bitching that you gave your best friend lunch money instead of him. For fun look up how often each of the countries listed voted the same as the US in the UN. Israel votes the same as we do nearly 90 percent of the time when we are lucky to get 60 percent with other nations who receive our aid. Now you can look at that as either Israel being a lapdog of the U.S. or vice versa, or you can realize that we share many common values and interests and our foreign aid reflects that.
10sun - That sounds reasonable even if it's only speculation, but do you believe the same holds true for other organizations funded quietly behind the scenes by various anti-Israel governments? I don't think it does, in fact if Abbas continues Arafat's line of thought the day he signed the Oslo accords (and that is to take what they could get a piece at a time until eventually they could call on the help of other arab nations to finally crush Israel) or something similar he's counting on it not going that way where other nation funded jihad groups are concerned.
Arlos - the type of settling you are talking about is not what Israel is pushing for, it's settling for natural expansion in other areas where people are not displaced for the purposes of natural growth. Granted their claims seem to be unproven informal agreements with the Bush administration and they may not technically have a ground to stand on, however my issue is less with that and more with the fact that Obama hands down a specific ultimatum to Israel and a general "you have to do a better job" to Abbas. Couple that with the fact that Obama is simply echoing exactly what Abbas is demanding toward Israel but using a feather touch toward Abbas when it comes to concessions for Israel and it really just looks like Obama found Carters play book and decided to follow it. It makes me wonder how long it will be until rouge nations start taking American as hostage again... oh wait that's already happening isn't it. Yep your golden boy is running around kissing the asses of nations who don't much care for us, treating one of our staunchest allies like a second rate country. Nevermind that we are straining relations with our allies, nations that don't care for us will hate us less!
In the end Obama will end up with mud on his face, as he'll soon find out that Israel when faced with waning support from the US will do what is in it's best interest for survival. This approach will actually leave Israel less breathing room to stay it's hand, and actually end up forcing it to take action. In a nutshell location plays a huge factor. We can sit on our side of the pond and consider how our actions look to the world, Israel doesn't have that luxury, nearly all decisions that country makes are with it's survival and direct security in the balance.