|Originally posted by NickD3.4:|
yep, and when you look more into it, you see that bush recanted and said that was not a realistic position to take on the matter.
You can read the full text here for yourself and see that Bush in fact endorsed a Palestinian state and it's borders being based on the 1967 ceasefire. http://www.haaretz.com/news...ers-in-full-1.277418
| I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states living side by side in peace and security as the key to peace, and to the road map as the route to get there.|
As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.
Now I know you have already researched the UNSC Resolutions so I don't need to tell you that what year 242 refers to.
Also here is the text for the Bush Road map to peace (it may give away what Resolution 242 is about but I'm sure you already knew it
|Ultimately, Israelis and Palestinians must address the core issues that divide them if there is to be a real peace, resolving all claims and ending the conflict between them. This means that the Israeli occupation that began in 1967 will be ended through a settlement negotiated between the parties, based on U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338, with Israeli withdrawal to secure and recognize borders.|
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-21-2011).]