Is It a Land Grab or a Peace Fence?

Re “A Fence That Makes Sense,” Commentary, Feb. 24:

I’d say, if I were the Palestinians, I’d have a little problem with having 14.5% of the West Bank, the amount David Makovsky mentions, taken from me [by Israel’s routing of the fence] too. It’s time for the Israeli settlers to move off the land now -- not to uproot the Palestinian people who hope to make it part of their new state.

Makovsky’s statement that the benefit of the fence was to “set the contours of a possible two-state solution” says it all. If it’s not a land grab, then build the wall on the Green Line. I believe 100% in security for the Israelis, but let’s have respect for the Palestinian civilian population too. That is the only way to build a lasting peace.

Carrie Vanston

Los Angeles

*

Re “Israel Barrier Feud Goes to Court,” Feb. 24:

If the Palestinians spent as much time fighting terrorism as they spend fighting the peace fence Israel is building, there would be no fence.

If the United Nations fought construction of all fences around the world -- such as those being built by Saudi Arabia at its border with Yemen and by India in the Kashmir -- instead of only Israel being taken to the International Court of Justice, there would be a better chance of peace in the Middle East.

It is the anti-Semitism of the Arab world and its accomplice, the United Nations, that has caused the bloodshed in the Middle East and that makes the fence necessary.

If people were coming into the United States from Mexico to blow up defenseless children, wouldn’t you want a fence? Sleep well tonight, as we have a fortified wall to stop that from ever happening.

David Lewis

Pasadena