Seems a lot of people like to forget that we wouldn't have a palestinian (i.e., border) argument if the palestinians hadn't worn out their welcome with Jordan back in the day. They had every opportunity in the world to make it work as an autonomous entity, but couldn't keep from stirring up trouble with Israel (AND Jordan) even then. Hell, Jordan had the best PR component in the world right in its backyard, but they STILL had to say "GTFO of here" because the PLO was nothing more than a rabble-rouser with EVERYONE (No one ever seems to express contempt with Jordan over their treatment of the palestinians, by the way).
Is it fair that the palestinians still pay the price for that? Maybe, maybe not. But guess what - Israel is still paying the price for an unprompted war levied against them over 50 years ago, both politically and economically. Is THAT fair? Could someone please stand up and say, "Wow, if the arabs weren't such belligerent, selfish f*ckers that wanted ALL of the land, and then continued to stand behind that philosophy 60 years later, maybe they wouldn't be seen as a bunch of, well, belligerent, selfish f*ckers".
Arab apologists need to cut the whole Super Bowl mentality of having to be on the winning side and just take a pragmatic look at history, for God's sake.
Note: I use the term "arabs" in this context only to define the regional anti-semetic, war-mongering sorts whose ideologies served to create this mess in the first place. No beef with arabs as a cultural institution.