This article reflects critically on simulations. Building on the authors' experience simulating the Palestinian-Israeli-American Camp David negotiations of 2000, they argue that simulations are useful pedagogical tools that encourage creative--but not critical--thinking and constructivist learning. However, they can also have the deleterious effect of reproducing unequal power relations in the classroom. The authors develop this argument in five stages: (1) They distinguish between problem solving and critical theory and define "critical thinking"--something not done by the simulation orthodoxy; (2) They describe the Camp David simulation. This is their contribution to the relatively small corpus of literature on simulating Palestinian-Israeli relations; (3) They review the constructivist learning and peer teaching accomplished through their simulation. This section is notable because it is authored by a graduate student who participated in the simulation as a meaning maker; (4) They review the manner in which simulations promote creative, not critical, thinking, and reproduce asymmetrical power relations; and (5) They reflect on the overall utility of simulating the Camp David negotiations in the classroom.