Given the intractability on both sides, what do you think are good...

[FormerRepublican]

...suggestions to help resolve conflict between Islamic countries in the ME and the West? I'm talking about real, practical suggestions - not just saying "get out of the ME." There's more going on in the ME than just the occupation of Iraq. Israel is another issue, as is oil. The reason why I say the "get out of the ME" response is not enough is because I believe the anger toward the West would countinue even after a withdrawal. More must be done than just withdrawal from Iraq to solve the problems in the Middle East.

I don't trust Bush for a second, and I have no confidence in his ability to handle the situation. By the same token, I don't trust Islamic extremists like Osama Bin Laden - and I don't care what their grievances are! - to stop killing Americans and Westerners, whom they view as infidels with less value than a dog. I think there is a serious power struggle going on, and huge risks that the situation will blow sky high.

As reference, here's Bin Laden's declaration of war from 1986:

"A Message From Usama Bin Muhammad Bin Laden Unto His Muslim Brethren All Over The World Generally And In The Arabian Peninsula Specifically.

Praise be to Allah, we seek His help and ask for his pardon. I seek refuge in Allah from Shaitan, the Damned. Whoever has been guided by Allah will not be misled, and whoever has been misled, he will never be guided. I bear witness that there is no God except Allah, no associates has He, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and messenger.

{O you who believe! Be careful of your duty to Allah with the proper care which is due to Him, and do not die except as Muslim} (Imraan; 3:102). {O people, be careful of your duty to your Lord, Who created you from a single being and created its mate of the same kind, and spread from these two, many men and women; and be careful of your duty to Allah by whom you demand one of another your rights, and (be careful) to the ties of kinship; surely Allah ever watches over you} (An-Nisa; 4:1). {O you who believe! Be careful of your duty to Allah and speak the right word; He will put your deeds into a right state for you, and forgive you your faults; and who ever obeys Allah and his Apostle, he indeed achieves a mighty success} (Al-Ahzab; 33:70-71).

Praise be to Allah, reporting the saying of the prophet Shu'aib: {I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able, and with none but Allah is the direction of my affair to the right and successful path; on him do I rely and to him do I turn} (Hud; 11:88). Praise be to Allah, saying: {You are the best of the nations raised up for the benefit of men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah} (Aale Imraan; 3:110)."

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden%27s_Declaration_of_War

Bin Laden isn't the only player who is an Islamic extremist. We know Hamas advocates the total destruction of Israel. Hezbollah is an organization that has killed more Americans than any other than Al Qaeda. Here's more about Hezbollah:

"Two thousand years ago, Julius Caesar ordered the construction of the largest temple in the Roman empire -- a monument to the god Jupiter -- in what is now Lebanon's Bekaa Valley near the border with Syria. The temple ruins are spectacular, but as he wanders through the site, FRONTLINE/World reporter David Lewis finds himself almost alone. Tourists avoid these ancient ruins because nearby the militant Islamic group, Hezbollah, once trained its fighters.

The Bekaa valley is outlaw territory, long known as a haven for terrorists, counterfeiting and drug smuggling. Syrian soldiers -- who intervened in Lebanon's civil war years ago and never left -- still dominate the region. Accompanied by a local Lebanese reporter, Hikmat Sharif, who works for Agence France-Presse, Lewis enters the town of Baalbek, a Hezbollah stronghold. Posters of Hezbollah "martyrs," or suicide bombers, line the streets of the city. A souvenir store sells videos of Hezbollah guerrillas attacking Israeli soldiers, alongside shelves of Hezbollah hats and postcards. They even market a Hezbollah scent called "perfume of the martyrs."

Founded in 1982 in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Hezbollah -- "Party of God" in Arabic -- based its ideology on the 1979 Iranian revolution and the teachings of Ayatollah Khomeini. Lewis spots the old castle where Iranian Revolutionary Guards came in 1981 and later trained Hezbollah recruits. He also sees where Hezbollah held Western hostages they kidnapped in the 1980s during Lebanon's long civil war. He even spots a notorious airplane hijacker who is living quietly in Baalbek.

Hijackings, bombings, a brutal civil war between Christians and Muslims -- that's what Lebanon was known for in the 1970s and 1980s, especially the capital, Beirut, which was reduced to rubble. But Lewis discovers that Beirut is largely peaceful today and much restored, eager to reclaim its old reputation as "the Paris of the Middle East." He sees American fast food restaurants, fancy cafes, belly dancers, even a luxury car show hosted by Miss Lebanon and prosperous businessmen seeking to attract foreign investment."

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/lebanon/thestory.html

I'd like to hear insightful thoughts from DUers regarding what kinds of things can be done to help resolve some of the issues that makes the ME so volatile and violent, and by extension to the deaths of innocent Americans in terrorist attacks, such a threat to the US. I'm not looking for a slug fest or allocation of blame, but some actual thoughtful suggestions on what might help. We can't turn the clock back and undo the past. The only thing we can do is look at the situation today and figure out what can be done now to solve problems.

[Avalux]

1. Well, for starters -

we could pull out of Iraq and quit trying to control the ME. Occupying Iraq has only inflamed the situation and it gives validity to Osama's arguments about the West. Beyond that, human nature is our greatest enemy.

A fundamental concept that mankind has been unable to grasp since the beginning of time is how to live together in harmony. Until human beings can accept each others differences and quit trying to force conformity, there are no real solutions. I have little hope there can every be true harmony in this world.

[wuushew]

2. Not our problem

terrorism committed within the United States is a domestic law enforcement problem anything else are just acts of violence perpetrated against Western business interests. Who are we to go meddling in the rest of the world's affairs?


Energy independence at home = security abroad.

[FormerRepublican]

5. So blowing up US Embassies in Africa is not our problem?

[wuushew]

6. Just treat it Pam Am style

conduct an investigation and if possible seek extradiction of the suspects. Dropping bombs on people(many who are innocent) is not a viable option.

[FormerRepublican]

8. You do understand that a US Embassy is considered US soil?

It's the same as if buildings in Detroit were bombed. I'm not sure that no national defense at all is an adequate solution, especially when the African bombings were followed up with the Cole bombing and 9/11. Doesn't that just embolden terrorists to commit even more horrific things, since they know they'll get away with it?

I don't agree with Iraq at all, but I do think some kind of action in Afghanistan was necessary to disrupt the Al Qaeda infrastructure there (although I believe the whole thing was mismanaged).

[wuushew]

13. The Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden to a third party

the U.S. not only failed to kill or capture him but caused massive deaths and suffering with the military option. I reject the idea that "something had to be done" regarding Afghanistan.

Terrorism is fueled by Saudi petro money not merely the existence of Islamic Fundamentalism.

[FormerRepublican]

16. Would the capture of Bin Laden have killed the Al Qaeda movement?

That's part of the intractability. If we got Bin Laden, someone else would take his place.

As I said, I agree the Afghanistan situation was mismanaged horribly, but after the magnitude of 9/11, was the hand over of Bin Laden enough to solve the national security problem?

[Greyhound]

17. All of our embassies have or are getting effective defensive perimeters to

preclude future bombings. The point, however, is that our reaction to these acts have been ineffective at best. Bombing people just ensures another generation of volunteers for the cause. Why is that so hard to understand?

[FormerRepublican]

22. Because ignoring the problem results in more recruits to the cause, too.

That's the intractability of the problem. Clinton didn't do much bombing, nor did he invade any countries, but it didn't prevent 9/11.

I'm not sure what the solution might be, but warfare and ignoring the problem have been tried, and neither work. But I don't think getting Bin Laden handed to us on a platter would have been enough, either.

We tried peace, we tried war - what's left?

[Greyhound]

26. He (Clinton) did bomb (albeit a whole lot less than this maniac)

He handed over, with special notice, all of the tools and information idiot-son needed to stop the attack (assuming they even did it, that video has got me reconsidering) and I don't think ignoring it has been suggested. But our arrogant defiance is definitely making it worse. It ain't our land, it ain't our business.
Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson that urged us to beware of and avoid foreign entanglements? Like any of these situations there is no good, or right, side.

[FormerRepublican]

29. Here's the problem as I see it, and I'm open to other points of view...

Al Qaeda and others want to kill Americans, whether for past grievances or power that's their stated intent. Al Qaeda and others have successfully killed Americans in multiple countries in accordance with their stated intent. Al Qaeda and others like them are organizations that do not reside in a single country, but span the globe and they are organized.

OK, let's compare this to plain old criminal activity. First of all, some response is necessary for the sake of justice and an ordered society. We can't have murderers running around killing people at whim. So we have police to investigate and catch murderers. When the murderers kill multiple people, far more police are assigned to catch them, and far more draconian police action is utilized in the process (road blocks, helecopters, house to house canvassing, etc.). If the person(s) doing mass murder are organized like the mob, then special branches of the police are involved in investigation and prosecution. If those murders span multiple states, the FBI gets involved. If those murders span multiple countries, co-ordination between law enforcements agencies in multiple countries get involved. But what happens if one or more governments don't co-operate? Doesn't that give murderers a base from which to operate and spread out from in order to commit murders? How do you deal with that? Just let your people be murdered? How do you get enough global cooperation to prevent it?

I think that's at the core of what we're dealing with. The problem is global, organized, complex, and a lot of people and countries are sympathetic. End result: Americans die.

How long does that go on before Americans demand some kind of action to prevent it? And what kind of action CAN prevent it other than some kind of bombing or CIA assassinations or something?

[Greyhound]

34. I think this is really a separate issue. The criminality of terrorism

is inarguable and I think, as you stated in your post, that the mechanism for dealing with it already exists. mo Qaddafi shielded terrorists for years in Lybia and he and his country suffered greatly for it (yes, he didn't suffer like his people, but he is an international pariah).
Al Queda says all they want is the infidels out of their lands, if true we leave, they stop and I don't care what happens after, we can look after our own, for a change. If they lie we exercise the stated alternative, we kill all of their relatives, children, friends, until their is nobody left that even remembers their names, let alone what they said they stood for. The Romans always had great success with this proven strategy as has everyone that has implemented it. It is brutal and inhumane, but it kills far fewer people than a war and you only have to follow through once.

[Lerkfish]

3. get rid of the oil, force western influence to stop, and disarm both sides

:shrug: that's the only way I see anything happening in a positive direction.

[FormerRepublican]

7. Given the fact that the ME is totally dependent on the oil economy...

...and in fact I read that Saudi Arabia has almost no economy EXCEPT oil, would getting rid of oil really solve the conflict, or would the source of the conflict change?

Economics is a powerful motivating force that drives people to conflict.

If we stopped our dependence on oil (causing collapse of ME economies) and withdrew from the Middle East, I could see the conflict morphing into a situation where economic concerns replace oil as the source of conflict.

That's part of what I see as the intractability of the situation. This is compounded by the total lack of leadership at the White House.

[wuushew]

9. Peak oil must force a new paradigm eventually

Do you feel delaying the inevitable will lessen violence?

[FormerRepublican]

11. No, I just think we don't have a good plan for dealing with it yet.

[Lerkfish]

12. I was being sarcastic.

obviously those things are not going to happen, so there is no solution.

[Greyhound]

35. You are probably right about that, but we would be out of it, and isn't

that the goal? We are responsible for ourselves and our actions, not theirs. Hell, way more than half the world is a chaotic cesspool and I don't see us spending vast amounts of our blood and treasure to fix their problems.

[bullimiami]

4. First, get some leaders that care about humanity.

Stop treating people like animals and exploiting them, stop the corporate greed and start making the whole world a place of cooperation, tolerance and sharing.

There will still be misunderstandings and renegades which would should be dealt with by worldly bodies and courts like the UN and World Court.

Bush and those idealogically similar are a cancer on humankind.

[Greyhound]

10. The problem is the only solution is one nobody wants to face.

We must wean ourselves from the oil (not nearly as big a deal as the Oil companies would have you believe) and get the fuck out. I mean the whole ME, fuck it, it isn't worth it.

To Israel: Sorry but it was a bad idea, here, take this chunk of Texas, nobody's going to miss it anyway. If you insist on Jerusalem, you'll have to work it out on your own.

To the ME Muslims: OK here's what you say you wanted. That's it leave us the fuck out of it or we will unleash a hell on earth that you cannot imagine. There will be no one left that even remembers you existed. What's the strategy, to the fourth generation? Something like that.

To the Oil companies: Sorry but you've had way too many chances to fix this and all you did was make a bigger mess for somebody else to clean up. Fuck you, and by the way we're taking all your shit as a partial payment for the misery and destruction you've caused.

[FormerRepublican]

14. WRT Israel, I don't think that will work.

It would be the same as telling non-Indian Americans "sorry, but this isn't your country - we're giving it to the Indians." It just causes the situation to immediately explode. And I don't think you could get the support in the US to make it happen anyway.

WRT ME Muslims (extremists, for those who object to generalizations), is it what they really want? That's the part I have angst over. Is it control of the ME, or control of global religious ideology (and the power it gives the Mullahs) that they really want?

WRT oil - I think that's the least of our problems. We already have some viable technologies that could be brought into play, oil companies be darned.

I think the situation is primarily a power struggle, and I'm not sure either side is willing to give up enough or accept enough compromises to settle it.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

18. What they want

My take on things is that the mullahs and other extremists are interested in power, period. I don't see them as wanting to convert the whole world to Islam, however. It's more of a "let us alone so that we can live according to our interpretation of the Qur'an." The nature of Islam as I understand it is not to proslythize. I know that my order expressly forbids it, and I've read enough of other orders to think they are the same.

BTW, I read the quotes from the Qur'an and Hadith that you posted in your original message, and wondered how in the world Usama could quote those and then do what he's doing, for in my mind he is going against the Qur'an and the example set by the Beloved Prophet (pbuh).

[FormerRepublican]

23. I think you hit the nail on the head - it's all about power.

And when you're talking about a lust for power, I don't think the borders of countries or laws mean much. That's what concerns me.

Even if we gave them everything they wanted (and we've tried that in the past), would it be enough if what they really want is power?

[Greyhound]

20. I never said it would be implemented, but it is the only solution I see.

There are huge tracts of unused land all over the western US (much nicer than where Israel is now) so nobody would have to be displaced.

Get out of our Holy-land and Israel are the only things they say they want. The second sentence is our promised reaction if they try to renege.

I don't get your statement about oil at all. It is the only reason we're there.

[FormerRepublican]

24. I think we'd end up with the promised reaction because I think...

...this is about power, not about Israel, oil, or anything else.

So, is there anything we can do to contain or control that lust for power short of war? (And we should consider Bush in that equation because the man is completely mad.)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

15. First of all, you have to look at history

During World War I, the Arabs were promised the moon by the British when they sought their aid in fighting the Ottoman Empire. Most folks know a bit about this from the film "Lawrence of Arabia". The Arabs were promised their own state, but other factors got in the way, such as the 1916 Sykes-Picto Agreement http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1916/sykespicot.html which basically put the Middle East in British and French control. To add to what the Arabs saw as, at the very least, going back on their word, the British and French decided to opt for a homeland of sorts for the Jews, in order to try and get the US into WWI.

I have heard a lecture by a Muslim American who has studied this period, and he said he found that the Europeans instilled their own form of education system, and tended to do what they could to weaken the tradition Islamic system of education, which was open to all and tended to show how Islam's teachings are to be used in everyday life. European ways were imposed as superior to the ways of the natives. (these were the main points of the lecture; I present this so that others may get an idea of at least one Muslim's thinking is about this time and its effect on Islam).

Like many people, Middle Easterners, be they Christian, Jew, or Muslim, have long memories and remember slights done to them. I think that the imposition of Western values, which, in the colonial mode, also denegrated native values, has rankled in the Middle East for quite a while. Couple with this some very corrupt governments that have come after the end of colonial rule, and you have the seeds for unrest.

Israel is in itself a thorny problem. I think a lot of the reason there is such venom towards it is because it was imposed upon the native population by European powers. Also, if one looks at the makeup of the government, one finds that most of the early members of the Cabinet were European Jews rather than Asiatic Jews (by this I mean Jews whose families had not left the Middle East or who had lived in the area for several hundred years). So again, in the eye of the Arab, one sees simply more Europeans imposing their will. The fact that so many Palestinians were displaced has added to the problem, especially as more moderate Palestinians tended to leave the area. Let us not forget that at the same time the Palestinians were uprooted, Asiatic Jews who had lived peacefully in many Arab countries were kicked out; from what I have read, many of them are still refugees.

So what do we as the West do? For one thing, perhaps we learn, finally, to treat other cultures with respect instead of automatically assuming that our way of doing things is the only way or the best way. We have to realize that democracies in this area aren't always going to reflect a position that is favorable to the West. We also have to realize that in some places, democracies will not take hold, that emirs, for example, will continue to rule, and that there is nothing wrong with this if the people who live under the emir are content and happy.

We also have to realize that we do not have the right to use and exploit natural resources that belong to other peoples. We have to be willing to look at the whole picture- including stopping working with corrupt regimes or puppet governments just so we can get their oil.

These are a few random thoughts, and are no way complete. But I hope it adds to the discussion.

[FormerRepublican]

21. Thank you for going over all the history involved - I was aware of it...

...before, but it's nice to see it again.

I want to also say I appreciate your reasoned approach to these issues. I'm in agreement with you more times than not.

The only part of what you said that I would quibble with is the part about natural resources. We live in a global economy, and American resources are flowing overseas (including $$) as well as resources flowing into the US. This is inevitable in a global economy.

Can you go more in depth into why you feel this is a problem? I think we're placed in an awkward position regarding bad regimes when we're forced to deal with them to gain necessary and needed (not fluff or luxuries) resources. We can be blackmailed, and be tempted to support those bad regimes in order to maintain the stability required to keep the needed resources flowing. Countries in developing nations tend to have very unstable governments, and when tons of $$$ and corruption are added to the mix, things can get ugly quick. In short, I believe we're placed between a rock and a hard place because of our need for those resources - not willful desire, but need. Keep in mind that a lot of people in the NE US would freeze in the winter without heating oil, as well as a lot of other uses for petroleum products, so it's not just corporations who need oil. If you have a better way of handling this that is more equitable, I would be interested to hear it. I guess I'd like to understand a little better why you feel buying resources from another country can be bad.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

25. I was afraid I didn't make myself clear

Sorry, I am typing around a ranting husband trying to put a computer desk together, and every so often something comes flying by. I posted quickly last time because I wasn't sure but that he might have unplugged the computer and I would have lost all my research!

What I meant to say is that we must rethink our methods of obtaining natural resources like oil. I think most here would say there is an unholy alliance with Saudi Arabia in regards to petroleum. I'm not exactly sure what to do about it, but I do know if Osama has his way, the Royal Family will be out and he and his cohorts aren't going to be likely to want to keep selling us petroleum. What we must do if this happens, or if another ME country denies us oil, is not to start a war just so we can keep getting it, which I feel is the whole point of going into Iraq.

This is why I think we need to have an all-out drive in our nation to change our energy consumption to renewable energy. I know it won't happen with Bush in charge, but this is what needs to be done. All the billions being funneled into the pockets of the wealthy and into an illegal war should be redirected to finding and developing renewable energies. It can be done. It has already started. If backwoods Arkansas can have a solar panel factory, houses built using geothermal energy for heat/cooling, wind turbines and biofuel, I know that my dear friends in New England can use these same techniques to help them heat their homes (and knowing how intelligent New Englanders are, by and large, I'm sure they'll come up with improvements). Sure, it will be hard for a while; that's why a reordering of priorities is needed, to subsidize the changes-I could see, perhaps, a subsidy to retrofit furnaces so that they can burn an alternative fuel rather than heating oil, for example. Hey, back in the '70s, Jimmy Carter gave me a rebate for insulating my home better, and it helped a lot! What it will take to help ease this world wide crisis is a redirection of resources and a commitment to change.

(Whew! Got all that done without another piece of computer desk sailing my way!)

[FormerRepublican]

30. Again I agree with you, except for one point.

I think if we stop buying Saudi oil, the Saudis will pressure us because that's their greatest source of income. This became obvious when we heard the immediate protest from the Saudis after Bush's vomit (sorry) at the SOTU and how he suddenly wants to limit our dependence on ME oil. How will they pressure us if we persist in reducing dependence? Well they could use the extremist Islamic ideology against us there, too.

I'm not sure what the connection is between Bin Laden and the Saudi royal family. I'm not sure it's as acrimonious as we'd like to believe. I know there have been terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia, but most of them have still been directed at foreign interests and not Saudi government infrastructure. I simply don't see Bin Laden's beef as being one with the Saudi government. And I guess I do see the Saudis (gov't) as using the terrorist movements to manipulate and control the West. I don't view the Saudis as moderates in any way shape or form. Perhaps I'm wrong in that, but that's how I view it based on what I've read.

I really do see terrorism as part of a larger power struggle, and I'm not so certain that governments in the ME aren't involved. That being said, I can see them using terrorism to manipulate us to CONTINUE using oil, just as I can see them using terrorism to manipulate us in other areas. Mostly in issues of power.

So yet again we're caught between a rock and a hard place.

I'd be interested in hearing your views on this.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

36. Both bin Laden and the Saudis are Wahhabists

Though they may be in cahoots, I think that bin Laden is a wild card as far as the royal family is concerned. Remember, one of the reasons he gave for striking NY and Washington was that US forces were stationed on Saudi soil. And if bin Laden is as strict as they say, he would definately object to the lifestyle of the royal family, which includes drinking alcohol and men wearing gold and silk, all of which are forbidden in strict Islam. That being said, I remind you that at least at some point, bin Laden appears to have been a CIA operative-who is to say that he isn't now-if indeed he is still alive? "Loose Change" showed one of the last videos perportedly showing Osama, and many details were wrong-and since then we've only had audio tapes-how convenient.

That being said, I think if the Saudis wanted to use "terror" to keep us using oil, they would hire someone to do it rather than rely on religious fanatics, because fanatics can never be trusted to follow orders and only attack the US. Of course they would do the operation with "terrorism" as a cover-but I don't think they would have hired guns willing to commit suicide, either.

But why should the Saudis even worry about the US and what it does in regards to oil? There are plenty of customers in the world-India and China, to name two. Just because the US, which I feel is being regarded by the rest of the world as a waning economy in very bad shape, stops using oil doesn't mean other parts of the world will.

[Ksec]

19. Honestly I doubt the two can coexist

The ME and its way of life is too different than mine. They live a different way, Im not saying its a bad way, just different and maybe too different . I grasp at evolutionary advances, most of them have disdain for advancing social causes . Hell, they still punish gay people dont they?

[lapfog_1]

27. I think we need to disengage from the ME for a period

of time... which could be generations... possibly a few hundred years.

The development of Islam is about where Christianity was when the West was putting the rest of the world (including their own Pagans) to the sword and forcing conversion, often with very bloody and horrible results. Tolerance is only something that comes along in terms of pendulum swings (which often last a generation or more), with each swing to the tolerance and love side moving the center (IMHO).

Even now, as fundies here are pushing us back toward the middle ages (quite possibly in reaction to the exposure to fundamentalist Islam), they cannot go that far back... they may push to ban abortions, but they cannot keep women from working or voting... and even though they say they might want to take away divorce, it won't happen)... but even now, the progressive views of tolerance and equality have moved the middle closer to what used to be "radical left" and heresy. Islam needs to go through this process, not to mention figuring out that secular education is required in the modern world. This is, in fact, what's so sad about the Iraq war. Saddam (yes, a murderous bastard) was pushing for a educated and secular populace. Iraq has plenty of civil and mechanical and electrical engineers. Somehow I don't think they will a generation or so from now.

So, Islam. Disengage, quit buying oil, let them visit the west but don't cram it down their throats (let them decide what to adopt and when to adopt it). Perhaps in 100 to 200 years, after a few generations, the current crop of jihadist's great grandchildren will want to engage the west and listen to whatever our current music is and so on... and not stone to death those caught in adultery or behead girls whose only crime was to be raped or fall in love with the "wrong" person. These cultural changes just don't happen overnight. Or even in a hundred years. Look at where Arabia was 100 years ago. I think we tried to move them into the 20th (and now the 21st) century much too fast. The Shah of Iran (another murderous bastard) tried to do that as well... hence the fundamentalist revolution.

[bloom]

28. You could start by reading this:

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/781/op2.htm


A different viewpoint.

[FormerRepublican]

31. And how does this prevent them from saying Israel has a right to exist...

...in some form? No requirement for border determination on either side is necessary before Hamas gives up it's demand that Israel cease to exist. Even as a negotiating tactic, the only thing that demand does is stop the negotiations cold and perpetuate violence.

The situation is not one sided - both sides have grievances. That's never been in dispute. The core of the problem, though, IS the demand that Israel cease to exist because no other solution is acceptable. That demand alone prevents any ultimate resolution. And if that's not a political play designed to continue the status quo, then I don't know what is.

Do YOU support the right of Israel to exist in some form?

[bloom]

32. yes

I just don't see Israel as being serious about negotiating - serious about the Palestinians having a state - and I don't like to see things put all on the Palestinians to compromise.


As far as the US and the ME - the US needs to stop acting like it owns the world.

[FormerRepublican]

33. That's my take on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, too. Both sides...

...intractable. And we're caught in the middle because we're seen as pro-Israel and an obstacle by those who would prefer that Israel be eliminated.

WRT the US and the ME, I can't see how we can stop all the power plays until we eliminate our dependence on oil. Neediness sucks and all that.

And it seems as if every attempt to reduce dependence is spiked, either here at home or in the ME.