The aid money we spend is not to foster peace. I wish it was, but those dollars are spent for political reasons. Isreal is considered a balancing force to other groups in the region. Egypt is a desirable strategic partner because of the Suez Canal and their unique location as the confluence of Africa and the Middle East. I don’t think the government sees it as rewarding or punishing anything, but rather an investment in protecting our interests. I am not saying I think that is right, but I do think that is very accurate.

The reactions by American Muslims and Jews don’t help, but it is understandable given the passions of each side already in place even before this latest incident. At least our fellow Americans are keeping it at words and not getting into the violence that has cropped up in several European countries. It is hard to start a meaningful dialogue at times like this, but now is when the real leaders of each faith and the real leaders of men need to step up and foster that dialogue and create a useful discussion that will help end this mess.

If it can be done in Ireland, it can be done anywhere.

I don’t disagree with Khalid about the other areas of the world that have much larger problems than this that don’t get the attention of the world. At least for America, there are more Jews and Muslims in the media than Congonese, so naturally their attention will go to the Middle East first and foremost…

I must respectfully disagree.

“After over 40 years of violence and turmoil very little seems to have changed.”

Perhaps for Arabs, but not for Israeli’s. Israel thrives because it maintains enlightened Western ideals of religious,economic, and political freedom. It is the only truly representative and free democracy in the entire region and is one of the few states in the region that does not expressly forbid or repress non-Muslims. Certain other Arab nations have made progress over that time, but for the most part Arab states remain autocratic, backwards, and oppressive.

Palestinian Arabs have created for themselves a culture that glorifies death, destruction, and martyrdom that only they can abolish. It began in the 1960’s with the rise of militant nationalists like the PLO, but has gotten progressively worse as nationalist aims were overtaken by extreme religious fanatics with the overall goal of Islamic supremacy supported by the the mullahs in Iran and the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia.

“It seems each side only goads the other to ever more depraved acts of violence.”

I suppose that depends on how one defines depravity. I consider people who strap bombs on themselves and then detonate them in supermarkets, discos, commuter buses, and pizza parlors with the express purpose of killing innocent people depraved. I consider people who drive bulldozers into crowds of pedestrians depraved. I consider people who lob missiles and mortars indiscriminately into residential neighborhoods depraved. I consider people who use women and children as human shields depraved. I consider people who belong to and support organizations that openly declare as the prime goal of their existence the world-wide extermination of Jews depraved.

By any objective standard, there is only one side that acts with a callousness that can only be described as pure evil. While it is certainly true not all Palestinians adhere to this barbaric ideology, far, far too many of them do.

“Over the years, both sides have committed so many acts of violence against civilians that neither has any real claim left to moral righteousness for their position.”

This is, of course, complete rubbish. I find attempts to rationalize a moral equivalence between a culture that openly believes in the mass extermination of another to be repugnant in the extreme. One would be hard pressed to find a group of people less deserving of sympathy, much less moral and political support than today’s Palestinians.

There is only one side in this conflict that has a decades-long track record of utter disregard for innocent lives, be they the lives of Jews or their own people.

“Also consider that in these intervening years others were able to find peace in places with arguably just as difficult conflicts (like Northern Ireland and South Africa and the former Yugoslavia) while there is no peace in sight in Palestine”.

What was it Golda Meir said? When the Palestinians learn to love their children more than they hate Jews, there will be peace. The Irish, South Africans, Serbs and Bosnians never devolved into a culture that glorifies death, genocide, and martyrdom like Palestinian Arabs have.

“Each side in Palestine is very adept at blaming the other but neither has any real vision of peace.”

Again, this is rubbish. There have been numerous chances for peace between Israel and Palestinian including repatriation, establishment of a Palestinian state, land swaps, etc. Palestinians and their Arab state supporters have undermined them every single time.

“There has been a complete lack of leadership in both the Palestinians and the Israelis on how to achieve peace. A dispassionate observer would conclude that perhaps neither side really wants peace.”

A truly dispassionate observer can see quite clearly which side doesn’t want it. Palestine has been one of the longest running, and least deserving episodes of Grievance Theater in modern times. “Palestinians” could have had their own country in 1948 had they accepted the UN sponsored partition plan which gave Israel AND the Palestinians countries of their own. Arabs rejected the UN offer and chose instead to wage a war of annihilation with the infant Israeli nation. They did it again in 1967. Both times the Arabs lost badly and have been whining about it ever since.

“As an American I am concerned that we have over that past 40 years spent more aid money in this area (mainly to Israel and Egypt) than the rest of the world combined and yet there has been no progress on achieving lasting peace.”

Indeed. Billions of dollars and tons of food and materiel are poured into the Palestinian territories each year, yet the people live in squalor. One wonders exactly what Palestinian political leaders are doing with all those resources. Somehow I don’t think their plight has as much to do with Israel as it does their own culture.

“Are we enabling and rewarding bad behavior and so making the situation worse?”

The UN, Arab world, and West certainly are. So long as a visceral hatred of Jews persists throughout Europe and the Muslim world and Westerners continue the culturally suicidal notion that says all ideologies and religious views have equal merit, the situation will get a lot worse. And not just for Israelis and Palestinians, but for people around the world. Islamist radicalism and global jihad is a cancer on civilization that must be eradicated.

“The same question goes to the American Jews and American Muslims. By our knee jerk responses are we also enabling and rewarding bad behavior and so making the situation worse?”

Not really. The problems the Palestinians currently face are solely their own doing. Only they have the power to change it.

“Looking around the world, there are humanitarian issues far greater than the Palestine-Israel issue in the world today that receive a fraction of our attention.”

Indeed. If you want an example of a group of a people who truly deserve the world’s moral support and sympathy, you need look no further than Tibet or Darfur.

“The rapid rise in grain prices and the impact on billions of poor the world over is surely a much greater crisis. Also the continuing problems in Western Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo impact far more people. Perhaps in view of the continued lack of progress in Palestine we need to focus some attention on these issues where we may have more positive impact.”

I agree completely. Decent people around the globe should do all we can to help the truly deserving and stop focusing on some of the world’s worst inhabitants.

“Finally I would like to offer this thought from Prophet Muhammad : ”help your brother whether he is a wronged or is a wrong doer.” And he went on to explain that: “the way you support your wrong doer brother is by stopping him from that bad action”. I hope that all of us exert more influence on our co-religionists in finding peace for all in Palestine.”

Which would be a nice sentiment if didn’t conflict with the Muhammad’s other thought that “brother” only extends to other Muslims.

Tim,
Thank you for your comments. I agree with everything you wrote and do lament that we cannot do more good with our actions as a nation.

Go Fish,
Your comments, from my perspective, completely validate everything I wrote.So I will just add two comments. Of course each ’side’ considers all its actions justified and all the ‘other sides’ actions heinous. But killing of any civilians is heinous, whoever does it. In the past few days Israeli bombing has killed more civilians in Gaza than all the civilians killed in years of rockets from Gaza. To not consider BOTH the actions of Palestinians and Israelis equally heinous is irrational a immoral double standard.

Your comments about Prophet Muhammad reveal ignorance. Muslims, good or bad, everywhere try to emulate the great example he left (the bad Muslims aren’t very good at following the his life example). I offer you only one fact left as a legacy of Muslims. The Jewish Book of History which states that the Golden period of Jewish Civilization was in the centuries of Muslim Spain. Surely if Jews consider their thriving civilization that existed under the patronage of Muslims as their Golden age, the life example of Prophet Muhammad deserves much credit and more serious study by all.

For peace and love to be present they each must give up being “right.”

I will disagree with your last statement, and I do so respectfully knowing it is the word of your prophet.

Both sides are committed to stopping the “wrong doers.” If you disagree, ask them.

The argument about a universally acceptable “rightenss” is never ending in the history of mankind, and has been the source of all wars, especially religous wars.

It is interesting to note the in my faith the ten commandments are very clearly inspiration, yet we call them “right” and “laws,” and if we don’t abide them we are “wrong,” if we do abide them we are “right”.

God says, “Do not kill.” It is simple, clear, and inspiring that it takes my breath away.

God does not say, “Killing is wrong.” or “Not killing is the right thing to do.”

God says, “Do not kill.” in a clear an inspiring way that touches me to my very soul. He does not declare it in a judgmental or righteous way.

Righteousness is in the realm of men, not God.

We, as human beings, will kill each other to be “right.”

It is this judgment in the name of “God” that we use to justify our killing. I do not see God making these judgments and doing this killing. I only see men doing it in the name of “God” and rightousness.

Men agree to respect life, to protect it, to honor it and nuture it because they are inspired to do so. Inspired by God if they choose.

To allow people to kill each other in the context of that commitment doesn’t work, and we will act to stop it. In this context nobody needs to be wrong or right. We will act to stop the killing.

There is no judgement, no right or wrong, no good or bad to confuse the commitment.

As people, we are inspired by life, we choose this for ourselves.

We can create for ourselves a community that exists without judgement, without righteousness, that honors what inspires us.

Nobody accepts themselves as a “wrong doer.” We can not convince or transform a “wrong doer.” The battle is lost when the judgmnent is present.

If the people in this world had integrity around their commitment to not kill. We would walk into this conflict and stop it, in a minute.

This is not what happens. What happens is we must first determine who is right in the matter. While we busy ourselves with this “Godly” work of who is “right” the killing continues, and the “righteous” men are glorified for upholding “righteousness.”

What is more important to people than life is maintaining their righteousness. Lives can be sacrificed for righteousness. Our leaders will tell us this.

Human beings will sacrifice their integrity under the veil of righteousness.

You will argue that “they” are abusing righteousness, not you, “they” are not abiding the right righteousness, we know the right rightousness because we are faithful followers of the one true God’s righteousness. Our God’s righteousness is the right righteousness. Ask us, and we will tell you.

Rightousness is for God not men. We use it for our own glorification.

I would assert that only God has power over it.

As people, we have what inspires us, we have choice and our integrity, we have committment. We have faith in these because they are from God.

As a Christian and a believer in the God of the Bible, I am not to judge or use the knowledge of sin. It doesn’t work for me to do so. I will surely die if I do so. God does not want this for me. God wants eternal life for me. I am inspired by this, and accept it as my own.

I believe the word you’re looking for is refutation, not validation. The argument that the deaths of innocent civilians is never justified has been refuted so many times that it needn’t be rehashed here. The claim is ridiculous on its face. So are the recently popular and patently absurd demands that Israel adopt some sort of “preportional” response strategy.

When Arab armies massed on Israels border in 1948 and again in 1967 with the expressed goal of pushing them into the sea, no one called for the Arabs to “exercise restraint”. No Arab or Western state demanded that Iran and Iraq employ some phony “proportional” strategy in their awful war of attrition. The Muslim world was silent as Russians killed hundreds and perhaps thousands of civilians in Georgia last summer. There has been little outcry over the tens of thousands killed by both Russians and Chechens in Chechnya over the last decade. Conspicuously, there appears to be no concern at all in the Muslim world at the plight of innocent Thais, Philippinos, non-Muslim Yemenis, Indians, and the Christians of Sudan who are butchered by the hundreds every day at the hands of jihadis. Given that fact, handwringing over the deaths of some not-so-innocent Palestinians amounts to nothing more than crocodile tears.

When faced with an existential threat, as Israel most certainly is from the genocidal fanatics of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran, the only rational response is to use whatever force is necessary to stop or destroy that threat. This has been an internationally recognized principle since the dawn of the modern era. I recall no Muslim or Western state demanding the govt of Sri Lanka exercise restraint in it’s current civil war. Nor were very many concerned about the innocent citizens of Lebanon during it’s decades long civil war.

No other country on earth is held to such a ridiculous standard. The only ones who advocate such a thing are apologists for violent jihad and Israel’s enemies.

Of course the death of civilians is a horrible thing and something to be avoided whenever possible. However, when states or proxy organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah deliberatly target the civilian population of Isreal use their own civilian populations as human shields, and worse, those same civilians tacitly condone such tactics by keeping the thugs of Hamas in power, they necessarily waive any claim to innocent victimhood.

Again, the attempt at moral equivalency is repugnant. There simply is no way to compare the goals and values of a state like Israel with those of organizations like Hamas or Palestinians in general. Only one side in this equation openly and proudly advocates the complete extermination of the other and has demonstrated time and again its zeal in achieving that end. Only one side has openly and proudly declared that they will never accept peace no matter what the circumstance. People who don’t recognize or dismiss these most obvious facts have no business lecturing others about the morality or war.

Go Fish,

No the word I wanted was DEFINITELY validate and your second entry would make it validate 2x. The argument is simple ‘what we do is right and justified, what they do is wrong and horrible’. Both Palestinians and Israelis (or rather their respective fervent supporters) use this same line of argument. Which is why while people in South Africa were able to overcome apartheid but this problem seems still stuck in the past.

The only part of your response that is of interest is where you provide no support except to say “The argument that the deaths of innocent civilians is never justified has been refuted so many times that it needn’t be rehashed here.” It has been proven many times that it is OK to kill civilians? Really!? I know that Hitler used this argument and on a smaller scale Osama bin Laden uses this argument but I hope we can agree that those are morally bankrupt persons. Of course I am aware that many of the worlds armies justify civilian deaths or the euphemism of collateral damage. But there is no moral justification for their position as far as I am aware. I have covered this issue of civilian deaths in some detail (with help from others) in a previous blog. I would be curious what MORAL argument you can provide in support of killing civilians.

Justified lost of civilian lives in war or situations such as this one is no different than if this country were to make it a practice to allow the killing of hostages in bank robberies etc…for the possibility or goal of capturing or killing bank robber(s).

Khalid, I think I understand what you’re driving at, and there is some truth to what you say. However, the Islamic community does not, and has not publicly denounced the extremists in their midst. Neither have they taken a strong stand that grants Israel the nation the right to exist. Because of this failure, the various Islamic extremists can easily justify their actions in the name of their God.

What has always puzzled me about this conflict is this: Why is it that the various Islamic groups seem to get a free pass for their failures? Arafat stole probably BILLIONS of dollars worth of aid and cash from the people he pledged to lead, and the world said nothing. Hamas and Hezbollah sets off car bombs and rockets, and the world yawns. Israel gets pushed once too far, and suddenly the world takes notice, and not in a positive way.

Personally, I think the conflict over there has roots that go so far back into history that none of us can even comprehend them. I sometimes prefer to look at it simplistically and say that it’s really nothing more than a family feud, where the cousins are fighting over the inheritance. Now, the fact that the inheritance is a patch of not terribly productive land doesn’t matter much.

I do believe that the ultimate resolution is the so-called 2-state solution, but I also believe that there are enough radicals on both sides who want total victory for themselves that it will never come about. For every Hamas leader who wants to destroy Israel there is an Israeli leader who believes in Eretz Israel and wants to demolish the Dome of the Rock so that the Temple of Solomon can be rebuilt. And, there are a sizable number of fervent Evangelical Christians who believe the same thing and want to bring about Armageddon. Because this is all tied up in Religious fervor on top of the social, political, and military issues, I think it’s a much knottier problem than anyone really understands.

Thank you D. Walker. Yes I have yet to hear any argument that says it is OK to kill civilians and my position is it is never ever OK for anybody to kill civilians.

HS, Thank you for your comments. There have been a number of public announcements by various muslim groups condemning terrorism. Unfortunately they are not always covered widely. Here is CAIR’s link with all their announcements http://www.cair.com/AmericanMuslims/AntiTerrorism.aspx

The issue of recognition of Israel by Arab Nations is a bit more complex. But the offer to work on it has been repeatedly made to Israel. The issues of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees are two that there is no agreement on and Israel refuses to discuss the issues. Personally I don’t care about the Jerusalem issue as much but refugee right to return is fundamental. Israel just recently pushed and won a case against Germany from WW2. The Palestinian refugees should have the same rights. Having said that here are a couple of articles about Arab League overtures towards Israel http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-07-25-mideast_N.htm?csp=34

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1556922/Arab-League-plans-first-visit-to-Israel.html

Finally, I don’t know if you have considered a One State solution. The realities are that is probably the only practical solution given how intertwined the two societies are. There used to be a Israeli restaurant at Olive and Fee Fee about 10 years ago and most of their customers were Arabs. Because Israeli food is Arab food. Israel is not in Europe, it is in the middle east and that makes it a middle eastern country. That is its destiny. Muslims and Jews have lived in harmony for centuries. My reference to the Jewish Book of History in an earlier response is a testament to how well they can live together. I remember reading an article a year or so ago about a Jewish family in Israel moving to a ‘mixed’ neighborhood (i.e., with Jews and Arabs living together) and loving it. That gave me some hope.

One suggestion is to remove righteousness of faith from the conversation among different peoples.

I am not suggestion people give up their faith, on the contrary, I am suggesting they use it to make their choices, not to justify them.

When war and killing is present there is a lack of integrity. People are not being who they say they are.

Nations who use their government as a tool of faith will be righteous and give themselves feet of clay. It is human nature.

They will justify horrible acts as necessary, as acts of righteousness inspired by their faith. They can not justify a horrendous act alone.

My faith wisely advises that I not mix the two. It advises that I bring my faith to my relatonships, not to bring my relationships to my faith.

The United States of America wisely chose not to include religion as a basis of our government. We did this with a passion to practise our faiths freely and the power in this was made know to us by experiencing first hand the oppression of a government justified by faith.

Wonderfully, honoring faith in this way is inspired by faith itself.

D. Walker,
In your comparison, Hamas (the bank robber?) would be a criminal recognized by all as such including their own citizens, and Israel and Palestine would be the authorities acting to stop them and protect their own citizens from the bank robber.

This does not appear to be the case.

As a soldier, I would not engage the enemy from my own house without being willing to sacrifice my own family. Blaming the enemy for their death is not being responsible for my own commitment.

Terrorism is an act of moral defeat. They have lost before they began.

Another,

There is moral behavior that all civilized people agree on, regardless of their religion. It is precisely at the point of conflict that it is most important that we do live up to our principles. If whenever there is war it is OK to violate our principles that is what is known as hypocrisy. Killing of civilians comes under this moral principle. If we do not follow moral principles when we choose then we have no business thinking our behavior is any better than the worst among humanity.

On the issue of separation of church and state, which is what I think you are referring to. My understanding is that the founding fathers did believe in religious values and considered them the underpinnings of a good society. It was for this reason that early in our history (I think it was Abraham Lincoln) that religious institutions were given a tax free status in order to enhance the strength of religious institutions. However the concern was that if you let religion be part of government then some people may try to enforce a particular interpretation of a religion in making laws (by the way this is really at the heart of the abortion debate as well as the debate in schools about teaching evolution. It is a particular view of religion that is driving one side of each debate)and having seen the corrosive effect this can have in society (in Europe) they wanted to avoid the same mistake in America. It wasn’t that religion does not have answers to issues facing society. Religion does and each person should use their faith background as part of their moral life but one person should not enforce their moral position on others or on all society.

Another,

In response to your comment to D. Walker. This is precisely the argument used by Osama bin Laden to justify killing of USA civilians or anyone who supports USA. No a civilian is NOT guilty simply by association or even by showing support. Only if they are physically engaged in terrorist activities, which means they are no longer civilians. A large number of the civilian casualties are children. Are you really suggesting that these children deserved to be killed because they live in Gaza? Then are the Palestinians justified in killing any or all Israelis simply because they are Israelis and supported (presumably although not all Israelis support this war, just like not all Palestinians in Gaza support Hamas) this wanton killing of civilians. You are a thinking person, please ponder you position.

If we are moral human beings we must work to avoid ALL civilian casualties.

“There is moral behavior that all civilized people agree on, regardless of their religion.”

Yes. I agree with that.

That moral code is created for people, by people. It is our responsibility in this world as people.

God provides inspiration for this, prophets provide ways to this, we make choices, commitments and maintain our integrity in this. It is our doing.

For any religion or person to declare righteousness about this is an act to steal from the people their ongoing conversation with God.

It is already automatically in our thoughts that it is “wrong” for civilians to die. I suggest that thought is designed to numb the pain and suffering from the death with self righteousness and blame. Israel (or Hamas) is killing civilians, not me. They are wrong, not me. I know what is right. I am good with God!

It is how people use the moral code. It is less a personal declaration and commitment, and more a compass for keeping themselves right with God in the eyes of others.

My point is to imagine this situation being resolved without blame. In that context, how would you go about it without making someone wrong?

Faith relieves us of judgement. This is for God. For us, it is to honor our moral code with integrity, to honor our word to ourselves and with each other.

Achieve that and you have the power to achieve peace.

Disappear the right and wrong, the judgement, and you will have peace and love.

Judge and punish and it will rise again another day even stronger.

We may disagree on this. It took me a long time to come to a place where I can work to give up judgment as a context for making my choices, and many do not agree.

I have found that there is little power in determining who is right or who is wrong. Making someone right only begins the process of diminishing the one who we make wrong by doing so. They resist even more in their tale of being right. The more we declare them wrong, the stronger becomes their resistance to our words.

I honor what inspires me and my commitments generated from that. I trust God to provide that inspiration.

You and I agree on the moral code: “Do not kill.” They will stop killing each other. Together, we can be a stand for that.

I will not be drawn into a debate about the right or wrong of it. That is only a story with the intention to maintain someone’s righteousness in a matter of not wanting to be held to their word.

Tolerate killing for the right cause, and you have not honored your word.

I am not a pacifist. I will defend myself and my family, and the lives of others. I will do it from my inspired love and commitment to life. I will not do it because it is the right thing to do and in so doing pretend to make another person who does not see what I see wrong before God.

I do very much enjoy your posts. Thank you.

This won’t end until Israel’s right to exist is really and wholly accepted by everybody.

We can be diplomatic and nice to all sides, but when it comes down to it, one side would just assume push the other into the sea never to exist again. Try talking peace to that mentality.

I won’t take the point of view that Isreal is the sole victim or that Palestine is the sole agressor, but if you want peace accept that they are there to stay and have the right to exist.

And stop “electing” terrorist leadership if you don’t want to look like the agressor to the world.

Oh, and at the end of a 3 hr. cease fire that you begged for, don’t be the first to start lobbing rockets at civilian targets.

One more thing, those civilian deaths are on Palestine’s hands. You can’t start a war by attacking civilians, get into said war that you are way undergunned on, hide in residential areas and then blame the other side for civilian casualties. What does the Koran say about using innocent human shields?

I am not saying that civilians or children deserve to die because of their sympathies, where they live, who their parents are, or any other circumstance.

I am saying that blame and righteous indignation is not a powerful way to manage life.

If you throw a rock at the mother bear’s cubs, and then run into your house where your family is, you are responsible for the consequences when she follows. Innocence has nothing to do with it.

Blaming the mother bear for being a mother bear makes no difference.

In the context of responsibility, Hamas is not committed to safe guarding its civilian life. We can determine this from the outcome. We do not need to know who is right or who is wrong.

They are reckless and irresponsible if they are tring to protect their own civilian life.

The events are as predictable as night and day. The intention is clear.

Responsibility is an simple commitment, it applies only to yourself. Blame is the pretense we use to avoid it.

Peace is for those who want it.

Pretending to hold its own innocent lives hostage for the world’s comdemnation of Israel will not work.

Not a judgment, it just won’t work.

It does work to hold their own pain and suffering in place to feed their rightousness. It is very dark work.

Sadly, this is a lesson they must take on for themselves. Only when they have experienced total despair, and maybe not even then, will they have the desire to make a difference in it.

Mike and Another,
The primary problem with both your arguments is the wrong assumption that only one side is always the aggressor and only one side is always the victim. Both Israelis and Palestinians have initiated attacks, both have reneged on treaties, both have committed atrocities. To an outsider Israel has committed far more atrocities. But this may be more of case of capability (Israel is one of the top five military forces in the world). The Palestinians just don’t match Israel in firepower (no fighter planes, no tanks, no armored vehicles).

No argument from me about the facts of the conflict. I agree with your assessment.

Who’s responsibility do you want to discuss Hamas or Israel? They are separate conversations.

Hamas is in a declared war against Israel. Complaining or defending for them about the consequences of that will not make a difference. They have the responsibility and the freedom to conduct their business. They have chosen their course and its results.

Are you suggesting we hold them responsible for their civilian deaths that are an outcome of that war? Yes, I agree.

Israel is doing the same. Do we hold them responsible for the civilian deaths that are a result of that? Yes, I agree.

Remove the blame, and you are now directly confronted with the problem.

Now what? A conversation about who has the greater moral capacity will not make a difference.

My suggestion: publish the atrocities, show the world, shine the light on it, show the despair, share the pain and suffering, confront everyone, but do not egage in a conversation of blame or righteousness. It is only a distraction to being present to the reality of who they are being for themselves and each other.

There will be no insight for Hamas or Israel if we allow ourselves to be drawn into their debate about what is right. If we allow ourselves to be used to justify any of this for either.

Condemn them both equally if you must, but I would suggest against that as well. They are both good people caught in a battle of righteousness.

I think what we’re seeing is another proof of the basic idea that terrorism cannot be defeated solely by military action. I agree with Another, neither side in this conflict is blameless. Neither side is “right”. And, neither side is “wrong” either. What we’re seeing, in many ways, is the latest installment in the oldest human pattern of all. When a well equipped group of migrants appear in a place, they push out the ‘natives’ and attempt to destroy them. When the natives fight back, they get dumped on.

We can go around and around arguing about who has the right to be there, who was there first, and so on. That argument, while perhaps interesting to the Anthropologists, doesn’t deal with the problem. On the Israeli side, their official statement is basically that they want to be left alone to live in peace. Now, they don’t live it very well, but that IS their official statement. The Palestinians, fundamentally, are still mad, 2 generations later, about being kicked out of their homes. Now, I think a careful reading of history would suggest that the various non-Israeli leaders in the region after WWII, kept the Palestinians in the camps rather than absorbing them for political reasons. After all, wasn’t Jordan supposed to be the “Palestinian” homeland under the Balfour declaration? Remember, prior to around 1920, there were no nations as we understand them in the region of Palestine. There were just a bunch of tribal groups that didn’t get along all that well, with constantly shifting boundaries. The area had been occupied by various colonial powers for centuries, and it had probably been 2500 years since there was anything approaching local national boundaries.

If anyone bears fundamental responsibility for the mess in the middle east, we in the West better look in the mirror. After WWII, the area was a complete mess, and the western political leaders basically promised to work with anyone who pledged to clean up the mess. WE installed all the various “kings” in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. And then we washed our hands of the outcome.

These people have been fighting with each other for what, 3000 years? And we think we can get them to stop, just like that? Who are we kidding?

Kalid,

I stated that neither side is the sole agressor. My point is simple. If the media darling of Palestine was so innocent as we keep hearing, then stop crowding women and children around your rocket launchers, overthow Hamas, and when you beg for a cease fire, don’t start launching rockets IMMEDIATELY after it ends.

Yes, nobody is innocent, but as an entity, Palestine won’t let anything end. They insist on terrorism and they insist on the end of Israel (as does the rest of the middle east.) So, how can we ever expect this to end if they won’t quit until Israel is no more?

The palestinians and their blood thirsty leadership are responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths in this current conflict, and their Islamic neighbors should hold them responsible.

hs has some good historical points. The only thing I would counter with is the same thing could be said of the Bosnians and the Serbs, the Protestants and the Catholics in Ireland (not 3000 years long, but 500 years is long enough), etc who have managed to get a peace going. Hopefully that peace lasts. Peace can be accomplished, but it sure as hell isn’t easy…

Thank you to all for adding their comments. Yesterday was a very strenuous work day for me and by nightfall I was exhausted so sorry for not responding earlier. There are a number of details where my understanding of history and how events transpired is different. Mike’s comment about Palestinian’s being the media darling got me thinking. But before I go there I do want to mention that Jews in America have made great contributions to society especially how minorities are treated. They have greatly benefited from this but they have worked for causes of others very passionately. Jewish humor has also been an instrument in this cause. My friend Steve (who happens to be jewish) told this story (was it factual or fiction I don’t know. Steve told it about himself). About his Jewish family living in New York and they had a neighbor who was very prejudiced against Jews. One day the two sons came across each other in front of their houses and started staring at each other. Finally Steve said “Our house is just as good as yours” the other kid grunted “Yeah so”. Steve: “My dad has just as good a job as your day” the other kid: “yeah so”. Steve: “But infact we are better off than you”. the other kid (with a note of incredulity): “How do you figure that”. Steve: “We don’t have no damn Jews living next to us”!! Humor can expose prejudice by making it look silly and less attractive. Mark Twain in his writings did the same with slavery.

But getting back to our theme, the Palestine conflict is unique only in that it is covered here in the US differently that anywhere else in the world, including inside Israel. I would suggest anyone wanting to see an alternative view to read Norm Finkelstein’s “Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict”
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/content.php?pg=4

The Wikipedia writeup on Norm is very up to date and excellent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_Finkelstein

Norm in his book goes through very detailed examples of everything he is asserting. Alan Dershowitz is Norm’s favorite target and nemesis who is trying to stop him. But as a child of holocaust survivors Norm cannot be called anti-jewish though many Jews do treat him that way. But Norm exemplifies the characteristic of seeking truth and justice that has been the hallmark a many great Jews historically.

Two of the important points the Norm makes are: 1. The holocaust has been covered like no other human tragedy and the purpose is to keep the sense of guilt high among the western nations and this is used to make them support Israel even when Israel is acting badly. Among the facts to support that holocaust gets more coverage, Norm counted the number of movies that have been made about the holocaust which at last count was over 70 and continues to grow. Number 2 on the list of historical events is the birth and life of Jesus about which about 10 movies have been made. He mentions how even today the NY Times publishes hundreds (he has the exact figure in his book) of articles every year on the holocaust. No other human tragedy or significant event gets anywhere near this coverage.

2. There is a class of scholars (Alan Dershowitz is one) who write books in support of Israel and these books receive great literary reviews and are on the best seller list but that these works are based on complete fabrication of history. He did take Alan Dershowitz’s book ‘The Case of Israel’ apart with specific page#/Line# references and in a interesting note Alan Dershowitz confronted Norm by calling in on a radio program and in the ensuing debate when Norm asked about specific statements in the book Alan unwittingly admitted that he hadn’t read the book (that he had written!!). I think the transcript or audio of that is somewhere on the web.

So, finally, all this is to say we should never be duped by anyone or any organization and sometimes we need to recheck our sources of information.
As for the Palestine-Israel conflict, like I have stated from the beginning when I compare it to other situations, like South Africa, the conclusion I reach is that neither side is really working for peace. The atrocities of apartheid were far worse than what Palestinians are enduring. And the peace reached in South Africa is far from perfect. But with peace the ordinary people benefit, children get educated and in a few generations nations gradually improve. We can see that here in our country with the Civil Rights movement and the gradual gains made by African Americans and how this has been good for all of us.

Chuckle!

I don’t disagree with you Khalid that the Jewish community wants to keep the Holocaust in the forefront of our minds. Blacks bring up slavery in this light too. In all such cases I completely understand why any group of people would want to do that. Fear of history repeating itself is a strong motivator indeed.

I also agree that information should be checked and verified, especially if it comes from the Web.

By the way, WW II has had way more movies made about it than any other topic. I know because I think I have watched them all.

What this proves once a again we cannot have dialogue using American Values to solve a non-American issue. If we were in Texas and bombs were raining down on San Antonio would we not use American laws and diplomacy first before we amass an Army to invade Mexico and how long would we have waited a week after the first bomb. Israel doesn,t have the a partner and is a island unto itself. The Palestinian don’t have the rule of law at all.
And Bush abandoned both to fight it out. I can only hope that President Obama has guts and the wisdom to start to solve this problem, it will take all his and Hillary’s skill solve a problem where no solution but death has been the answer.

Tim,

Thank you for your response. I am in the last entry quoting Norm Finkelstein on both points. He makes a case for the Holocaust also in a separate book called The Holocaust industry. You may want to follow the links in the previous entry. You are right about WW2 though (I have seen a LOT of them too) maybe it is number 2. I will look in Norm’s book again.

Rick, Thank you for your comment. Not sure you have read all the entries but only response I have is that if we give up OUR rule of law when we are under threat that is a real problem. The application of law is most important when society is under stress. Otherwise we are letting the worst elements in our or in external sources determine our adherence to our principles and laws. By giving up our laws we are adopting the principles of those attacking us, which makes us no better than them. My whole point about the Palestine conflict. Both sides have committed a lot of atrocities (Israel may have committed more, as I said before, but I attribute that to them having more weapons). From the outside we need to focus on peace and keep asking the question of both Palestinians and Israelis “if South Africa can get to peace why can’t you?”. If we keep asking that question often enough maybe they we each start looking at their own behavior rather than keep reacting to the others and keep this tit for tat going on and on.

Khalid no one ever should give up their rights to the rule of law. Thomas Jefferson said that is the law given by nature. The rule of law needs to be put in place or you have anarchy and death which is what they have now. What needs to be imposed is the rule of law, so that legitimate grievance can be handled in a civil manner. Hopefully the Egyptians working with the EU and America can devise a new way to think and get it done.

The rule of law is needed, so parties can address their grievances in civil manor, not who has the bigger gun. School yard bully approach. Hopefully Egypt, The EU, and the US can come up with the way to make that happen. otherwise, Anarchy will continue and death will prevail

Funny thing—I have a knee-jerk need for survival. So do the Israelis. And they really REALLY get annoyed by constant rocket attacks on them [they're peculiar that way---so many Americans seem to believe that they wouldn't mind rocket attacks on American cities, if the bundist-like comments so prevalent on political forums and blogs these days is any guide], and have rightly finally decided to destroy the attackers, whatever it takes.

This is one of those fey articles that are always popping up—As though all things are equal because there are two sides. That’s crap. Israel simply isn’t going away,and as long as it’s attacked, on whatever rationale the teary-eyed care to hide behind, there will be war, and people will be killed. There’s no magic flower. From the Israeli perspective, religion has nothing to do with it. Curious that this article appears in a “religion” blog. The religious hatred resulting in political and military action is entirely one-sided: moslems against Jews.

Whatever “justice” lies in store, it will never include an arab or other moslem takeover of Israel.

Irv,
I usually ignore such hate diatribes but when it is on my blog I have to respond. Not in kind but at least hopefully bring the dialogue back to reason. Since you have clearly not read previous entries I will re-iterate. The Jewish book of History lists as the Golden Age of Judaism in Muslim Spain. That was over 500 years of history. You can see thousands of synagogues in Spain from that Muslim Age. Clearly there is no history of hatred. Secondly, it is NEVER justified to kill civilians and killing civilians never leads to any good for those doing it. Finally you confirm my main point that supporters of each side put ALL the blame on the other side and that is the main barrier to peace.

shah,

YOUR blog?!!! Well, you certainly have tried to dominate it; but this blog is supposed to be about religion and is supposed to be a blog of many people. your attitude is so typically moslem.

There is no hate in my previous posting. I dare you to show me any. I have stated facts. Israel will not leave. Try as you might, that is the central fact that the moslem world for the most part does not accept, has never accepted and is intent on not accepting. I couldn’t care less about moslem spain [a conquest by moslems, by the way, of other people's lands]. The issue is Israel. It has nothing to do with ancient spain, despite the moslem world’s incessant pipedream of a return to those “glory” days [when, of course, they dominated others, much like you on this blog].

No moslems until the peace agreements between Israel, on the one hand, and egypt and jordan [the fiefdom previously known as Transjordan], on the other, have ever chosen to live peacefully with the Jewish nation. And egypt and jordan wouldn’t have entered into those agreements if they hadn’t gotten tired of getting the crap kicked out of them every time they tried to eliminate the Jewish nation. We don’t need your imagined tolerance, nor do we give a damn about it. We live and will continue to live in our own nation, where we treat moslems with far more goodness and tolerance than any moslem country ever treated us before we had the renewal of our country. The majority of Jews in Israel are Jews or the descendants of Jews who were kicked out of moslem countries, almost to a man without any of their possessions. There’s your hate.

you speak with a forked tongue, in another attempt to mesmerize the world of “good” moslem intentions. The rockets from gaza speak more forcefully of their real intentions.