They’ve been at it for what, 3000 years? Longer?
The situation is impossible. The only resolution would be for one ‘side’ to take the whole area and annihilate the infidels (those who don’t share their beliefs). We call them extremists, but I wonder if that’s a true characterization. Maybe they’re right. They are following the strict interpretation of their (whoevers) religion, are they not? Could be the non-extremists are slackers, following the easier path.
Jew and Muslim both point to the exact same spot and claim that spot, saying that the others defile that spot. How can that be resolved? Without compromise, which is forbidden. And it’s the same freakin’ book that they get this from!
Well, my “hope button” is broken. And I’m sad.
That’s my opinion.
What do you think, about the possibility of a resolution.
Peace,
mangeorge
Finally, someone else with the same take on the Middle East situation.
Then again, I don’t have favorable feelings for organized religion in general, much less religious fanaticism. I think it is abhorrent that so many feel obligated to kill the innocent, but it’s never going to stop.
I also wish that the United States government would concentrate more on alternative energy research, so we could lessen our dependency on oil and get out of the area entirely (not to mention avoiding the destruction of Alaskan wildlife). However, that’s probably for another thread. So it goes.
If God were truly a just god, He’d do one of the following:
-
Give everyone in the “Holy Land” 48 hours to get out before he obliterates it from the face of the earth. And then announce that, from now on, there is no holy land, so you people better value the precious land you have now.
-
Give every fanatic who’s even thinking of blowing up even more civilians a whirlwind tour of the rest of the world (something along the lines of The Amazing Race, only more extensive, and it’s not a race, of course). After sampling the cultures of places like Japan, Korea, Russia, Thailand, South Africa, Ethiopia, Italy, Germany, France, England, Spain, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and (yes) America, they can return home and see whether they still give a rat’s nostril about the positively minuscule, not-worth-a-millisheckel differences between Arabs and Jews.
-
Give everyone cable TV, video games, magazines, CD players, tickets to sporting events, theme restaurants, skateboards, rollerblades, miniature golf etc. etc. With all that, who has time for some silly jihad?
But it’s never going to happen…so there’s no hope.
I’m serious. I’ve reached the point where I feel the Mideast situation is like a fault line. You can never pacify it no matter what; you just have to hope for the best and ride out the crises as best as you can.
sigh
I understand the frustration, I really do. I share much of it and am as cynical as anyone about finding a good solution to this mess anytime soon.
But once again, and for the fifth or sixth time on his board and lord knows how many times off of it, I have to take issue with this notion that this conflict is the continuation of some ancient bloodfeud. It’s not.
I know it seems otherwise. We see pictures and hear stories about Islamic extremeism on one side and Jewish claims to the Holy Land on the other. Then we remember the presentations we’ve all had in grade school history classes about the Crusades and nod knowingly, thinking this is just another part of some cycle of violence on the blood-soaked ground claimed by three religions. Further the popular media ( not always known for their sterling historical analysis ) feeds into this notion and reinforces it.
But it’s an inaccurate picture. Over the course of the last 3,000 years, on average, the region of Palestine/Israel has not been an area of outstanding violence ( at least subjectively ). Yes the modern period has been incredibly violent - But this only extends back to the late-19th century at best and most of the violence has been post-1918. Between the end of the Crusader period ( let’s say 1260 ) and 1918, this region was a sleepy backwater - A possesion of the first the Mamelukes and then the Ottomans. Before that we have the aberration of the Crusader period ( very roughly 1096-1260 ). Before that Muslim rule from the early 640’s - Again pretty quiet, despite the occasional change of dynasty. Before that Roman/Byzantine rule from the first century C.E., before that the Herodian client kingdom from 40 B.C.E., before that at various times the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms, before them Alexander and then the Achaemenid Persians, etc. etc.
During just about all of these periods Israel/Palestine was a backwater. Only with brief exceptions of the Herodian Kingdom and the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, was it an independant region since the ancient Babylonian conquests. Even then, it was a backwater. The Herodians were always under the Roman gun, the Latin Kingdom was a weakling compared even to their own vassals to the north in Lebanon. When armies traversed the region, it was to claim the prizes of Syria to the north and northeast, Egypt to southwest - Which is where most of the actual fighting tended to occur. There were a few Anti-Persian/anti-Seleucid/anti-Roman revolts and the First Crusade was gory, but Palestine/Israel had no outstanding resources or wealth, couldn’t support a pre-moden army in the field for any substantial length of time, and was of interest only because of geography ( and later religion, but you might be surprised how little emphasis this received most of the time ). And sectarian, inter-communal violence, even during the Crusader periods, were exceptions, not the norm.
This is a modern conflict. And contary to some opinions, it is only secondarily a religious one.
Okay, sorry about the rant 
. Like I said, I do understand the frustration. And sadly I have no good answers ( at least not that either side would be willing to listen to right now ).
- Tamerlane
I sometimes feel the situation is as hopeless and tragic as most others here do. However, I’ve long thought that based on a timeline and historical summary such as Tamerlane’s, the only remedy will be the passage of time.
Mangeorge says they’ve been at it for 3000 years or longer. He’s right, but only when the it he refers to is civilisation. Atrocity is the anomaly and they’ll return to civilisation.
In the meantime, there will be many more deaths, bombings, repression and lies from both sides but even then, it won’t be on the same scale as was seen in the crusades. It’s horrifying but it isn’t the coming Apocalypse either.
So I don’t see that a fatalistic and hopeless view of the issue is helpful. People need to be held to account for their actions and this tends not to happen when it all seems inevitable. I can see the reasons for the extra-judicial executions and suicide bombings, but there can be no justification for it. These are people from ancient, rich cultures with strong traditions of learning and art. They aren’t barbarians who we should expect this behaviour from. The rejection of fatalistic attitudes, especially on the part of the combatants will go a long way to aiding a return to normalcy.
but Palestine/Israel had no outstanding resources or wealth
And neither do to this day, do they?
If it weren’t for the fact that the lion’s share of the world’s crude oil was a stone’s throw from this particular spot on the Earth’s surface the Unites States wouldn’t give a rat’s ass if the Israelis and the Palestinians ate each other alive.
The only “national interest” served by our involvement is a cheap and steady supply of crude oil. Period.
I thought we got ours from Venezuela.
Hell, I buy mine at BP, a.k.a. British Petroleum. That would be the North Sea.