[QUOTE=Themenin]
I may be mis-informed here, but my understanding is that prior to the current ‘Holy Land’ debacle, Jews and Muslims had been living side by side in (relative) harmony. I’m specifically thinking of Algeria, but assumed that similar applied to other countries. My understanding is that prior to the current situation Jews had primarily been hounded by Christians, from the Reconquista to the Russian pogroms etc.
[/QUOTE]
Part of the Spanish anti Jewish thing was because the Jews rubbed along just fine with the Moors in Spain.
Recently a Jehovah’s Witness knocked on my door, it turned out that he was originally Jewish, about 40 years old and was born in The Sudan where his parents still live.
to the OP–sorry to tell you this, but your idea has been suggested before, and you can read all about it in the news.
But it wasn’t a “neutral third party”
The headline says it all : “God re-floods the Middle East”
[QUOTE=Little Nemo]
Taiwan? Kurdistan? Macedonia? Come on, give us another clue.
[/QUOTE]
Taiwan – maybe you have a point, although I don’t think you’ll find many people outside the PRC advocating a forced merger, and nobody advocating forced removal of the population.
Kurdistan – doesn’t even exist, yet many advocate its creation. A very different proposal.
Macedonia – Anybody outside of some faint Greek protest still seriously calling for abolishing modern Macedonia?
And again – in none of these cases is there even a hint at forcible removal of population. At most, you may be right that there are some cases of countries claiming the whole territory of another country, including its population, as their own. But they tend to claim the people there as belonging to them as well. And you won’t find much if any sympathy for there annexationist claims outside of the country claiming any particular territory – I’m used to Arabs saying they want the real-estate I’m living on, but show me Europeans or Americans, in such large numbers and persistence, campaigning for the abolition of any other country as a political entity, let alone for the relocation of all of its population.
[QUOTE=FRDE]
I think that if you check back you’ll find that there was not really another nation.QUOTE]
Then I guess you could say the same thing about every other nation that was carved out of the Ottoman Empire. If Israel had never been created by the U.N. (with every country in the region opposing the creation of the state of Israel), we wouldn’t have these problems. In fact if we never chopped up the Ottoman Empire, we wouldn’t have these problems in Iraq either.
What if a neutral third-party were to forcibly herd everyone out of the hotly contested Jewish/Islamic holy lands, and then simply irradiate it Chernobyl-style? The area surrounding that infamous 1986 disaster is uninhabitable for at least 600 years.
[/QUOTE]
I think the title of the OP is a bit misleading. “Viable” would seem to suggest that one or more parties actually has the gumption to go through with the plan. The idea isn’t just impractical it’s downright crazy and I don’t mean in a “it’s just crazy enough to work” kind of way.
[QUOTE=FRDE]
I think that if you check back you’ll find that there was not really another nation.
[/QUOTE]
Then I guess you could say the same thing about every other nation that was carved out of the Ottoman Empire. If Israel had never been created by the U.N. (with every country in the region opposing the creation of the state of Israel), we wouldn’t have these problems. In fact if we never chopped up the Ottoman Empire, we wouldn’t have these problems in Iraq either.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
IMHO, the best solution to the Israel-Palestine situation is for Israel to formally occupy Palestine. How can Palestine be a democracy, when Israel captures and arrests elected government officials? I would propose:
(1) All elected officials running for office in Palestine must have the approval of Israel first. This works to prevent the country from being plunged into economic diaster everytime voters elect a party and/or a candidate that Israel doesn’t like.
(2) Phasing out and replacing the current Palestinian military with the IDF.
(3) Banning anti-Israel speech in print and press.
(4) Israel be forced to relinquish weapon stockpiles, especially those that can cause undue harm to innocent civilians. The country has proven over and over again that it is incapable of using modern weaponry without inflicting massive civilian casualties.
I thought many Christians like going to Jerusalem & other Israeli sites too. I’m pretty sure they won’t go for this plan. So that’d be three off-pissed groups, not just Jews and Muslims. So wouldn’t want to be the “neutral third party” in this affair (Buddhists? Hindus?).
While I have problems with many aspects of current Israeli policy, I really don’t see any “take their toys away” solution working. I always hope for an eventual negotiated settlement like N.Ireland and South Africa.
[QUOTE=MrDibble]
I thought many Christians like going to Jerusalem & other Israeli sites too. I’m pretty sure they won’t go for this plan. So that’d be three off-pissed groups, not just Jews and Muslims. So wouldn’t want to be the “neutral third party” in this affair (Buddhists? Hindus?).
[/QUOTE]
I’m not Christian, I self identify as an Antheist, so there would be four pissed off groups - Jerusalem is fascinating - as is Jaffa.
[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
The conflict will still be raging, only now there will be mutants.
[/QUOTE]
Then, I’m sold to the idea. Current film technology does not do justice to movies about mutants, i.e. X-men, Fantastic Four, etc. A scene involving real mutants with all their powers will be too AWESOME, all the downside to the irradiation will be worth it.