Replies

One of the problems with discussing this issue is that I almost never come up with someone inclined to be fair. Either the Israelis are saints or the Palastinians are. I'd love to see a reasonably objective discussion of this issue.

So let's see if I understand this.

The British had control over a huge swathe of Middle Eastern land.

For some reason, they divided it into a bunch of nations. One of them was Israel, and another was Jordan. Jordan was meant as a Palastinian habitat, and Israel was meant for the Jews. However, Palastinians inhabited the West Bank, which is a coastal region, and the Gaza Strip, which was part of Jordan.

Israel took over the West Bank and Gaza, not as a power-mad step, but to have a buffer zone around their country, which seemed likely to be under pretty much continuous attack.

You could say that by arbitrarily dividing the land, and giving the Israelis a choice coastal part of it, the British were largely to blame.

You could also blame the Arab nations. They should have allowed Palastinians to emigrate into their countries, giving them a home and defusing the situation. But it was better politically for them to create a dependent race of beggars, so that they could hide their own shortcomings with hate for Israel.

I find the original essay interesting, because it implies a solution: Palastinians should simply move to Jordan, a country of which I suspect has plenty of wide-open spaces. Ironically enough, it's not nearly as nice a place as Israel, which makes this Palastinian insistance on their own state puzzling to say the least.

I sympathise with Sharon; he says the violence has to stop, and then we work towards peace. Some, including The Economist, say that this is not possible. I say it's the only way forward. If you feel threatened, you're not going to be comfortable with giving up any of your territory, and it makes no sense for you to do so. So at the moment, I find myself definitely in the Israeli camp.

But perhaps I've missed something?

D

The British do indeed own a lot of the blame. What the British did in "Palestine" they did to India/Pakistan and to Cyprus and Iraq so on.

The undermanned British ruled their empire through ethnic and religous divide and conquer policies.

I am all for the state of Israel to exist, and is the only middle eastern country I could live in -- but saying all that I do not like that they use my tax dollars to build settlements in the occupied territories.

As for those moronic Palestinian Arabs--because of their Muslim faith they can never accept the power that non-violent Christian origin peaceful disobediance could bring to bear. Under Islam victory can only be through jihad.