politic_analyst

It appears that with the never ending wave of warfare in the middleeast and the past histories of the cultures in this region that it is hard to attain peace. If you were in charge what would you do to handle the matter. Some people say its because of the existence of Israel in the region. Some people say there is too much idea of revenge in the region on how people treated their ancestors, others say its purely a battle for land. Maybe you have some solutions so post them here.

WI Crippler

Are we talking a general overall solution based soley on history, or do you want solutions starting out with the situation as it currently stands?? Because I don't want to get into the whole, "If we didn't invade Iraq" discussion over and over again.

__________________
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."- Reg

DivineComedy

Sorry, since I am exceeding the limits I don’t believe I can be in charge of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Caliphate.

FrontPage magazine.com :: Consummated in Cairo by Robert Spencer

First, before I could be “in charge,” I would have to kill you and everyone like you.

After all, if I was to speak aggressively towards those that Chant “Death to America,” and speak aggressively against those nations that support terrorism, under your rules I would have to send my entire family and myself to be the main line for the first assault. So it is like stupid for me to consider I could be “in charge” of anything for very long, following your rules:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...tml#post569493 (Lieberman Backs Limited U.S. Attacks on Iran)

__________________
“[59.14] They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified towns or from behind walls; their fighting between them is severe, you may think them as one body, and their hearts are disunited; that is because they are a people who have no sense.”

Yeah, a wall and a border patrol will protect us. {sound of laughter}

politic_analyst

The solution should center on current situations. Bring up history on why people fight is not the intention of the thread. There are lots of armchair quaterbacks and critics on the region and this is the opportunity for them also to share what they think the best strategy is to attain long lasting peace in the region. There are people who are just tried of war since it is purely wasteful.....

Billo_Really

I would push for a UNSC resolution authorizing military action against Israel. If passed, I would

• then move the 140,000 US troops from Iraq to Palestine
• drive Israel back past the Green Line
• bulldoze down every structure of theirs built on Palestinian land
• arrest and deport any Israeli citizen's choosing to stay in Palestine without green cards
• set up a DMZ along the Green Line and shoot anyone from either side that crosses it

After all that, I would push for UN sanctions to enact an economic blockade of Israel until they agreed to pay reparations for 40 years of bull****!

Then I would sit back and have a beer.

__________________

"With neocons, it just goes to show, when the
bar is low enough, you can never be too wrong!"

tecoyah

As we, over the past decades have pretty much destroyed any credibility we may have once had in the region, combined with the massive cultural issues the are has had for its entire history....I would disengage completely,and let them kill each other.

Thus allowing our defense department to ...well....defend rather than offend.

Vader

That's very un-American of you, Billo. The Israelis are not our enemies and they do not use religion as an excuse to cause strife, murder women and children, and basically repress their people. Palestine on the other hand.....

Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

__________________

Billo_Really

I don't support people that disrespect the rule of law. Which is what Israel has done the last 40 years. It wasn't the Palestinian's fault Israel decided (unilaterally) against all accepted intruments of International Law, to hold on to land they seized in a war. The single biggest issue in this whole conflict, is that! And after 40 years, it is clear to me Israel doesn't give a s.h.i.t what anyone thinks. So, I think we should make them give a s.h.i.t! Force them to obey the law. Not with lobbing rockets or suicide bombers, but with a UNSC sanctioned coalition force. Just like we did with Hussein in Kuwait.

You want to end this conflict, that's one way of doing it.

AcePylut

The thing is Billo, that you're must not be aware of, is that you aren't aware of the Palestinians complete disregard of the "rule of Law".

UN Resolution 242 is the so-called "'67 Borders" Resolution that the arab-muslim media constantly refers to... but they completely ignore the following provisions:

United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii)Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

The elected gov't of Palestine refuses to abide by Resolution 242, but yet you only refer to Israel not abiding by the resolution.

It's apparent, by the palestinian people voting into power a gov't whos charter says "no negotiation, no peace, no Israel" (which in itself is a violation of a 1948 UN Resolution) that the Palestinians don't give a s.h.i.t. about "rule of law".. and thus, since you do not support people that do not abide by the rule of law, you should not support the palestinians.


What you think is that if Israel withdraws to the '67 borders, there will be this magical peace in the Mideast... but there is no evidence to support your claim, as Israel will still "exist on palestinian land" and that the very existance of a "jewish state on muslim land" (or more appropriately Palestinian waqf) is the issue.

The problem is the palestinians, not the Israelis.

You're solution will not bring peace. It will only bring muslims one step closer to the complete destruction of Israel. THAT is their primary goal.... not some '67 borders resolution.

__________________
http://www.debatepolitics.com/forum-...rum-rules.html

Disruptive behavior, such as personal attacks, can lead to temporary or permanent revocation of posting privileges.

Be noted: I will not accept any personal attacks directed towards me. If you want to discuss a topic with me, you will do it in a civil manner or you will be reported to the moderators, no exceptions.

AcePylut

Lets see if it's really the '67 Borders... Here's the PLO Charter, convened on July 1-17, 1968 :

MidEast Web - PLO Covenant (Charter)

Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it . They also assert their right to normal life in Palestine and to exercise their right to self-determination and sovereignty over it.

Article 10: Commando action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution. It also requires the achieving of unity for the national (watani) struggle among the different groupings of the Palestinian people, and between the Palestinian people and the Arab masses, so as to secure the continuation of the revolution, its escalation, and victory.

Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and to their natural right in their homeland, and inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.

Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.

Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aiming at the liquidation of the Palestinian problem, or its internationalization.



Kinda hard to believe that the Palestinians aren't at fault, when you view what they believe: Destroy Israel.

Sorry, but the '67 borders aren't going to make peace. IMHO that's just extremely naive thinking.