The problem is that this isn't about hurting others for own gain... It's diplomacy gone bad because of one part refusing to listen. The western world has only responded with weapons every time the people in the middle east has raised their voices in protest.

If the same actions would be taken on gangs in major cities, where would we end up? We give weapons and money to the gang that seem to agree most with our values, let them eliminate the other gangs...  A solution that *might* work??? Hardly...

#56... good post.

That's so easy for you to say... Living a protected life...

When should the hate stop? Not even 5 years go by without america UN tossing bombs into some country in the middle east...

No more need be said.

It's called free speech.

What i think people aren't getting is I am not taking sides.. all I know is I can go google radical Islamic attrocities then google Israeli ones....VAST difference in results.

I am sure there are deap seated resentments, transgressions on either side, It is what we do going forward that matters.

The only flags i see being burned are western flags. I dont see massive throngs of Americans shouting DEATH TO IRAN in unison while sporting assualt rifles and black hoods.

And yes, it might be easy for me to say, living my protected life, because i happen to CHERISH my life.

At least, I am saying it., Apathy and tolerance were never my strong suits.

Easy way out...... the post starting this can follow the same guidelines right.. if it bothers v-styler.. tell him to look the other way.. or just dont listen.

DrJBHL i yhink your oppinions are very one sided.. probably with a cause.

I know i can rub people the wrong way and im happy people like v-styler exists it would be very boring if everyone thought the same way about everything. Im sorry if i offend you all im just pushing my own views that i believe in.

voidcore, your welcome to continue expressing you opinion, it's why i made the thread, and I will continue to disagree with you.

Whether your contention is correct or not here's the deal:

1. It's 2009 and Israel is going to stop or radically alter Hamas' campaign of terror against it.

2. I don't give a rat's ass about imagined conspiracies, etc. Israelis have the right to live in peace. That's all they ever wanted.

3. They left Gaza, their factories and greenhouses and the treated arable land converted from desert. Period. No compensation. What did the Arabs do with it? Use it to launch their missles.

4. Israel has allies. Get used to it. The Arabs aren't standing so solidly behind Hamas as in the past. Why is that? Because Hamas has precipitated this current round which might be the last round for them there if people have the courage to say: "No more! Live in peace or be gone!"

5. You see great injustice...and you "know" who to blame for it. Funny how your glasses don't focus on everyone equally. Here it's really simple: "Stop. Live in Peace. No? Then leave or die."

Exactly. Let go of it, Hamas. Live in peace or stop living. Either way is OK with me. No tears shed. No compromise. No equivocating. End it or be ended.

What do you think they will do? Which do you think they are capable of choosing?

Oh yeah, and tell me just why is it wrong to defend yourself?

I'm glad somebody else appreciates my views, so thanks for that.  However, they would be appliable if more people thought similarly and the concepts of peace and pacifism were predominant in their hearts.  Sadly, there are those who believe more than their fair share is their right, and will walk all over whom-ever to get it... often using religion to disguise their true agenda/intent.

Is there an answer to this madness?  Probably not... not until the peoples of the World refuse to blindly follow and give the lunatics power through numbers... just as a general is nothing without an army, fanatics are nothing without their disciples to do the dirty work thay have not the balls to do themselves.

Unfortunately, too many people Worldwide view a career in the miltary and are trained to kill, which may be considered more acceptable when it's to defend ones homeland/soil... but how many of the recent conflicts have actually been to defend home soil?  Apart from the Israelis defending their homeland from rocket attacks and suicide bombers, most recent conflicts have been invasions to overthrow domestic rulers and force ideals down the throats of people who may not necesarily want them... thus creating bitterness, resentment and hatred towards those who appointed themselves the World's policemen.

We might not like rulers like Saddam Hussein and Robert Mugabe, but we need to stay at home when diplomacy fails to help resolve the issues, because intervention results only in greater bloodshed.

1. Right, and that will make the middle east a safe place and peace and love will prosper? Hardly.

2. There's nothing conspiratory about israel, it WAS founded after WWII by the allies, noone bothered to speak to those who actually live in the middle east at all. After all, it's not OUR country is it?

3 - 5. The israeli has no more right to live in peace on that land than those who lived there before israel was founded by EUROPEANS and AMERICANS... Which is even MORE valid since you seem to consider 50 years to be more than enough time to drop the issue...

Lets hope for a peaceful solution, but i dont think that will work...

They arent imagined.. and they arent conspiracy's its politics and money, its in plain sight.

Left?? first they took it all... then left it what was it 2003?

Lets hope this happens.. nothing justifies the rockets they shoot at israel it is just evil.

But the isreali peace might not be the peace the palestinians want there need to be a dialog not a monolog for both sides to get smomething both can live with.

The other side probably think the same way....

Spot on....

Mickeko are correct...

What now is called isreal was the Osmanian empire then GreatBritain took it over.... Under GB rule the first promises where made for a zionist state.

You don't offend me at all. I just wish you'd go live in Gaza for a while to get some "sweat equity" in what you hold opinions about.

There's nothing easy about free speech. My family and I have earned it from Plymouth Rock to The Yom Kippur War and everything in between.

I dare say that there does not exist a country in the world that was not created by someone taking something from someone. If so, I would be pleased to be educated.  The issue is the way forward and there will be no peace unless both sides decide that living together is better than constant war and one side can not realistically demand the total destruction of the other side. The total destruction of Israel as Hamas demands is not a viable option for any future peace.

Thanks, Ken. Very few seem to grasp that this is the real issue. There's no room for compromise or equivocation when your survival is threatened as they have threatened Israel's.

I'm done here. Bye and thanks for the opportunity of speaking my mind, vStyler.

A better New Year to all.

True, but in the cases where it has been somewhat successful it has always been because it was taken by a neigbouring country. In this case, we have 2 different continents put a country called israel in the middle east... If the israeli people needed a country, why didn't they give them texas? Or maybe east germany... Atleast then the allies had given something they had a right to give.

Israel was NOT founded by the allies after WW II... it existed for thousands of years before Arab forces took it from the Jews and forced many to leave the region.  The re-establishment of Israel was primarily to settle millions of displaced people nobody else wanted, and more or less it comprises of the traditional lands previously held by the former State of Israel.

Furthermore, the Middle East has been carved up since the Roman Empire and before, with the Brits and other Euopean nations redrawing borders and displacing/alienating traditional land holders since the 1800's... ie, Iraq and the Kurds,

The recreation of an Israeli state did not displace traditional land owners,,, rather it returned it to its righful owners, and those who were prepared to live there in peace were welcome to stay.  However, as history tells us, some Arab occupants refused to accept the transition/reclaimation and to live in peace, so they were herded up and expelled, it's as simple as that.

Be educated the vatican city state, iceland and probably more island states... but totally of the point.

True, but what im saying is the jews where given their land by a goverment that is far away from the place in question.. why didnt GB offer wales to them instead or why didnt US say hell take florida its just a big swamp anyway... land that goverment had more right (thru old stablized treatys and conflicts) to give away than that piece of land. True it was jewish land long before this BUT the problem lies in modern times(-100years) not ancient times several hundread years ago. Why not let the world start a war againts US and give the land back to the natives? this goes for australia too...... Anyway these states tries to justify old wrongdoings to some extent wheras jews and arabs are much alike to what part of the world they come from, where the others are invaders on another continent.

And i concur hamas thoughts and ideas is not correct or justified... israel is the lesser of two evils... in this conflict.

beat me to it

Your 'neighboring country" idea does not explain all of North America, Central America,  South America, Austrailia, UK, New Zealand, much of the Asian regions. etc. ergo much of the world as we know it was created by countries from other continents taking away lands from others.  Regardless, I do not want to quibble, and it seems to me that the point remains the same.  There will be no peace until both sides determine to live together and not demand the total destruction of the other.

Wrong! The Allies were not the traditional landowners and had no right to redistribute it to anyone.  Yes, the Russians occupied it after WW II and installed a puppet government comprised of Germans, but it was still owned by the traditional owners, not Russia.  The same applied to West Germany while the US, Britain and France remained... it remained German land and was not theirs to redistribute to the displaced Jews or anybody.

The establishment of the current Israeli state, however, is an entirely different matter (see my previous post)... it belonged to the Jews prior to an Arab invasion... remember Richard the Lionhearted and the 'Holy Wars'  The Brits, French, Spanish and other European countries sent knights to help defend the Jewish State but were overwhelmed by sheer numbers, and thus a 'new Arab State remained until the present State of Israel was reinstated... reinstated being the operative word.