Israel

Here's a crazy notion. I know, I know, totally crazy, but bear with me.

What if, people in Gaza were to all just say 'hey Israel, I just want to somewhere to live, I don't care what name that place has, whether its Israel, Palestine, Gaza, or NingNangNoo or anything else'. And what if the people of Israel said 'Hey, lets not fight, we've got enough land, why don't we become friends and trade instead?'.

And then, here's the really crazy part, they could 'share' it. People living on one side of the border could freely go to the other side for business or leisure, and maybe even to make some new friends, and there'd be nothing to fight over because everyone would have enough land to live on, and nobody would need to care what religion you might have or which hospital your mother gave birth in.

 

The two nation state - think India/Pakistan, Eire/Northern Ireland even Canada and now UK/Scotland It isn't the man/woman in the street who wouldn't try to make it work - politics, often in the guise of religion usually gets in the way.

 

To the Jewish nation Israel is the Holy Land. Can anybody expect them to give up the land of their fathers and their Holy Land? What would happen if it was suggested that the Pope take over Mecca or that the Delhi Llama take over the Vatican?

 

That's one of the arguments but you could also factor in that all three Abrahamic religions identify the same Holy Land and significant sites but that those sites were settled because to nomadic people they were also where the resources were (water originally but subsequently oil too) and hence fertility. Those who put their religion first usually do respect each other, I've often seen Muslims, Jews & Christians sharing food, discussion and respect for each other both here and in the Middle East.

 

Does the death toll in the latest fighting seem proportional.

I mean, the rockets from Gaza seem to be mostly a futile attempt to fight back from a place that the Israelis have had under siege for years.
They seem to just to want to wipe out Gaza and take it for their own.

Then they can start moving in the settlers.

 

They tried that and it didn't work.

I have a Muslim friend and one of his businesses is a partnership with two of his friends, one of whom is Jewish.

No they're not, but then Hamas should not be supported by the majority and they should certainly not be using human shields.
Bear in mind also that Middle Eastern and North African terrorist groups work on one level or another with terrorist organisations in Ireland and Spain.

Actually, it was the rockets (and terrorists coming out of Gaza) that caused the siege in the first place). It should also be noted that Hamas receives support from several states in the Middle East.

 

So Hamas leave, and they all live happily ever after?

 

Not totally relevant...

 

If only it were that simple. Iran, Syria et al would not allow it, others would fill the void and it would still be an unholy mess as long as the less desirable Muslim Clerics have an abundance of uneducated but devout Muslims to corrupt. And old wounds will take a long time to heal too.

 

Here in the UK, the majority supported the government that was in power when we invaded two separate countries that posed no immediate threat to us. I'm wary of the stance that the majority be judged by the actions of those in power. Here in the UK we have little say, and compared to some parts of the world we actually have something vaguely resembling a democracy (in that we can vote for who we like once every few years, without fear of a severe beating or disappearing act).

 

Gaza has been governed by Syria, Egypt and Israel and was part of the Ottoman Empire. The most recent figures suggest that the total area is approx 140 sq miles with an estimated population of almost 1.82 million. That's more than 13,000 people to the square mile!
Other than the land border with Egypt, Israel has retained control of the airspace, territorial waters and land border crossings. It is a strip of land with a long sea coast (but no harbours or industry associated with a coast) and is mostly sand backing on to desert; few natural resources. The area is hugely reliant on aid so of course the people will be controlled externally whether it be by the forces we see as terrorist, Israel, the UN or the West How else can they survive?

The tunnels have been dug in response to the "fence" a boundary which Israel erected and which allows only 5 crossing points, 4 into Israel (one is cargo only) and 1 into Egypt. Would a start be to at least add more crossing points even if they can't/won't take down the "fence".

Anyone old enough to remember the Berlin wall?

 

But one did pose an immediate threat - it gave shelter and support to what is probably the most powerful terrorist group that the world has ever seen.
Once that shelter was gone Iraq became a problem. Be under no illusion that Sadam would have moved heaven and earth to share his crude chemical weapons with Al Queda. These would have ended up in Europe.

The difference is that the people of Gaza knew what Hamas was about before they elected them.

 

Why not invade Pakistan then?

 

Three reasons;
1] we do not need to free a nation from a regime that was so murderously tyrannical that Mao Tse Chung and Stalin would have looked on in awe.
2] the Pakistani government do not want them there. Certainly there are elements within the government (and more so the security services) that do, but on the whole they are not welcome there.
3] after Afghanistan and post Bin Laden Al Queda is factionalised and weakened severely.

 

There is a counter argument that Gaza was already under siege because of the fence. There is no free movement in and out of Gaza and there hasn't been since the Israeli withdrawal. When people are advised to leave they can only leave their immediate vicinity, they still have to stay in Gaza.