Took me a long time to go through this topic, twice I might add. I too
had difficulties with the information from the internet. I did not want
to join in this conversation till I thought I had a better understanding
of it all.

But I find, I must have a weak mind indeed.

I can't get past an issue I'm having and I fear it is blocking me from
seeing the picture as you all do. If it's not too much imposition or
interruption, I'd like to have my blockage addressed.

In America, we are taught, maybe ingrained, with the idea that we
"fight" for freedom. That means, when we get involved with a conflict,
our soldiers "believe" that they are upholding, not only our freedom but
also that of those we fight for.

Now, in the regions of the middle east, there are MANY who fight. There
are those who are simply fighting for their lives, this is
understandable. When one is attacked, one fights back.

But the soldiers, are they fighting for a government with reasonings,
similar to Americans? Or are they fighting, for personal reasons, such
as siding with the government most likely to take power. Or are they
fighting for religions reasons and are those reasons in conjunction with
the government in power?

Am I making my questions clear? I understand there are cultural
differences that I am not comprehending.

I understand the fight for land, but it is the why of the fight.

To me it has it's basis in religion. It has been made apparent that
these battles have been going for many generations.

If the root of the dysfunction is within religion, how can ANYONE,
including America every have a hope of correcting the situation, much
less creating a peaceful coexistence between all those involved -
without changing the perspective of hundreds of years of religious
conviction?

Is that what this discussion is attempting to determine?

Please tell me if I'm too lost to consider in this discussion, and if
possible, direct me to general topic 101 for a beginner learning course.
I so hate being lost on important issues.

Spent much time with this topic and morning is close at hand. Think
I'll close my eyes for a while. Will check back tomorrow.

I have my own tea concoction, I'll bring to the breakfast table, hope
you all try it, if you like a sweet mix of spices, if not, it still
smells good.

Redy, a good morning to you!

Speaking for myself, thank you, thank you, thank you for wading through
the thread....you are an angel


I get so tired of the opinion-slinging fly-bys.

I think your question its top-notch and will try and give it some
thought as you are asking a large and important question.

I'll get back in a bit....

It is tea for me right now! A wonderful jasmine tea with crysanthemum
petals. Years ago I wrote a book on Red Zinger -- an intense month of
many many mugs each day. The moment I got the manuscript sent off, I
suddenly couldn't stand even the whiff of Red Zinger.

Off to ponder a bit....



Oceans

Sorry, sometimes I need sleep.

Oceans5555,

Some solutions were in my post. If you believe in the effectiveness of
collective bodies such as the League of Nations or the U.N. you may
trust them to form equitable treaties. Treaties must of course be
enforced or they are useless.

Some may feel that people who will not live together in harmony deserve
to have a third party overseer rule them. Overseers may be benevolent,
totalitarian, or a blend of methods though all will believe they have
some higher ideal attached to their particular mandate. If you are
dealing with people that have stubbornly held onto old beliefs and have
refused to let their society evolve to a more moderate social system
then the less benevolent overseer may be the most effective.

The best solution I can offer you is to stop trafficking in the blame
trade. Truly believe that what has happened there can be put in the
past. Spend your time encouraging new leadership that seeks a more
spiritual approach to mankind. Without a belief in the sanctity of life
that transcends religions, borders, and multi-generational hatred there
will never be peace in the area.

Maybe I can be a little clearer with my own pondering thoughts here.

From the posts I understood, about the Jews believing they have a divine
right to the land, and 'in short' this is the underlying root of the
consistent battles.

Where I get lost is anyone other than the two, possibly three powers
that struggle over the land. Are they all trying to basically set up
their own religious infrastructure governed through and in line with the
reigning power? If so, is it the plan of any power that might take
control to 'get rid' of any undesirables in any way necessary?

In any case, for any other country to fight 'with' any of the single
powers, to me has no reason other than greed or possibly the promotion
of a more 'right' religion.

For this reason, I can not understand why any nation would get involved,
other than to distribute comfort and necessities on some equitable
basis.

Which is why the whole discussion confuses me.

I wish I could understand all this better, I think I must be stuck in a
more humanitarian view. Were religion is concerned we should not, can
not side. No matter what happens, until we are personally attacked we
should not be involved in these conflicts except for humanitarian
reason. Please prove me wrong so I can get my head into this
conversation.

Oceans, wonderful choice of tea, can I have some with honey.

Mine this morning was green tea with my own blend of cinnamon, ginger,
cloves and touch of nutmeg, I slice of orange gently squeezed and just a
bit of honey to blend the flavors.

Anyone have a sweet delight, or some fresh fruit and yogurt, I'll share
my tea, you can spice it as you like.

IM,
The benevolent overseer, Britain caused the problem to exist in the
first place. They took a part of their Empire (from the colonial hayday)
and a land they occupied and controlled by Military force, and
introduces a new entity that most of the residents at the time didnt
even know existed.
Then the UN, in their ultimate wisdom decided to give a minority
(Jewish) a majority of the land, and divide it into two countries. The
Arabs, who had been there alone (no Jews) since 57-60AD immeadiately
objected. Etc., etc, etc,, till today and a hatred to all western powers
that intervened in the first place.
These people are not little children that need a swat on the bottom and
stand in the corner time. Unless you mean Israel who are the children of
the West. We brought them there (birth) we feed them (weapons) but
seldom do we discipline them. Now they are unruly, stubborn, and spoiled
(wont share!)! Go fiqure!!
Unless the UN, US, whoever treats all parties with equal respect and due
process there will be no solution from them.

Short and painless. Bravo

hey andrea,

ah but not so simple because the motive was to have them as a
westernized base to be able to manuver from . They with their American
funded and developed defence dept , pose a strategic nuclear threat .


now why do you suppose that is necessary?



this obsession with oil when we have and should be using all the other
resources available.... is to profit a handful of meglomaniacs

Well some people that didn't see as far as the tip of their noses
obviously shot themselves in both feet and didn't even notice.

That was the etc., etc., part of that post, Alex!! LMAO

Sorry I went away, family dropped in.

We should start a new thread for those possibilities.
Israel has threatened it again, I see in the news!!!

Even Israel must realize by now that they are losing support in the
Western world fast. They know that they can't go on for ever like this.
I wonder whether it is the last attempt before they start to budge.

Like this:

JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel has put out secret feelers to Syria, but has not
received a response, Israel's deputy prime minister confirmed Saturday.

The comments came a day after an Israeli newspaper reported that Israel
has told Syrian leaders it is willing to give up the captured Golan
Heights as part of a peace deal that would require Syria to distance
itself from Iran's virulently anti-Israel regime.

Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz, speaking Saturday to Israel Radio,
confirmed that a message was sent to Syria, but would not describe the
content in detail.

ah yes the old get in bed with your enemy.....


i don't think there is a condom made to protect israel from it's
karma

I think its a distraction for this:

JERUSALEM (AP) - Military action is one of the options in dealing with
Iran's nuclear program, Israel's deputy prime minister said Saturday,
after discussing the issue with senior U.S. officials.

For now, sanctions are the best way to go, said the Cabinet minister,
Shaul Mofaz. He said Israel and the U.S. agreed to review the
effectiveness of sanctions at the end of 2007.

Mofaz met earlier this week with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. At
the time, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said he was not
aware of any discussion of a deadline for diplomacy.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions twice against Iran for defying
international will with its uranium enrichment program. The United
States and its allies have signaled their support for harsher sanctions.

Mofaz told Israel Radio on Saturday that the U.S. and Israel agree on
how to deal with Iran.

"The strategy shared by the U.S. and Israel has three elements," Mofaz
told Israel Radio. "One is a united international front against the
Iranian nuclear program. Secondly, at this time, sanctions are the best
way to act against the aspirations of Iran."

He said the third element is "a very, very clear signal and a clear
statement that all options are on the table." Mofaz added: "I never said
there is no military option, and the military option is included in all
the options that are on the table, but at this time it's right to use
the path of sanctions, and to intensify them."

Iran insists that its program is designed to produce civilian energy. It
has resisted Western offers of diplomatic and economic benefits if it
would suspend enrichment programs.

I think time is running out.
Israel will strike if the Us wont!!!

Soon! sanctions arent working, and the end of 2007 is not far!!

Hi Alex

I'm having a nice hot cup of coffee and enjoying the read.

Fanta46,
You read between the lines of my post. Overseers, treaties, summits,
the U.N., all will fail if there is not a true desire for peace and a
passion for the sanctity of human life. There is no workable solution
without that foundation. They can't let go of the past and therefore
they are not ready for peace. The idea of a certain land, city, site,
monument, clump of dirt or collection of stones being worth killing for
is just stone age thinking. Until Israel is to Syria, Lebanon, Jordon,
Egypt, etc. as Florida is to Alabama, Georgia, whatever, there will be
no peace. Geography is just dots on the map. Live as one people.