[quote]lixy wrote:
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
[quote]lixy wrote:
Israel is, sadly, still a thorn in the butt of almost every Arab alive and the recent colonial past of every majority-Muslim country doesn’t help one bit. [/quote]
Here’s a little thought experiment for you: well, for everyone, actually.
Let’s imagine that EVERY fact is and was the same, except that the people in question were some Muslim minority that had been living in other parts of the world, but historically had been living in – let’s not use a historically biased word – Canaan. That is to say, west of the Jordan River.
Members of this Muslim minority began returning to the area and individually purchased properties by voluntary agreement from existing landowners.
Then the whole deal comes with the UN recognizing them and setting up a state, let’s say that there were the same wars with other Muslims over a wish that they weren’t there but rather the “Palestinians.”
They have other Muslims be citizens of their country with same rights as everybody, but the reverse is not true and other Muslim groups constantly commit terrorism against them. Their repsonse is the same as has been the case in actuality.
Now, it’s easy to dismiss a question of this sort by saying it is like asking, “If the moon were made of cheese, and there big mice in space, would space cats eat the mice before they got to the cheese?” Or in other words to assert that the question has no possible reality and so is meaningless. But that can’t be said here. The above scenario would be entirely possible. It can’t be asserted that Arabs and/or Muslims never fight each other exactly as would be described above. Happens all the time, and has happened throughout history.
This is an entirely realistic scenario. So it is reasonable to consider: what if all circumstances were the same but the religion of the party establishing and holding onto this new state?
How much of a “thorn in the butt of almost every Arab [and/or Muslim] alive” would it be if the people in question weren’t Jewish, but were Muslim?
I believe the answer would be “none.”
What would your view be if everything were identical but their religion?
If the answer is that it would be different, then isn’t this religious-based hatred or at the least religious-based discrimination to such an extent as to lead to wars and terrorism, etc?
It might be that in your case you chose the word Arab because you believe it is race-based hatred or discrimination. If so I would agree that that could be the case as well, but let’s for now look at it from the religious standpoint, as I rather doubt if the Israelis were racially Arab but were of the Jewish faith that you all would like them any better for it.
???[/quote]
Fair point. The conclusion you draw is nonetheless speculative (please note that I’m not dismissing it as wrong). It may be wishful thinking on my part to believe things would be in any way different were the Palestinians to have a viable state. I don’t know. But what I’m pretty certain of, is that the status-quo in the Middle-East isn’t helping quell radical expressions of Islam in the Arab world (I refer to the “Arab” world because it is the source of Wahabi/Salafist movements). Can you consider conceding that much (or little)?
And a Happy Easter to you![/quote]
Thanks, Lixy! That is thoughtful of you.
Yes, I agree radical expressions of Islam are not reduced by the Israeli/Palestinian situation. I would go further and say that they find fuel in this. Though frankly I tend to believe that the more radical of them would not proclaim themselves satisfied until every Jew was dead or out of the Middle East, and so I don’t think there is any satisfying them. And so striving to make compromises on the belief that this will appease them will not bring any further peace – it never has – but only new further demands, together with rockets and suicide bombings.
There’s also the consideration that a Palestinian signature on a peace accord has over time been thoroughly proven to never be worth the ink that it wasted. They always rapidly revert to more violence coupled with more demands.