WHAT'S YOUR ROADMAP TO PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST?
 

How can the crisis between the Israeli's and Palestinians be solved? This thread is for suggestions about what all the players on the world stage could or should do.

Let God handle it.

I wrote a beautiful article about this a few months ago, but I can't post a link because that would be spam. :(

Reduce Mecca and Jerusalem to rubble and both sides will shut up like the bickering (but dangerous) children they are and play nice.

WHile we are at it, How about we just nuke the whole world and start out fresh. :)

This is too foggy of an issue to me. It almost seems like its a lost cause. There just going to keep fighting.

The whole world isn't populated by people who are out to kill their neighbors at any cost.

Yeah I know, but I was trying to do this new thing called a "joke".

I think it's extremely telling that no one but me has even made an attempt at this. I'm not putting the jokes down, I dig 'em. I'm just saying some of the people who've been so strident in other threads out to put their Chutzpah where there typing fingers are and say what they think the way out of this mess might be. It's all very well to embrace retribution, but it's not what you'd call a plan.

As long as we don't make hundreds of Palestinians refugees as we stabilize Israel, it should be a simple matter to attain peace.

Oh, wait...

Are you kidding? That would send both sides into murderous rages. What the hell does Mecca have to do with the Palestinians?

Rawanda, Sierra Leonne, Kashmir, Northern Ireland, Philipines, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, China, Chenchnya

A lot of people around the world don't like their neighbors. I don't think you have enough ordinance.

OH, WHAT THE HELL :lol

http://www.thedailybull.ca/article.php?id=154

:(

Well, that was clearly a veiled shot at me. ;)

Call me a cynic, but it's becoming less and less likely that "a secure Israel and a free state of Palestine co-existing peacefully" will be the outcome of this conflict, at least not with current Palestinian leadership. The more moderate and progressive Palestinians will probably have to remove people like Arafat themselves before reasonable peace talks will ever take place.

Put them both in time-out until they can play nice. >:

I wasn't joking, Max. If you wanted specific and detailed political steps, I'm afraid I can't give you much because I'm not too keen on procedures. But what I think the leaders should do is issue an ultimatum saying essentially "knock it off or we'll destroy the centers of your culture," and follow through on that threat if necessary. History has shown that Arabs are cowed by force (and their culture hasn't fundamentally changed since the last several times that was proven true), and if we give them one good whack with a big enough stick, I would wager that conflict will diminish with a reduced net loss of life and property. No one's going to agree with me on this forum and this isn't really going to happen until Europe and the US suffer a few more big attacks from hardcore Muslims (probably not even then), but I felt like talking about the subject honestly for a moment and this is the only actual effective solution I could come up with..

There are only two roads for the peoples of the area: either socialist revolution or else a nightmare future of never ending violence, death and destruction.

Build a Socialist Federation of the Middle East, within which each nation would have both the fullest autonomy and the right to self-determination. Thus a homeland could be guaranteed both to Jews and Palestinians. Instead of spending huge resources on military spending the wealth produced by the workers of the region could be used to solve all the problems that capitalism has not been able to solve. On the basis of jobs, decent housing, clean water, health care, pensions for all it would be possible to work towards the solving of rivalries and the cooperation between all the peoples of the Middle East.

A socialist planned economy would free the Middle East from the stranglehold of imperialism once and for all. It would overthrow the corrupt feudal rulers who monopolise the oil wealth that ought to belong to all the peoples.

I really don't know how many times there holy cities have been threatened, though. If your serious (which i don't think you are) people from both sides and beyon will be awfully mad at us for doing such an unbelievably blatant thing as destroying religous cities. Not to mention driving more people to radical causes that weren't already that way, because im very sure that you wont get anywhere by destroying bethlehem, the vatican, or mecca except gettin alot of people pissed off and totally radicalized.

Leveling cities that have no military stances isn't going to make us look like the most noble cause either. Bombing a holy city accomplishes nothing strategically. Doing something that radical would sway the moral timber to the other side far too quickly.

Plus you need to take into account the people who won't be too pleased with it accross the rest of the world (namely every single muslim/jewish/christian country on the planet)

I don't know how your theory of ultimate peace will come from a supercedingly violent act makes sense. The only thing I think it would do is piss off alot of people and push people further and further away from peace...

The benefit of limiting your political activity to speculation on Internet message boards is that no one gets hurt if you're wrong. Bear in mind when reading any of my political posts that I neither think at length about my opinions nor talk about them anywhere but here; as far as I'm concerned, all political speculation is just jerking off with your brain anyway. I'm not a policy maker, and even the big powers are controlled to an unfortunate extent by public opinion. That said...

Yeah, maybe Jerusalem was a bad choice, though with the number of Muslims already vehemently out for Jewish and Western blood, I don't think pissing the rest of them off by destroying Mecca would create a whole lot more enemies than we've already got. What it would do is scare the shit out of them; you're right that it might just make them more violent, but I'm betting the other way.

If a holy city that isn't directly involved in the conflict would be a poor target no matter what, then any devastating attack on a more military target would do, so long as it is sufficiently brutal. If maximum force is never used, they will never take threats seriously enough and will never back down. Think of Hiroshima; that put Japan down in a quick hurry, didn't it?

Yes, I was serious. Nobility isn't exactly a priority for me, though it is one of the main reasons why this won't actually happen. Even if world leaders wanted to do such a thing (and I have a hunch a couple of them would love to), they would never get away with it under the millions of eyes watching them on TV.

Oh, and I didn't say ultimate peace. We're talking about peace in a particular conflict. Ultimate peace is an utter pipe dream, no matter what measures are taken.

I say we expunge the entire contents of both our mens and womens penitentiaries into the streets of Israel and Palestine, then threaten to drop "care packages" including firearms, gasoline, and Richard Simmons work-out tapes.



And I'm only half-joking.

I vote for zhukov.

:love

You have to factor in the hard part though, which is making a revolution.

The problem with starting a revolution is that both sides like their leader, i.e. they cause people on the other side to die. I think not only socialism on both sides is a good idea, because even with a secure federation of middle east nations to govern themselves, they'd still have problems with their neighbors no matter how peacefully they try to resolve things. I mean, under that plan the Israelis will still own Jerusulem. Besides, they'd be the few Jews next to a large number of Muslims. What they'd need are sensitivity classes, or some form of cultural integration, so that travelling, moving, or touring parts of other countries is in no way a difficulty whatsoever.

actually that's the fun part of it.

Of course, this would be a vital part of the fed.

In regards to your first part camacazio, as long as they are basing the revolution on the woking masses, who have been convinced of a socialist revolution, and not on islamic radicals like Iran, then the only problem is to get the workers to side with a Socialist idea.

This is the hard part; educating. The fun part is the insurection.


Please don't stop discussing because of me. Max, post your idea from the othert hread, I thought it was good.

It amuses me to no end how comfortable middle-class young adults talk so cheerfully and confidently about insurrections by the workers and all that other idealistic Socialist stuff.

Scathing, perndog, really. We obviously have different views on the meaning of "comfortable" and "middle class".

Oh, and I find it pretty wierd and stupid that you are a satanist.