One thing Obama won't change

[hibikir]

Godsmurf said:

Kasz216 said:
Nah I think there is violence on both sides. However the violence has to stop first from the nation who expects something. They are the ones who want something. So they have to be the ones to take the first step to get what they want

In other words, you think the weaker side should always surrender and the stronger side can always do what it wants. Interesting Darwinian perspective, but those of us who'd like to live in a civilised world would prefer that such matters be arranged according to international law. E.g. Israel has to completely dismantle its colonies in occupied territories as those are in direct violation of international law (and the root cause of all the violence, I might add).

 

 How in the world is surrender Darwinian? Since when does 'survival of the fittest' mean that anyone should roll over and die? When has science provided any moral guidance? Please, learn what a word means before you use it.

 As far as the palestinian situation, it's lose-lose no matter what it's done. The israeli territories indicated by the original treaty are indefensible. Neither side really wants to make any real concessions, and both israelis and palestinians fight using other people's money. What would Israel do without the USs military technology treaties and funding? What would the Palestinians do without Iran?

 I doubt I'll see the issue solved in my lifetime.