@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
At least we've stopped the name calling. I think that my portrayal of the UK has been considerably more critical than your portrayal of the United States. Let's just leave it at that. What do you think of involving Hamas in the Peace Process?
In this case you have much more material to work with in finding criticism.
Hamas's role in Palestinian governance is a fact. Hard to imagine any meaningful negotiations if they are excluded. Even independently of that, it is hard to believe that either side will seriously engage in meaningful negotiations - both parties appear to operate under the illusion that time is on their side - the party that imagines it can inflict the most injury vs, the party that imagines it can absorb the most pain.
The conflict in Palestine involves close analogies with the underlying issues in the protracted one in Northern Ireland (300 years). That one wasn't resolved until both sides lost hope of unilateral victory and also rejected their radical fringes. I don't see those conditions in the Mideast.
Hard to fault the European Jews who fled death and rejection in their former homelands to found a refuge in the Middle east. Hard too to fault the Palestinians displaced from their former homes. At the same time one can't rationalize the murder and destruction on one side and the systematic injustice and oppression on the other. It is also difficult to rationalize the current behavior of folks whose countries played a major part in creating this situation in criticizing the motives and actions of those who are merely trying (imperfectly) to deal with the consequences. (There is, after all, a moral difference between the active struggle in the arena and merely criticizing from the sidelines.)