Originally Posted by
Morticia
->
This is what I don't get ..
For those who are unstinting in their praise and support of Israel. Or come to that, in support of Palestinians. Pick either side.
To determine who rightfully should have 'what' in the ME there are only 3 yardsticks of reference.
1) Ancient biblical stuff which many feel is too ancient, even though it is vital to the tribes now in dispute. That's all they are ... different tribes. Not dissimilar to our own Kings of Wessex or Kings of Mercia who warred but times has moved on so forget old stuff.
2) The post-war Partitioning of Palestine .. when it was divided to accommodate Israel.
The allocated boundaries of which have shifted dramatically due to tribal wars ... except Israel have acquired land they were never given.
3) Which leads us to 'now' .. this minute ... when 'might is right' and the boundaries and sovereign rights are based on territory won by conquest. If so, Israel keep everything they have won. The post-war agreement is null.
But ... the trouble with that one is that whilst Israel have the right to 'defend themselves' and annex more land ... the Palestinians also have the right to see what they can win by conquest, or are entitled to resist subjugation by whatever means are available to them ... including terrorist tactics, despicable as they are, as if they win they will become tomorrows 'freedom fighters'.
They are, in reality .. in a state of war.
And all the Peace Envoys struggling to thrash out a deal agreeable to both sides can all come home and leave them to it.
So everyone pick which option they prefer.
I suspect the tribes themselves are still stuck on number one option whilst actively pursuing number 3.
Number 2 seems to have got lost along the way.
The whole of the ME have an archaic mindset based on tribal warfare.