Comments (84)

Maybe the reason we Americans see Hezbollah as a terror organization is its insistence that its advantage is that it loves death while its opponents love life. That's about as pithy a mission statement of pure evil as you can get. We'd rather be on the side of the life-lovers.

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links:

comjrud ykhabjup eagrmqzc jhpaigdl wqecom qrjkb thkuegamp

Here is an article that shows what we are up against. It shows how Barack Obama executed his abrupt flip flop on Palestinian support when he began his campaign for a US Senate seat from Illinois:

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6619.shtml

How Barack Obama learned to love Israel

Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 4 March 2007

...“In 2000, when Obama unsuccessfully ran for Congress I heard him speak at a campaign fundraiser hosted by a University of Chicago professor. On that occasion and others Obama was forthright in his criticism of US policy and his call for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”…

…“But Obama's gradual shift into the AIPAC camp had begun as early as 2002 as he planned his move from small time Illinois politics to the national scene. In 2003, Forward reported on how he had "been courting the pro-Israel constituency." He co-sponsored an amendment to the Illinois Pension Code allowing the state of Illinois to lend money to the Israeli government. Among his early backers was Penny Pritzker -- now his national campaign finance chair -- scion of the liberal but staunchly Zionist family that owns the Hyatt hotel chain. (The Hyatt Regency hotel on Mount Scopus was built on land forcibly expropriated from Palestinian owners after Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967). He has also appointed several prominent pro-Israel advisors.”…

…“If disappointing, given his historically close relations to Palestinian-Americans, Obama's about-face is not surprising. He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power.”…

“Only if enough people know what Obama and his competitors stand for, and organize to compel them to pay attention to their concerns can there be any hope of altering the disastrous course of US policy in the Middle East. It is at best a very long-term project that cannot substitute for support for the growing campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions needed to hold Israel accountable for its escalating violence and solidifying apartheid.”

It is clear to me that our only hope for an honest government is campaign reform with total taxpayer financing of political campaigns. All lobbying must be totally banned.

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting!

Ok Rick I admit the water thing gets me a bit that is just well wrong the Palestinians should get enough water to survive that is just plain wrong of the Jews and is undefendable. Point to you if ultimatley it is true (for I have a hard time believing anything coming out of the area and take both sides bashing of the other with a grain of salt - and the UN holds about as much weight with me if not less - the US report gets me a bit more). But even if it is true and they are taking 80% of the water it doesn't change the fact that things won't change there and in my eyes won't for a very long time (credit that to Vic because he is right forever is the wrong way to look at the situation) and with the Jews facing a theoretical genocide of their own on all sides of the map who are we to sit by and let them get wiped off the map. And make no mistake they could make it a lot harder on the Palestinians then they do for they have the firepower and will of their citizens to do it if push comes to shove. I know that you will say that you don't want them to get wiped off the map you want them to come here but that could easily be said of the Palestinians also. They could just as easily go to one of the many Arab countries there but they won't take them because they (the Arab countries) want to keep them there so that they can live in misery and kill the Jews without having the messy job of trying to do it themselves (once again because they would get whooped). I find this to be just as offensive as you find the US and League of Nations setting up the Jewish state. Not to mention that it is a lacking argument because neither peoples wants to go anywhere. As for the two peoples here that we illegally got our land from we took it with force just like the Israelis are ultimatley going to have to take their land from their enemies. And even if it happened tomm. that all the Jews in Israel decided to leave and go wherever the Palestinians would still be slaughtered but this time by some Arab nation that wanted the land for themselves, for all the "help" they gave during the resistance of the occupation (this is proved by the fact that a couple of the Arab nations that were involved in the 6 or 7 Day War [depending on how you count] still hold "Palestinian" land as their own for "helping" out after Isreal gave the land back). And where would the UN be then? Nowhere, because #1 they are a paper tiger with no teeth, #2 they wouldn't care they would just be happy that the Jewish thing was taken care of and #3 and probably most importantly when was the last time an Arab nation (or any nation besides the EU)really listened to the UN (a member state or not) that didn't want to? I just don't see peace anywhere anytime soon for anybody in that area of the woods. You may see it as pessimism I see it as reality. I find your argument for the Jews to come here to hold as much validity as Vic's eternal optimism that peace will reign between the two, both great ideas but not realistic in my eyes or the eyes of the people involved in the conflict.

Vic I think that the Holocaust and the genocide that the Jews face now are pretty much the same the only difference is that the Jews can now defend themselves where is WWII they couldn't because they didn't have the means. And ultimatley I don't see why they shouldn't when (as I see it) everytime they try and let peace come about the Palestinians start up at some point because they feel they have been sleighted or are manipulated by another Arab country to do something that provokes the Jews. It isn't the Jews who start the hostilities it is the Palestinians (and other Arab nations). As far as looking for a scapegoat I see it as assingning blame where blame is do. I will concied the fact that "cooler" heads will prevail though those "cooler" heads will come at the end of a gun barrel (like just about every other "peace" process). So your right they will eventually get to peace but not after many many many more years of bloodshed. I am not sure those are the cooler heads that you are looking for but those are the ones that I see rising to the top of the mountain. And I just want to point out the reason that the Germans aren't killing the Jews today does not have anything to do with cooler heads prevailing it has to do with the fact that the Allied countries forced them to change by killing a whole bunch of Nazis and ripping from them their charismatic leader and once again I don't think these are the cooler heads that you refer to. The only problem I see is that ultimatley it is all of the Palestinians that want to kill them (at least 98.9%) and killing as many as it would take to accomplish peace would make the Jews "Nazis" and they don't want to be that (rightfully so). The Israelis are not the ones that want to wipe people off the planet (now like every free society you do have your nut jobs who would do this if they had the backing but what are you going to do) it is the Jews who face this reality wherever they go - even in the Western Civilizations there are those who would wipe out the Jews albeit in a much lower percentage but there nonetheless. At least while they have Israel within those borders they don't face genocide from eachother and for that reason right there I think they have every right to defend that hope and land any way they need to.

Here is the 2nd of two articles in the WP this week about the exhumation in Washington D.C. and reburial in Israel of Theodore Herzl’s grandson.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/05/AR2007120502025_pf.html

Here is the link to the 1st.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/29/AR2007112902368_pf.html

This is the tragic story of the Zionists’ greatest hero. The first article mentions in passing what an incredible simpleton Herzl was. It never occurred to him that the Palestinians would not readily give up their land and welcome the invading Zionists with open arms.

"Historians and others still sift through Herzl's writings and see many legacies. They note that he envisioned a Jewish state where people spoke not Hebrew, but German; that he and other early Zionists failed to understand Arab nationalism; and that in a utopian novel Herzl wrote, he describes a binational, egalitarian state."

From the 2nd article:

“Sixty years after jumping off a bridge to his death, the last descendant of Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, was buried Wednesday in a Jerusalem cemetery bearing his grandfather's name _ bringing an end to a torturous family saga and finally fulfilling Herzl's century-old will.

Herzl's son also committed suicide. He had a daughter who was mentally ill and another who was killed in the Holocaust. In the past year, three of the founder's four descendants have been buried in Israel_ no easy task because of rabbinical injunctions against Jewish burials for those who have killed themselves or converted to other religions.”...

"His vision was realized, and now there is an exemplary nation," said Liora Herzl, the great-granddaughter of Herzl's cousin. But she noted that Zionism's founder left behind a broken, cash-strapped family. "He was completely consumed with his commitment to the Zionist idea, and his family ultimately paid the price for that."

“Norman was the lone family member committed to Herzl's Zionist cause. He read about his grandfather's work and was active in his movement.”

So here we have the idealist Zionist simpleton who is the principal founder responsible for the incredible mess we have in the Middle East today. The question for us to unravel is: what are we going to do about it?

Clearly, the rightful owners of the land of Palestine are in no mood to welcome the Zionist invaders with open arms and they continue to demand the return of their land. The USA is stuck with the consequences of its incredibly poor judgment in siding with the Zionists on this issue.

We are stuck with only two very unattractive options that I can see:

1. Continue with the present approach of funding (with my tax dollars) the slow genocide of the Palestinian people through the denial of their basic human rights and dignity. This is a fate worse than death as evidenced by the tasteless joke of the occasional exploding Muslim. The Israelis confiscate most of the West Bank water, to the point that Palestinians do not even have what the UN and the US government both regard as the minimum necessary to sustain human life, while Jewish settlers - accustomed to living in their native Europe or America - water grass lawns and fill swimming pools with water taken from under the feet of the Palestinians, while the Palestinians are rarely allowed to drill wells.

2. Admit what horrendous mistakes were made by the League of Nations in the 20th century with the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the UN Partition of Palestine in 1947 and correct them. How do we correct them? Restore the original pre-1947 boundary of the map of Palestine, go back to the single state solution, recognize the Palestinian Refugee right of return, form a UN mandate to control the allocation of water and enforce the peace. The Israeli planes, tanks, ships and nuclear weapons and all Palestinian arms would be destroyed.

To my mind the 2nd option is the clear choice. What are the odds of this happening? I would say not so good; it is very difficult to admit when one has made a mistake.

Elevate, cooler heads always prevail, you just can't hope for them in the moment when you're screaming at the top of your lungs for a scapegoat. You point to the Holocaust as a sign of no one standing up. You're not mentioning a couple differences about the conflict. Israel is surrounded by people who don't like them, but they aren't completely innocent in this situation. I mean, there is certainly latent hatred of Jews in the area, but they aren't doing themselves any favors when they take Hezbollah's bait and bulldoze houses when they "withdraw". In the Holocaust, the Jews were simply living and minding their own business when a charismatic leader swept into power and ordered their destruction when he needed a scapegoat to Germany's poverty.

There are certainly similarities. Certainly, leaders of anti-Israel terrorist groups have pointed out the same mentality and use the Jews as an excuse for their own problems. Unfortunately, they aren't entirely incorrect this time. Though it's a self-perpetuated cycle, the Israeli's are pushing up on one side of the wargear while the Palestinians are pulling down from the other side. Though Jews are blamed and the Jews aren't really to blame, the government of Israel is nominally Jewish and is guilty of a few slights and crimes that the organizers on the other side are also using to avoid the total anti-Semetic label. It's a big difference from Hitler, who killed the Jews in his country with his people's tacit approval, to the terrorists who attack a Jewish country for crimes of the courts. Not that both aren't monsters, but they're certainly different flavors of monster.

I'm saying cooler heads will prevail, but we might be waiting for a while. The reason it hasn't happened yet goes back to the idea that both sides are rolling that wheel of war. We've seen the Israeli's stop and the Palestinians keep bombing them. We've seen Palestinian reluctance followed by Israeli bombings. For peace to occur, both sides are going to have to stop at once, or that wheel will keep on rolling. And there just aren't powerful enough leaders on either side to stop the momentum, nor are there many outside the conflict who can step in and make them stop. But to say they will NEVER come is simply not realistic. It's not likely to happen tomorrow, but Germany today certainly isn't killing the Jewish people anymore. The Egyptians and Jordanians have both signed peace treaties with Israel to normalize relations.

Time is on peace's side. Eventually, something happens when someone truly courageous stands up and calls for a truce. Definitely not going to be any of the stooges in office right now, but time works in the favor of peace.

Who knows, maybe a hundred and fifty years from now, Israel will hate America with every fire of its being and will be helping its Syrian neighbors financially. You can always talk about the past, but memories can be very short when you're done shooting. And just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it's impossible. It's just hard to stop a wheel that's already rolling. Luckily, all it just takes a few strong hands and a lot of time and energy. But peace will happen there, even if it doesn't happen in some of our lifetimes.

Probably if, for nothing else, than it's just costing way too much to keep both sides killing each other for everyone involved. Eventually, the anti-West, anti-Muslim, and anti-Israel mileage will be spent. And then we'll need some other war somewhere to keep us all occupied, watching our TVs and reading our newspapers.

Hello Vic and Elevate,

I agree with Elevate, Vic’s passionate hope for peace is admirable. Unfortunately, I also agree with Elevate that it just aint going to happen.

I disagree with Elevate that the Greenies are just a bunch of money grubbing phonies. They have the right idea and we had best start listening before it’s too late.

Elevate makes a great point about how we should give America back to the Native Americans and Mexicans, given my insistence that the Israelis return Palestine to the Palestinians. I hear that a lot on these boards, as expected given my unconventional views.

The only defense that I have been able to come up with is that the Mexicans and Indians appear to be resigned to the situation. At least they are no longer fighting us. Of course there aren’t that many of the Indians left, since we darned near wiped them off the face of the earth. The Mexicans have decided that it’s better to join us and get a piece of the good life. They will just invade us via immigration (legally or not) and let the demographics of population explosion help take over the country for them.

That is not an option for the Palestinians, who still outnumber the Israeli invaders. The apartheid, theocratic, “State of Israel” will never be over run by illegal Palestinian immigrants. In fact, they will probably teach us how to keep out the Mexican illegal immigrants by building a wall around the country.

The Palestinians will never accept the illegitimate “State of Israel” on Palestinian land, nor should they. Here is an interesting site glorifying the Israeli technological marvel and helps explain why the Israelis love us, and the Palestinians hate us. That’s not a good thing; the Palestinians should hate us.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/2007/12/israel_silicon_valley_entrepreneur.html

Yup, Israel is a technological marvel. That’s why the Israelis need to hog 80% of the Palestinian’s water supply.

http://www.fmep.org/analysis/articles/water_policy_maher.html

…“According to recommended standards of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S Agency for International Development (USAID), a minimum of 100 liters a day per capita are needed for balanced and healthy domestic consumption in rural households. In contrast, BâeTselem, the Israeli human rights organization, documents that Israeli per capita consumption of water already reaches 350 l/day, about five-times Palestinian consumption. Per capita consumption of water in Israeli settlements, most of which are strategically located directly above main water extraction sources, can reach even higher levels, estimated at seven-fold the Palestinian consumption rate. In contrast, Palestinian consumption rates per capita vary between 35-80 l/d, well below WHO and USAID recommendations, and in some communities, water consumption can dip to as low as 7 l/d under certain conditions…”

So Israel confiscates most of the West Bank water, to the point that Palestinians there do not even have what the UN and the US government both regard as the minimum necessary to sustain human life, while Jewish settlers - accustomed to living in their native Europe or America - water grass lawns and fill swimming pools with water taken from under the feet of the Palestinians, while the Palestinians are rarely allowed to drill wells.

So you Israelis go ahead and live well at the expense of your oppressed neighbors on your stolen land. My government will guarantee the continuation of your illegal existence and fund your atrocious behavior with billions of my tax dollars. Live long and prosper, until the world wakes up and puts a stop to your despicable treatment of the rightful owners of your stolen land.

The Iranians and Israelis can relax. We have no plan to end our dependence on Middle East oil any time soon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/opinion/05friedman.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

December 5, 2007

Op-Ed Columnist

Intercepting Iran’s Take on America

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

There are two intelligence analyses that are relevant to the balance of power between the U.S. and Iran — one is the latest U.S. assessment of Iran, which certainly gave a much more complex view of what is happening there. The other is the Iranian National Intelligence Estimate of America, which — my guess — would read something like this:

To: President Ahmadinejad

From: The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence

Subject: America

As you’ll recall, in the wake of 9/11, we were extremely concerned that the U.S. would develop a covert program to end its addiction to oil, which would be the greatest threat to Iranian [and Israeli] national security. In fact, after Bush’s 2006 State of the Union, in which he decried America’s oil addiction, we had “high confidence” that a comprehensive U.S. clean energy policy would emerge. We were wrong.

Our fears that the U.S. was engaged in a covert “Manhattan Project” to achieve energy independence have been “assuaged.” America’s Manhattan Project turns out to be largely confined to the production of corn ethanol in Iowa, which, our analysts have confirmed from cell phone intercepts between lobbyists and Congressmen, is nothing more than a multibillion-dollar payoff to big Iowa farmers and agro-businesses…

First an apology from me I didn't mean to be away from the discussion for so long but life kind of got in the way of computer time. So sorry.

Rick - I will concied the fact that it is very good that the Google persons are getting involved with alternative energy. I like you believe that this is a good step to possible energy independence. This is a good thing as long as they keep it a private matter and don't let politics get in the way, for we all know that the Feds will only mess things up. As for the "Greenies" that you mention I believe that they are nothing but money grubbing Anti-techies who will find something wrong with everything that comes out of the movement anyway. Look who is making the most off of the Global Warming scare anyway it is mostly Greenie people and the politicians who back them. They have tied an alarmist movement into making money and policy that is going to completley collapse the economy of America - but this is also an argument for another debate. Back on subject on point two that you make that you rest with the Palestinians - under the logic that you present it sounds like we should give back the land that we live on to the American Indians and the Mexicans for we surely violated the same human rights and committed the same heinous crimes against them to have the great country that we live in today. In my eyes the great crimes are being committed by the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab nations that are calling for the destruction of the Jews - for they never even tried to live in peace with them. Those two peoples could have given each other so much but instead they kill each other without thought. Wrong on both sides of the coin but the Jews didn't just go in and start killing the Arabs the world actually wanted them to live in peace and conincide with each other. I can't fault the Jews for defending themselves against a peoples who just want their utter annialation, which in my eyes is the only thing that the Palestinians want. They wouldn't care if they just moved the hate would still be there and their hate would follow the Jewish people wherever they went. I think the Jews hate in reverse is only aslong lived as the violence against their people is. Point three I can't really comment on but to say that I kind of agree with the whole setting up of a DMZ type thing there but with a manned wall instead of mines, and as for the shifting of money I think it goes without saying that I think that a bad idea. I can't express enough that I think giving money to people who ultimatly hate us as much as they hate the Jews is a bad idea and this goes for all over the world not just there - ie Pakistan (bad idea) - but I also realize that out of neccasity somethings may need to be done to get things done. As for the PS part of your post I am not sure that will happen because the Arabs realize that the first thing that happens to them if the level Tel Aviv is that we will show our own commitment in the region and to the Jewish people and for all their posturing on their side they know they do not want us over there in force because they would get creamed and at that point it will be with the backing of the majority of the citizens of this country because we love the Jews and we would view an attack of that magnitude on the Jewish state as almost a direct attack on us (this I truly believe with all my heart).

Vic - I honestly hope that you are correct and that cooler heads can prevail but I think that is nothing but the hope of an eternal optimist - a great quality in your personality but not a realistic point of view as far as I am concerned. Ask your self where the cooler heads were in WWII when the Nazis killed 6 million people and the German people did what? Nothing they did nothing to stop them. This is one of the memories that drives the Jewish people, they are surrounded by people who want to wipe them off the face of the planet - not make peace with them - for God's sake they are strapping bombs onto their own sons so that they can blow up other people. I don't think that they really care about the loss of life (on their side or the other side) as long as they can kill Jews. And while I sincerly hope that cooler heads can overcome and live in peace I think that those same cooler heads would like nothing else but to get rid of the Jews also albeit with less bloodshed maybe but annialation none the less. I don't believe that peace is what they want so there will never be peace there. And even if I am wrong and they do accomplish peace between themselves you still have how many other Arab countries to deal with? Just to much for cooler heads to overcome I fear. And yes you will always have one or two people on the side of the "enemy" who will lament over the fact that his or her side is doing wrong and try and help (ie a Schindler) but they alone can not overcome hatred (as sad as that is). As for the answer to your last question I don't think that the bearers of peace will be walking over dead bodies to shake hands because ultimatley I don't really belive that the Palestians want peace and if they do they view "peace" as the utter annialation of the Jews. Sad but this is what I see. As for world opinion having any bearing on the situation we only have to look at what how many decades of berating both sides has accomplished for world opinion - a whole bunch of nothing. Again sad but true no matter what comes out of a peace agreement nothing changes (except maybe the Jews have to give something up).

Once again I want to apologize to both of you for being gone for so long - please respond because I find both of your arguments compelling and enlightening for even if I don't agree you are giving me different views of looking at the situation that I would not have thought of myself.

Thank you Elevate

You know Rick, I've brought that up before somewhere. I've always enjoyed the thought of turning Israel into a mine-surrounded no-man's land. That would be the scariest place on Earth, then.

Again, I'll have to reiterate a point I bring up VERY often when someone talks about shifting aid to Palestine. The reason Israel gets more money than Palestine is pretty simple, actually. The Israelis like us more. Whatever else is coming up in the debate, the Palestinians support their sponsors and Israel supports its own. The obvious reason Israel gets more money is because they are, politically speaking, pro-West. Palestine is, generally speaking, not. The terrorist organizations are not just anti-Israel, they are also anti-West. Not exactly a surprise, and not that it's inexplicable. But since Israel's foreign policy is focused on us and being as nice to us as possible, and because Palestine's is one of not trusting us because Israel is always kissing up to us (both of which are pretty accurate) Israel is more of our friend and Palestine is a distant person we know doesn't like us but has to work with us anyway.

Thus Israel gets more money. We give more money to people who like us. Shrug it off. That's how it happens. You wouldn't help out people who didn't like you very much as well as you'd help people who are your friends either.

And Elevate, I think cooler heads ALWAYS prevail. It takes time, and yes, that means more time than we've already given it. Enough people have to die on both sides to make peace an absolute necessity. people don't very often in history kill each other to death. Often enough they realize they're both suffering too much and finally come to a truce. I doubt the killing will continue for too long.

The questions you need to be asking yourself are: first off how can we facilitate peace by making it a more respected, popular, and viable option, second how we can include urgency behind that proposal so that it happens more quickly, and finally how many more people have to die on both sides before they approach their limits. Eventually, they will. When people live in fear, they vote for the people who stress aggressive defense. When they live in horror, they vote for people who promise peace. Unfortunately, both the Israelis and Palestinians are living in fear. They're deathly afraid of each other, and until their horror at grisled death scenes and bomb craters overcomes their fear of these things, you aren't likely to achieve peace.

But eventually, horror wins. It's all glory and honor until you've seen a charred pregnant woman. The rest of the world has pretty much seen enough of this stuff coming out of an Israel and Palestine bickering like small children. But Israel and Palestine apparently have some pretty strong stomachs for unholy carnage and are willing to take a little more. You've got to get those people in office, people who've seen the horror of murder so much that it has overcome fear and hate.

Eventually, we see things so diabolical, so violent, so miserable, that we eventually say that enough is enough. Freakishly enough, the world's most bloodthirsty people might be Palestinians and Israelis because neither has shown much resolve to curtail the policies mauling their own civilian populations. But it will eventually happen. Enough blood will be shed to stuff the vultures full of carrion and peace will come.

The last question has to be: how many dead bodies will the bearers of peace have to walk across to shake hands? Because the road to peace in that area is going to be littered with the dismembered bodies of the dead. So don't be disheartened by the hate you're seeing between both sides. Eventually, everyone gets sick of blood. In Israel and Palestine people are just a little less likely to be turned away from ongoing conflict by the sight of the dead cost of the conflicts they ask for. Give it time. Those numbers are going to stack up until peace isn't just the most logical option, it's the only option.

Elevate,

Good post and thanks for the reply:

1. “We can't let them go at it because that will disrupt our oil supply (one of the reasons if not the main reason we are so interested in the region).”

Excellent point; you are exactly right. That’s why we need to develop alternate energy sources to end our dependence on Middle East (and other, including domestic) sources of oil. The Greenies are right; damaging our environment is not required. Thankfully, the Google geniuses are now getting into this big time, so expect major advances in this area soon. See my previous post on November 28, 2007 8:44 AM.

2. “The Jewish people have done and continue to do a lot for this country... So ask yourself where would your loyalties lie?”

My sympathies lie with the oppressed Palestinians. No amount of contribution to our society or lobbying (purchasing) of our politicians can justify the illegal theft of Palestinian homes and land and atrocious oppression of basic human rights and dignity that has been and continues to be perpetrated on the Palestinians with the aid of my tax dollars.

3. “As for the North and South Korea example I believe that the DMZ and the largest landmine field in the world has a lot to do with the peace over there.”

Another excellent point; maybe we should surround Israel with an equivalent DMZ and police it with UN or US forces. It would serve a similar function as the Israeli wall, but would divide the land more equitably between Israel and Palestine. The water supply would also be UN controlled and equitably distributed between the two sides. Our billions of dollars of foreign aid would be shifted from Israel to Palestine until their economy recovers to a point equal to Israel’s.

Thanks again for the post; you are clearly an honest broker and great thinker. Now all we have to do is convince our geniuses in Washington D.C.

P.S.:

Unfortunately, after a moment of euphoric optimism, reality sets in and we realize that this approach is also doomed to failure. The hard liners of the region will never permit the “State of Israel” to remain on Arab land, nor should they. With the advent of the modern Cruise Missile that is low flying, GPS guided and impervious to radar detection, it is only a matter of time until downtown Tel Aviv and other major Israeli targets are flattened. Russia, Iran, Pakistan or someone will give or sell these weapons to the Arabs. They could but won’t use nuclear warheads because they want the land to remain habitable. They can be programmed to fly various land hugging profiles, approach from multiple directions, and no one will know where they came from.

Vic - I agree that the peaceful people do exist and they probably will be considered the cooler heads that you speak of no argument there. My main point is that they will never and I reiterate, never overcome the hatred that the main populace of both peoples feel for each other over there in the Middle East. Is that unfortunate? You bet, but at the same time for everyone of the cooler heads you have 1 or 2 thousand that are spewing hatred and breeding it in the respected societies (and yes the Jews do this also just not to the extent that the Arabs do). As for Annapolis I would have liked nothing better then something worth while to come from it. As with the mass exodus of Jews to America though I don't think that I will hold my breath. Maybe I am just being pessimistic but I honestly don't think that peace is possible there. As for the North and South Korea example I believe that the DMZ and the largest landmine field in the world has a lot to do with the peace over there. North can't send "terrorists" into the South to blow themselves up like the Arabs are in Israel. And if North sarts a war over there they will get waxed by us and I don't think at this point China would have to much to say against it (I maybe wrong on that point though I will admit). My last point would be to say that to defend yourself is not to be a terrorist. To be a terrorist is to strap a bomb on yourself and blow up in the middle of a cafe or on a bus (which I want to point out the Jews have plotted of once that I know of probably more but the Jewish society caught them and threw them in jail while the Pal. people look the other way). And I know the age old argument that it is the only way they can fight back or they are called "freedom fighters". But if they were actually out for a peacful existence then wouldn't they let the cooler heads prevail? I think they would but they only want the destruction of the Jews and that is all that will make them happy. In that outlook they don't care for peace or the politics to get there they will only use terror to kill as many people as possible. They even kill their own people who do not agree with them - I ask you is that a people of peace? I don't think so. At the same time I will admit that the Jews are not as innocent as I am making them sound - I just believe that if given the honest option to live in peace with the Muslims they would - the Muslims are the ones who want nothing but the destruction of the Jewish people not the Jews wanting the utter destruction of the Muslims. In my eyes it isn't about peace to them it is about the eradication of the Jews and until that view in the Muslim community changes then peace has no chance. As for the Jews hatred - I think that it would pass if the Muslims quit killing them for trying to just live.

Rick - The first thing that I will say is that I no less then nothing about Economics (accept I wish I made more) so sorry I can't comment on that except to say I wish we didn't borrow so much from ANYONE - China or not. As for letting them have at each other as you put it is an obvious one to all who are posting here - oil. We can't let them go at it because that will disrupt our oil supply (one of the reasons if not the main reason we are so interested in the region). Now that could be offset if we overruled the Green Movement fanatics that won't let us drill or build in our own country but that is a totally different argument. So as it is we need to do what we can to stabalize that area of the world because they don't encounter the same enviro freaks that we have here (or if they do they don't care about them). As for being policemen I think that if we really trying that role we would be doing something in Darfur and other humanitarinan crisis areas like that. Don't fool yourself we are not being policemen we are looking out for our nations intrestes and oil in the Middle East is one of those at this time. As is the state of Israel because the Jews have a bunch of power and money that they give to our society here in America. They have one of (if not the most) powerful policy lobbies in DC. Now depending on how you look at it that is a good or bad thing but that is why we are meddling in that affair and giving the Jews over there so much. The Jewish people have done and continue to do a lot for this country. Not to say that the Arabs don't contribute but it really is like comparing apples and oranges when it comes to contributions to the USA. So ask yourself where would your loyalties lie?

Rick, I'm assuming you're being sarcastic about giving the Palestinians our best technologies. Are you looking for a Middle Eastern showdown like some kind of football game?

Besides, we're not borrowing billions of dollars a year for the Israelis. We're borrowing so much because Bush cut taxes, fought two wars (one they started, one we definitely started), increased runaway spending, and never found another source of revenue. This isn't one you can pin on our financial support of other nations. Just because Israel is at the top of our list doesn't mean there aren't other nations doing the same thing. Israel gets the most because they publicly like us so much. We aren't giving, say, Palestine as much money because Hamas doesn't like us much anyway. Why would we give them more money?

Our spending habits increased on the wars and absolutely exploded domestically, but you can pin that borrowing right on the man in office right now. His tax cuts ruined the government's ability to pay the debts back. It's not his generation, the generation of boomers now in control of our electorate, that will pay them back. It's my generation, those of us just finishing college, who are supposed to foot the bill for Iraq. It's why, suddenly, the Democrats are the party to go to for fiscal responsibility. Sure, the Dems will spend like it's going out of style, but they at least cover the expenses and budget. Bush has strangled our economy all on his lonesome. Israel's a completely seperate issue. We supported Israel just fine through the Clinton administration when, finally, all our numbers were in the black.

That's why I'll not vote for any president who says they won't raise taxes. I'm prepared to pay more taxes. We need to increase revenues. I'd like to see the beureaucracy reduced, but the government never seems to shrink. So for a little bit of a tangent, if you're concerned about our borrowing habits, it's not Israel that's our problem. Iraq is our biggest problem, and it's become a vast pit for our resources that, due to Iraqi infighting, are seeing very few political results.

But back on the subject, you've made the mistake of selecting a point in time in Israel when the Jews were a minority population. If you go back farther in the past, all sorts of nations, including the Jews, owned that chunk of dirt. Today, Jews own that chunk of dirt. I could point in the past to all sorts of people that have owned that chunk of dirt and called for a return to the landowners. Even European Christians owned that piece of crust at one point. Are you trying to say that, when the Christians came and wiped out the Muslim population of Jerusalem, that now the Christians can go back and claim it as their own? Because it was the majority?

If Israel had been formed a year ago, that was the time to talk about who belonged there before. The mandate of Palestine was given something like eighty years ago. So any shot at who SHOULD own the land is moot. A lot of people have conquered the Holy Land. The Palestinians aren't any different from any other person on that patch of dust except for the time they were there.

So let's cut the crap already about that.

And Elevate, just because the partisans are loudest doesn't mean cooler heads don't exist. They just aren't quite loud enough. Did you read Bakshi's last post about a Palestinian working through civic organizations to combat the injustices he sees in the system? That's a cooler head. He doesn't have to LIKE Israel or America, but he's chosen to work peacefully and positively to better the Palestinian people. That kind of action doesn't often get a lot of the praise it deserves. A lot of people are only interested when the Israelis or Palestinians are painting their streets red. But that man is the hope of a Palestinian and Israeli future both. He's just one of the cooler heads that can fix the situation, if only people would listen.

But when we talk about peace, it's boring. We want to talk about war. We love to talk about the slaughter, mass deportation, "legitimate resistance", "defensive measures", and so on. It's all you ever hear about. A lot of people don't give peace an arguement because, quite frankly, we don't think it's newsworthy. Everyone had already dismissed the Annapolis Convention before it ever began for a lot of reasons. Often legitimate ones. But you can't simply strike down the peace process because Bush is an opportunist who needs a better public image. You can't laugh it out of an arguement because the Israelis and Palestinians both refuse to compromise. You have to say that, even though it's not likely, if North and South Korea can live without major hostilities for so long with each other, then so can Israel and Palestine.

But why talk constructively towards peace? That doesn't earn you any points in the debate. It doesn't get your name pointed out often when you speak constructively towards a safer world. It doesn't make you popular in the area because so many people have gained so much power by fighting one another that it seems foolish to try otherwise. Even on this board, everyone tries to line up on Israel or Palestine's side and ask who the terrorist is.

Because we have a hard time looking at the mirror and saying, "Every time I dismiss peace, I am the terrorist." And every single man and woman in that region who stands on one side of the valley or another and points there finger is the very person who perpetuates the violence. And the only real heroes are the men and women who walk into the range of rifles to meet in the middle and shake hands.

Elevate:

Thanks for the reply.

“...As for being absent for 2 millenia there were always pockets of Jews in the Middle East - always have been and always will be...”

Agreed, but at the turn of the 20th century Jews were 2% of the population of Palestine. That’s what it should be now. Just like the good ole US of A, no illegal unwanted immigrants are allowed.

“...We think solving the issue of the Muslims and Jews is hard wait until we have to try and maintain peace between those two or is nobody going to care about that? I don't know just an observation and question to explore on the post...”

Agreed again, but I say that we are not the world’s policeman. We should just sit back and let the Sunnis and Shiites have at each other. We should also do the same with the Palestinians and Israelis.

Here’s another question to explore on the post:

Why do we borrow billions of dollars from the Chinese each year to give to the Israelis? Why don’t we terminate all aid to Israel and let them support themselves? Why don’t we borrow billions of dollars from the Chinese each year to give to the Palestinians for the next 60 years to even the score. While we are at it, we can give them access to our best military hardware.

Rick - I am glad that you love the Jews and embrace them. So do I. That still does not change the fact that they will not leave, nor do we have the right to tell them they should. I am also all for asking them to come of their own free will if they want to but I would not expect a flood of new Jews in this country if I was you. As for the Palestinians you are correct in believing that I pity them. I do to a certain extent but on a whole (as I see it) are not interested in living in any semblence of peace with the Israelis they appear to be hell bent on their demise. Their leaders talk a good game but everytime they get something from the Jews they continue to shoot rockets or board buses and blow themselves up along with many innocent people with them. As for being absent for 2 millenia there were always pockets of Jews in the Middle East - always have been and always will be. Just because they were persucuted and not in the ruling class - you know its kind of hard when the ruling religion beheads those who do not believe in the same thing that they do - does not mean they were "gone". That land is just as holy to the Jews as it is to the Muslims (more so if you ask me) so what gives the Muslims any more right to it then the Jews?

Vic - I am sorry if anything I posted struck you as Anti-Semetic. Honestly. That was not my intention. As for Lebanon I think that we basically agree that it could have been a lot worse. I was just saying that Israel showed restraint because they could have leveled that entire country like they did that border - and in my eyes would have been completly justified to do so. Tragic? Yes loss of innocent life is always tragic. Within their rights? Yes again for the fact that those "innocent" people did not stand up for themselves and stop the terrorists from provoking a nation that could destroy them. And I ask this why didn't they? I think it is because the "innocent" people of Lebanon want the same thing that Hezbollha wants-the utter destruction of the Jewish State of Israel. Now I think that makes them not so "innocent" anymore. And yes I realize that this just propigates a circle of hate that will continue on and on but at the same time I realize that "cooler" heads won't prevail because one side (and in all actuallity probably both sides anymore)just don't have cool heads.

Think of this also. If the Muslims were not "united" in their hatred for the Jews there still would be no peace in the Middle East because the two main sects of Islam hate each other so they would be killing each other. We think solving the issue of the Muslims and Jews is hard wait until we have to try and maintain peace between those two or is nobody going to care about that? I don't know just an observation and question to explore on the post.

It cut me off! And I used the wrong name. Sorry Westerner. That name just sticks out at me every time I read it.

Elevated broke out the Anti-Semetic rant, and I don't often agree with that label, but he's right about what he's talking about. If Israel doesn't want to go anywhere, it's not. And neither will the Palestinians. I don't think they were THAT restrained, but Israel does, actually, have international right to invade Lebanon and Palestine both for attacks across the border by terrorist organizations if those organizations are not resolved by the government. The Israelis did, actually, have free reign to conduct a conventional war.

Luckily, Israel didn't roll out the heaviest stuff and steamroll Lebanon. I don't think they were nearly as restrained as Elevated says (they were LIMITED, but they certainly took it to that border pretty heavily), but as I said, to talk about Palestinian plight as if the Palestinians are innocent of anything is wrong. Everyone in this conflict is drenched in the blood of the innocent. So don't bring the talk of our shame of the Palestinian plight. I'm just embarrassed that so many people have lined up on one side of the issue or the other and decided to try to put one people or the other on a white marble pedestal.

There is enough sin for everyone in this little off-and-on war the Israelis and Palestinians have conducted. Calling out one side as the aggressor anymore is an exercise in blame-planting. Which qualifies one to run for President of the United States, but is not the quality of a man bringing a genuine solution to a serious problem.

Rick, that kind of understanding is why the Israelis will never leave. And why I back them. The idea that, "Yeah, you've got a point, but there's no chance. The Israelis (or Palestinians, depending on who you are, you're just one flavor) have to go," is absolutely, old-school American-style politics of mass-decision. It's an incredibly faulty foreign policy decision to declare an ends not reached by consensus. It always seems so easy to change locations rather than change minds. But this kind of foreign policy started the Israeli mess in the first place.

So simply saying that the Israelis have to leave because, quite frankly, we ought to not spend the energy to find a solution, is a symptom of our larger problem in America. The peace has a chance, but it must be vigorously, and objectively, pushed by anyone involved. As long as Bush is paying a two-state solution lip-service for his political legacy and Achmadinejad is building the majority of his political support from ranting against Israel and America, we'll have the same politics of force we've seen for years. In part, the whole reason peace has never been achieved is because we have never, seriously, given it a chance. Either the Israelis or Palestinians must make all of the concessions or the deal is broken.

The only way it will work is if everyone realizes the end result of every successful end to a volatile argument. Everyone must give something dear to them. Nobody walks away happy. And thirty years after the fact, hopefully, it will be part of a Chris Rock joke. But until we make it not just policy, but sound action, that Israel and Palestine cannot spend the rest of eternity simmering in war, we are going to see war.

Eventually it will happen. There are vultures on both sides feeding on the dead for political power, but eventually calmer heads shall grow sick of the violence and distrust. You can hear it echoed around in the younger generations in these countries, that foreign powers simply complicate the issue and that peace must be reached, somehow, soon. It will take a long time to finally wind down the violence, but you don't have to be anti-Israel or anti-Palestinian to have a decent opinion of the situation. I know people on both sides of the concrete barriers that are decent people who have good points. Israel's treatment of its Muslim population, out of fear of its own safety, is deplorable. Palestinian support of what amounts to a murder unit on the Israeli border is deplorable, especially to us Americans, since we've been raised to only respect the straight-out, in your face fistfight and deplore the killing from the shadows technique.

But never, EVER discount the, perhaps small, group of intelligent people in both countries with cool heads, hard souls, unconquerable conscience, and an understanding, open mind. There aren't many, but they're the most respectable people on Earth. And they'll be the people who, when they finally are elected into power, will end the cycle of violence. Never doubt the power of the world's greatest breed of men and women. Though the wind howls at the foundation, some towers shall never fall.

And these people will walk a high road above the herds of sheep-like talking heads who spit vehemence but can never think of a true, workable solution.

Westerner broke out the Anti-Semitic rant, and I don't often agree with that label,

Elevated?

I do not hate the Jews. I embrace the Jews and want to bring them to America where they belong, with their 5.7 million brethren (as of 2002, latest survey that I could find). They certainly do not belong in the Middle East amidst the billions of Muslims who detest them, and rightly so, after the atrocities that the Zionists have perpetrated on the native Palestinians, and after being absent for nearly 2 millennia.

If the 5.0 million Israeli Jews were to come to America, this would give us 10.7 million, or 80% of the total 13.3 million Jewish worldwide population; a true homeland. We can support them; Palestine cannot. They could even take over a single state, since anyone with the price of purchase can have any property they wish in our country.

I am anti-Zionist, pro-Palestinian, and enraged at the atrocities that my tax dollars are being used to enable in Palestine. I am sure that you, as a thoughtful, reasonable person are embarrassed by the plight of the Palestinians as well.

Vic,

Now we’ll get somewhere:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/technology/28google.html?pagewanted=print

Google’s Next Frontier: Renewable Energy

By BRAD STONE

SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 27 — Google, the Internet company with a seemingly limitless source of revenue, plans to get into the business of finding limitless sources of energy.

The company, based in Mountain View, Calif., announced Tuesday that it intended to develop and help stimulate the creation of renewable energy technologies that are cheaper than coal-generated power.

Let us be frank Israel will go no where and the Arabs are going no where. They will always be at each others throats and quite honestly I am suprised that Israel stopped when they did.

For all of us Americans who are posting here lets look at this rationally.. what would we do? Say that Canada and Mexico were sitting on the borders and lobbing rockets into our cities. We can even say that it was "terrorist" groups who didn't have the backing of the "people" but those same "people" were not doing anything to stop them from provoking us because they want our destruction as much as the "terrorist" group does. What would our reaction be? I can tell you that with the backing of a HUGE majority of its citizens (as the Israeli government did) we would flatten both those countries.

So I say that to show the restraint that Israel did is amazing. We would have taken the whole country over - which may not be politically correct but when has that stopped us? And as for "world opinion" stopping Israel, I for one think that is a joke. They (like us) don't really care about "world opinion" and why should they when the cards are stacked against them from the start. Everyone screams illegal state, illegal state but not one says come live here in peace. Not that the Israelis would leave that is their home - most the only one they have ever known. It would be like someone saying that you have no right to live in America (or where ever you live) because it was taken from someone else. Countries have been formed like that throughout time - America(taken from Indians), Israel(taken from the Arabs but taken from the Jews and Christians first) blah blah blah etc etc etc. So really who has any legitimate claim to any land - no one it was all taken or given back or away at one time or another.

Now I don't know what the solution to the problem is (if there is one) but to think that either party is going anywhere is like pulling the wool over your own eyes.

Here is the best solution posted by Sam on another board @November 27, 2007 3:08 PM:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/hisham_melhem/2007/11/dont_expect_much_from_annapoli/all_comments.html

Sam has the best and only solution, the single-state solution, with Palestinian right of return:

“…All citizens of the new state, PALISRA (Palestine +Israel), would enjoy equal rights and bear the same responsibilities…”

To clarify, Israel is not dependent on oil for export the way the Saudis, Kuwait, UAE, etc. are. to generate their GDP. Israel is dependent on oil the way Japan is dependent on oil and I would definitely categorize Japan as a successful modern country.

Agreed. There will be no peace in the Middle East unless Israel leaves.

The AIPAC funded political opinions that are popular in Washington, DC usually point to the Palestinians as the problem. They have to renounce terrorism. They have to recognize Israel. They have to do a lot of things.

That is political spin that has no bearing on or relation to reality.

The reality is that Israel holds all the cards: they control the water, they control the power, they control the borders, they control the money.

As a result, the only party that can do anything to bring about peace is Israel.

And here is what Israel has to do: recognize the elected government of the Palestinian people (that's called democracy), dismantle all settlements, return all post-1967 territory, return all rightful funds to the Palestinian government which have been withheld, dismantle the wall, allow East Jerusalem to become the capitol of a Palestinian state, and allow the right of return to Palestinian Arabs forced off their land by Jewish occupiers.

The Palestinians have no moral or legal responsibility to accomodate any of the demands of Israel because they are waging a war against illegal occupiers for their rightful homeland.

Any act of violence against the state of Israel is an act of liberation against an occupying, foreign force.

The ball is entirely in the hands of Israel if she wants peace.

Since Israel will not agree to any (nevermind all) of the above conditions, she must either leave the Middle East or eventually succumb to destruction.

Vic,

Good post and very impassioned, but I’m sorry; it just isn’t going to happen. The Israelis have to go.

Hey Rick, let's go back to that 5$ a barrel scenario. Let's say you have the option to put up your money in small gulps in oil or one lump sum to switch to nuclear power. Twenty dollars more a tank, and those power plants will be up mighty fast.

Even liberals (Pelosi liberals, not liberals like me) will give nuclear the nod when we've been bombarded by oil prices. Americans aren't just addicted to consuming oil. We keep consuming it because it has become a part of almost every aspect of our economic balance to continue to buy it. Those oil dollars, if they disappear out of the Middle East, is certainly going to cause a little bit of turmoil (not Middle Eastern mass destruction, of course, but there's going to be some fireworks if that money gets cut). In the same way America is still buying coal even though we have nuclear power, we'll continue to buy oil as long as two things continue to happen: America keeps its oil prices low in the country to encourage consumption and it is a Middle East foreign policy decision to keep oil prices to America low.

Imagine the balance of power changing when (not if, when) America decides to go nuclear. Suddenly, you'll have to have a non-oil based economy to survive. And there just isn't movement in that direction in most countries in the old Islamic empires.

My guess is that about twenty or so years from now, America and most civilized nations will be completely electric. Oil producing nations will become oil consuming nations (and Al Gore can start complaining about the Middle East more than our own country) and will have to power their own economies through the consumption of their oil. Anyone who doesn't have an oil based economy is going to have a bright red bulls-eye painted on their chest and they'll either rise to lead the region or fall and be consumed.

We'll see how that goes.

Can I just make the comment on all the coming spitfire to just cut the talk of Israeli deportation? That's about as realistic as kicking the Muslims out of Lebanon at this point. Whatever good or bad it might do, let's just not be completely ridiculous.

This is what REALLY angers me about the Israel debate. There is one, simple, inevitable answer to the problem. The creation of a Palestinian state, the cessation of hostilities against Israel, the cessation of hostilities from Israel, and recognition of Israel by regional powers. Really! Those four things are the base of the problem! Everything else is geopolitical, but if those four things happen, THAT'S THE EASIEST SOLUTION!

But a whole lot of people have banked or built on the endless war with Israel. Israeli neocons eat and live on the idea that all their neighbors are against Israel. And as long as they're right, they're in power. All sorts of Islamic political parties on the border are worthless without an Israeli threat to counter. So a lot of people are building their fortunes on war. And they're getting help.

They're getting help from every ridiculous rhetoric posited by a sarcastic bevy of partisans who have chosen to fight gravity and belittle the situation. Of all situations, the Israeli-Palestinian situation HAS to be resolved. It absolutely HAS to be. Israel has way too much firepower to keep pointing at the heads of its neighbors and then to have its neighbors taunting them to pull the trigger. Because after enough times asking for Israel to shoot them, they will.

Are you people happy with this situation? The Israelis aren't going anywhere. The League of Nations mandate was given in, what, 1922? It's been over eighty years people! Sure, it wasn't a good idea, but it's been too long. You can't tell the Israelis to leave any more than the Palestinian Muslims anymore.

But a lot of people, especially people outside the conflict, have turned Israel into a focal point in their whole administration. Countries like, say, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, they can't make peace with Israel because everyone is so bitter about an injustice originated before they were all born. Nobody seems to figure out that there isn't really anyone ALIVE anymore old enough to remember being originally offended. Everything everyone has to complain about is a direct result of their own hostility. Islamic anger at Israel fuels all of Israel anger at the Islamic community.

So sets up the original, most dangerous and inefficient model of conlict. One side hating the other afraid to lose face and negotiate. Look at the model of American partisanship lately and you'll know why this just gums up any advancement of social change. Moderation is seen as a victory by partisans of the other side and nothing is ever really accomplished until something blows up. That's all America has been since I've been alive, domestically. A nation of people bickering over things that usually don't even concern them (abortion comes to mind, as does gay marriage) until something blows up and unites us as one, big, ugly monstrous face.

Until people pull their heads out of the dirt, stop blaming each other as the perpetrator of this conflict (because there is innocent blood on everyone's hands in this conflict), shut out their conservative warhawks, and cut a deal, people are going to die. A lot of people. In horrific ways.

So every time we ever say there won't be peace in the Middle East, let's all keep in the back of our minds that the only reason there isn't peace in the Middle East is because nobody thinks there can be. As long as we've doomed every peace process and convention to failure before it's even occurred, we're nothing but part of the war.

Sure, Bush is absolutely the worst candidate for bringing about peace right now. It's too late in his administration, he doesn't seem to care enough about reconciliation, he stands too far on the side of Israel, and he's probably just making a play on it to write a bookend on his disastrous legacy. But I'll give Condi my support even if she's got almost no chance. A glimmer of chance, any hope of success, is enough to at least give a nod to.

I mean, if the Israelis and Palestinians are at least TALKING, they're more peaceful than our own government is with Iran and Syria. The only, irresistable force is towards the two-state solution, for Israel to give back most, if not all, of its conquered lands, for recognition of the Israeli state, and for everyone to just quit shooting each other.

Peace will eventually happen. It will happen when murderers on both sides of the barrier quit filling their bellies with the blood of the dead and calling it "resistance" and "self-defense."

Vic,

Here’s a good article on power generation and utilization. You are right, we are going electric, but can we get there in time? Today we get 50% of our energy from coal, 30% from oil and natural gas, and 20% from nuclear.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/15_1_nuclear_power.html

Why the U.S. Needs More Nuclear Power (Winter 2005)
Peter W. Huber, Mark P. Mills

“The U.S. today consumes about 100 quads—100 quadrillion BTUs—of raw thermal energy per year. We do three basic things with it: generate electricity (about 40 percent of the raw energy consumed), move vehicles (30 percent), and produce heat (30 percent). Oil is the fuel of transportation, of course. We principally use natural gas to supply raw heat, though it’s now making steady inroads into electric power generation. Fueling electric power plants are mainly (in descending order) coal, uranium, natural gas, and rainfall, by way of hydroelectricity...

So today we use 40 percent of our fuel to power the plug, and the plug powers 60 percent of GDP. And with the ascent of microwaves, lasers, hybrid wheels, and such, we’re moving to 60 and 80 percent, respectively, soon; and then, in due course, 100/100. We’re turning to electricity as fuel because it can do more, faster, in much less space—indeed, it’s by far the fastest and purest form of power yet tamed for ubiquitous use. Small wonder that demand for it keeps growing...

It must surely be clear by now, too, that the political costs of depending so heavily on oil from the Middle East are just too great. We need to find a way to stop funneling $25 billion a year (or so) of our energy dollars into churning cauldrons of hate and violence. By sharply curtailing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, we would greatly expand the range of feasibl