XidiouX's Middle East Questionnaire
1. Do you believe that the State of Israel is legitimate and deserves international recognition and acceptance? 2. If your answer to 1. is 'No', do you nevertheless take the pragmatic point of view that 'We can't get there from here', and that we must nevertheless accept Israel's existence? If your answer to 1. is yes, how can you justify the terrible crimes commited against the Palestinians, who played no part in the Nazi persecution and attempted extermination of the Jews in WW2, and indeed with whom the Jews had previously coexisted peacefully for centuries on the territories which are now in dispute? 3. Do you believe in a one-state or a two-state solution, or neither? Please give reasons for your choice. 4. How to you think John McCain, if he elected as the next President of the United States of America, will address the Israel/Palestine issue? 5. How to you think Barack Obama, if he elected as the next President of the United States of America, will address the Israel/Palestine issue? 6. Do you think Iran is a serious threat to the stability of the Middle East? Do you think it really has ambitions to obtain nuclear weapons? If so, are they justified? Would a nuclear-armed Iran necessarily be a bad thing? 7. What conclusions can we draw to about the US-Iran relationship given that a) Iran has not attacked any foreign territory for over 200 years while the US has invaded at least 23 countries since WW2 and that b) Iran had the first democracy ever in the Middle East, which was destroyed by the US and the UK in 1953 because this democracy decided to take control of its own oil? 8. An individual has no choice about how or where they are born. How would you react to your circumstances if you were born an Israeli Jew? My answers: 1. No. 2. Not much choice right now. I don't wish to see Israel bombed out of existence, because there are a lot of decent people there. But it would be nice to see it voted out of existence though, which I hope will happen eventually. 3. One state. The humiliation of the Palestinians into accepting the separate territories of the dismal Gaza Strip and increasingly diminished West Bank is unsustainable. As is the stalemate over the status of Jerusalem and Israel's systematic denial of Palestinian access to crucial resouces, water in particular. The Palestinians deserve a contiguous, respectable homeland, and will fight for it until they get it. Their rate of reproduction, together with that of Israeli Arabs/Muslims, compared with that of Israeli Jews, makes the ultimate merging of territories inevitable, I believe. 4. Bush term 3, except with a president who is actually senile rather than merely stupid. 5. Obama is confusing. Although he is committed to the security of Israel, he nevertheless does not equate Zionism with being 'Pro-Likud'. He is also in favour of a contiguous Palestinian state, which I agree with and which would be more difficult to arrange than the two-state solution favoured by the US administration since Clinton. We'll see. 6. No. Perhaps. Perhaps. Perhaps not. 7. Go figure. 8. I would push for a one state solution with a total separation of religion and politics. I would also, as a free-thinker, renounce Judaism in every respect except for the one that would compel me to sue my mohel for all he was worth. XidiouX

1. I think it is questionable, butI don't think that Israel deserve or warrants anymore aide and ass-kissing from the US and other Western powers anymore. It's time for their own people to decide what's best for themselves. Whether Israel can continue to co-exist peacefully, or it be taken down and turned into a Palestinian state. 2. It depends on what you mean by "recognize". If you mean recognize as respect their sovereignty, I really don't know. As I said, it's questionable. France and the League of Nations created Israel in 1948. Before then there wasn't really any problems with stability. However, one should recognize that both the Jews and the Palestinians want their independence very strongly. 3. I think the two-state resolution is ridiculous, its about as ridiculous is drawing imaginary borders and splitting up Iraq. Either Israel needs to recognize the rights of Palestinians and create a new government that has both Jews and Palestinians or it will eventually lose everything. 4. John McCain pretty much follows the neo-con interventionist foreign policy. He won't be as brash as Bush, but he certainly wouldn't be wise either. I believe he will strongly support military, political, and financial aide to Israel and attempt to stomp out Palestinian insurection. 5. Obama will probably take a step back about the issue, but continue support of Israel, as most of the candidates seem to do. 6. Iran is a bit strange. I think one of the sources of a lot of tensions with them is they are extremely suspicious of outsiders, but they have every reason to be suspicious. I think we should do our best to leave them alone and allow the new generation to overthrow the current regime. There are a lot of unhappy people in Iran, especially in the youth who would support a more modern, democratic-style government. Leave them alone, things will change. Even if they get a few nukes, I strongly doubt they would waist them. 7. Iran deserves the respect of American foreign policy. 8. I don't know, if I was a different person, my views might be different. But if I were a Jew, I know I'd like some kind of homeland that accepts me. I might likely support Israel's continued existance, but support a lot of changes to its government and policies, especially about Palestinians.

1) Israel is legitimate and deserves full acceptance 2) The existance of the State of Israel stands besides the crimes against the Palestinians. But I cannot agree with these crimes. Furthermore, Xidioux, you cannot connect the Nazi crimes with the ones listed above. 3) a two-state solution. There is simply no other solution. The Israeli State is there, the Palestinians aren't moving out. Where should they go. Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Iran aren't taking them in. 4) McCain doesn't pull the strings. 5) Obama doesn't pull the strings. 6) Yes, Iran is a threat when it becomes a nuclear power. Yes, I believe they are aming for a nuclear weapon. I cannot believe they want nuclear power just to boil eggs. Iran has sworn to destroy the State of Israel....a government with this kind of view is not something to be very pleased with. 7) Iran is not an expending state.....the US are. The relationship is at best called 'rocky'. 8) Religions should play no role. Common sence should/must.

Unfortunately, I must disagree, grasshopper, what you propose would bring constant war and instability to the region. It's best to allow people to settle their own conflicts instead of playing the father figure and getting involved all the time, sometimes its necessary, but most of the time it's extremely counter-productive to peace. As a result, much of the Middle East hates America and western powers.

Could you specify your remarks, dear F.F.? I have trouble finding the point of our disagreement.

Acting as a "big brother" in settling conflicts does not always work, in fact most of the time it doesn't. Take the UN for example. The sole purpose it was created was to promote stability and world peace, however in practice, it causes conflict and deepens tensions. The Western powers have been far too manipulatory of the Middle East for a long time and now we are surprised how much they hate us. It was the same thing that happened to China when they fell to communism. They turned to someone they didn't fully understand out of desperation and frustration of foreigners meddling in their affairs. Big international organizations only worsen the tension in Iran and Israel, they do not help it. You cannot expect some politician to truly understand or effectively troubleshoot such a situation, especially if they're from Europe or North America. We really don't understand what it's like to live there. Our consistent support of Israel and its apartheid government that discriminates against Palestinians is likely to garner hatred for the US and Europe. I don't see why people don't see that. Israel has committed just as many crimes as the Palestinians. It's time for both sides to hear the other out. A two state solution will not work as it is not working now with Gaza. Do you really think Iran is stupid enough to launch a nuke at Israel? That would mean the instant destruction of their country be world powers. Even France would support an invasion of Iran if that happened. The Tehran government did not get into power by being stupid, they're more clover than that. The nuke is for political purpose to give them leverage over the region and its neighbors. That is very dangerous, but I seriously doubt that they are going to use it. Israel is revered by Muslims too as a holy place, they are not about to destroy it.

It's not that I have a problem with the Irany people. I have a problem with the religious, fanatic government that is in power now. Their leader has, on several occaision, threatened to destroy Israel. Counting one and one together, I am not willing to take a chance and I can't blame the Israeli's for doing the same thing. As I have stated above, I believe in a two-state solution. Simply because there is no alternative. Iran, Syria, Jordan and Egypt have done, to this day, nothing to help their 'Arab-brothers', the Palestinians. Look, I don't agree with the policy the Israeli government is doing now, but it's easy for us, over thousend miles away, to debate over such delicate issues. Fact is that the Israeli state was declared war upon by the whole Arab world as it called into excistence. The Israeli's won that war and that's the way the world goes: He who is king of the Hill rules the place. They tried it again, but were beaten to the punch by Israel in 1967, in which they conquered the Westbank and the Golan Heights. In 1973 they were nearly beaten, but by foreign help (including the Dutch, which I am partically proud of) they defeated the combined forces of Syria, Jordan and Egypt. So, instead of pointing to who is wrong, I would rather be willing to take this point in history as a starting point and begin from here. If the Palestinians/Israeli's accept each other as nations, living aside, the both economy's could rise up. More jobs means something to work for, health, security, a family, a future. That would leave the guys who are willing to do wrong, the guys who pay for the bombers, in the open. THAT would be a good start.

It is because of consistent foreign help of Israel that both Arabs and Palestinians are frustrated. I don't know why the US is so easily won over by Israel and why we give them unconditional help. It's time for Israel to solve its own problems. I personally believe that Israelis and Palestinians should solve the problem, no one else can. Until either side is willing to put aside terrorism, nothing is going to get done. A two state solution will never work, just as the proposed plan to break up Iraq into four different nations will not work. The Palestinians currently inhabit very weak economic centers. No fertile land and no real natural resources. Much of the West Bank and Gaza are practically stripped raw of growth or possible development, it will take a long time for the regions to recover from constant warfare. Also, if you notice, practically everything around Jerusalem is desert. There is no way the Palestinians could possibly run a nation if Israel divides in two. Eventually, tensions will flair and arguments will occur over borders and control of resources and war will break out. The UN will take the side of Israel and the Arabs will take the side of the Palestinians. It would be catastrophic to the relations with Arab countries. Not to mention, who controls the Holy places? It's been the subject of wars since 1091. Not to mention any borders drawn by others will not be respected by Palestinians as they don't now. I think the real danger that comes from Iran owning a nuke is that it could easily be stolen by a terror group. The Tehran government is all bark and no bite, consider Iran has not invaded a country in almost a century. Consider that Israel and the US have consistently invaded countries. Who has the more credibility? Iran's youth is very pro-democratic and I wouldn't be surprised if anywhere from 10 - 20 years from now we see a revolution in Iran. Iran is simply not the same threat that North Korea is. What do I propose, just leave all alone, wait for a while and see what happens....

your closing line is one of the best, F.F. :wink: I see what you are getting at, but let me explain from my own experience when I visited Israel in 1996. By help of the Dutch, they are able to get even the desert furtile!!!! If the guys who are willing to lay down money to do evil (bombers) are willing to invest in the Palestian economy, wonders will happen. The US is easily gained for the Israeli's, because they have a lot of influence. Money and power are greatly mixed to the Democratic and Republican parties by the Jewish side in the US. That's a worldwide phenomenon.

True, because Jews are good with making and keeping money. Politicians are very attracted to money and power. Who says the Palestinians aren't willing to invest in their own economy? Even if they get it, they still need to trade resources or have some kind of involvement in the world market. Problem is that Palestinians won't have much of a nation to invest in. A nation cannot tax its way into prosperity, things don't work that way. I think the Dutch don't need to make the same mistakes the US has done. Don't get involved in that stuff, it will twist your government's policies.

I know, buddy, I know. Sometimes life is as simple as one and one......the Middle East never was easy. :cry:

It's a place us Western people's don't really understand. Indeed it is complex.