Monday, June 26, 2006

Today's Cartoon: Hamas Militants Tunnel into Israel / Nicole Kidman's Wedding

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinian territory is NEVER going to end until one side finally decides that they are NOT going to retaliate, no matter what. Of course, this is way easier said than done, which is perhaps what each side actually counts on the other believing, when they decide to launch an attack.

Both sides seem to rely upon the fact that each of their attacks will provoke an almost immediate response, which in their mind not only provides them with an opportunity to retaliate (against the "retaliation"), but it also then justifies their initial attack as well. It's like in boxing, where you have fighters that are willing to take a hit in order to give a (harder) hit; both the Israelis and the Palestinians seem willing to provoke a response from the each other so that they can then be given the "moral authority" to launch an even larger attack in response to that. Some people call this a "circle" of violence, but I see this more as a "downward spiral".

However, I believe I have the solution to not only this conflict, but to ALL conflicts in the world. Desperate times call for desperate measures, which I why propose that the United Nations find a country that it's citizens no longer want to be in (like Mexico), immediately relocate its population throughout the rest of the world and then designate that vacated nation as a permanent "war zone"; where (when diplomacy fails) ALL of the disputes of the world are settled through military means.

Think about it, there would be no more civilian casualties because the only people who would be in that country would be those who WANTED to be in that country; and those who would want to be in that country would be those who wanted to fight. There would only be one "war" at a time, so if more than two countries were in dispute and wanted to settle it on the battlefield, they would have to wait until the Israelis and the Palestinians had FINALLY settled their differences and gone back home... sometime around the year 2500.


Blogger MikeFitz said...

You are quite right, Kevin. The Israel v Palestine problem isn't going to be solved without some radical solution. Courage on the part of the political leaders is not enough; it exposes them to threats from extremists on their own side. (Yitzhak Rabin assassinated in 1995, Anwar Sadat assassinated in 1981)

Something slightly less radical than evacuating Mexico might be a solution proposed by Edward de Bono. I blogged about it at Edward de Bono on Israel v Palestine.

Summary of de Bono’s Lateral Thinking solution: Let each side vote in each other’s elections. Let Israelis vote in Palestinian elections and let Palestinians vote in Israeli elections. That way, only constructive people would get elected. Extremists on both sides wouldn’t stand a chance.

de Bono mentioned that he had not put this idea forward to any of the world's political leaders.

It's up to you and me, mate.

Cheers -- Mike

8:54 a.m.  
Blogger Kevin said...

Yeah, that's a MUCH better idea than evacuating Mexico and having them slug it out there :)

My fear is that the extremists have been running the show on both sides for far too long; and as a result I don't think that either side would fully trust the other to vote in their country's best interest.

If there are those who don't even recognize the existence of Israel, they would probably not recognize any Palestinian government that was actually voted in by the Israelis. And then you also have those who are willing to assassinate their OWN political leaders (Yitzhak Rabin) to prevent any serious attempts towards peace from being made.

Of course, this is all speculation because nothing like that has ever been attempted. I don't know if it would actually work, but it definitely gets people thinking in right direction.

It would certainly be interesting to see who each side would vote for.


1:00 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home