When will it end?

We read and hear about the conflict in Gaza with attacks and counter-attacks.  It becomes confusing wondering for what aggression the latest retaliation applies.  What we witness is the effect and few talk about the cause.  Until the cause is resolved, the conflict will continue.
The cause, simply put, is the illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.  There have been resolutions by various international bodies that call on Israel to withdraw, but she ignores the resolutions.  What is especially interesting in this round of assault is that Israel is warning the Palestinians to flee to avoid being hit.  The problem is that they have no place to go.  They are reluctant to leave their homes having learned a lesson from the past.  In 1948 they were told to flee and they did in mass.  Once the hostilities were ended, they were not permitted to return and their land was occupied.  
It is seen as a dilemma and it is, however there is a solution.  One way is to compel Israel to comply with resolutions is to cut off their financial support.  The US imposes sanctions on other countries in an effort to force them to comply.  Why not Israel?  The reason, in my view, is that no one has the courage to stand up to Israel.  Israel carries much weight in the US and it is viewed as political suicide.  I think that Obama is in the perfect position to take a stand since he cannot be re-elected, however he wouldn’t be able to carry out such a mission.  He can’t even get support for projects within America since the opposition wants him to fail.  If he attempted to do any thing against Israel, they would call him a Muslim.  The opposition has already spread that lie about him and with the mass support of Israel; he would be subject to impeachment.  Impeachment is just another tactic used by the opposition to hamper any progress he tries to make.  
I find it sad that Jews the world over are made to suffer for the militant acts of the Israeli government.  Some Jews have spoken out, but not enough.  We remember how the Germans were blamed for not speaking out when Hitler was in power.  The masses didn’t know what was happening and those who did, were afraid to speak out as it would mean their death.   The Jews who know what is happening will regret not having voiced their disapproval once the fighting is over and the casualties are counted.  

Working for a cease-fire is just a first step.  Unless that is followed by a solution, the cease-fire will just be a temporary interlude thus enabling the combatants to restock their supplies.

It is difficult to take a neutral stand.  Today with modern technology, more is known about world events.  That was not true in the past.  Trying to ascertain truth from propaganda is difficult.
We hear the statement:  “Israel has the right to defend itself”.  What about the right of the Palestinians to defend themselves?  With what?   Israel has an Army, a Navy, an Air Force and unlimited source of supply and re-supply.  The Palestinians have no Army, no Navy, no Air Force and few weapons with little, if any, means of supply.  It reeks of Genocide.   Palestinian children are in Israeli jails for throwing stones.  We read the Bible story how David slew the Giant with a sling-shot.  That technique isn’t working for the Palestinians.  In the past few days, we read where a few Israeli soldiers were killed.  When anyone puts on a uniform, they become a target.  I think that Secretary Kerry’s sarcastic remark: “So this is pin-point accuracy” when referencing Palestinian civilians being killed says much.  If pin-point accuracy is believed, does that mean that the killing of women and children is intended?   Yesterday, Netanjahu asked a reporter what reaction Americans would have if Canada or Mexico launched missiles into the US.  A Hypothetical example to be sure, however my question would be: “Why would they do that?”  
Action and reaction is to be expected.  Unless/until the cause of the problem is resolved and ENFORCED, any cease-fire is temporary.   It is time to speak out for justice.  It is time to find and enforce a solution.

Alass, wars are not rational.  They are emotional.  They are economic. 

I always wondered how there could be rules of war.  Wars kill innocent people.  Period.  No war, no killing of innocent people.

Gang wars kill innocent children.  No gang wars, no killing of innocent children.

Stop making and selling weapons and they will have to meet each other in hand to hand combat.  Stop the profit form weapons and war will come to a screeching halt. 

Share the world's resources of food, water, shelter and gainful employment.  The war will stop.

But no, killing each other off seems an easier bet. Eventually, those left will just be tired and end it and start up again when rested and angry again.

Abe, this conflict between Jews and Muslims stretch back centuries. I'm not totally on Israel's side because they haven't been pure and innocent throughout the decades since their country was reborn. However, I've been hearing some interesting things from intelligent people recently.

One, that democracy and freedom cannot be forced. We talk about spreading democracy to the Middle East, but when they get it, the people will elect those who share similar beliefs, which isn't Christianity. Look at Iraq. They freely elected a guy who was one sect of the Muslim religion and he started putting down people of the other sect and they struck back. So then Iran steps in and helps. So you have one set of terrorists battling another set of terrorists back by more terrorists. Trying to impose our beliefs, as one talk show host, is like trying to convert your cat to your belief system. When we had troops there, we kept the violence diminished, not completely gone, but diminished. We left and this is the result. It was same with Yugoslavia. When the Russians had control, no problems because the Ruskies quelled any uprising. They left and old hatreds resurfaced and they started killing each other.

One show host was explaining a bit about Hamas, that they were formed, in part, because a group of people didn't think the PLO was killing enough people. The Palestinians elected Hamas leaders, so as the guy quoted someone else, the Palestinians ARE Hamas, so this notion of 'we can't have civilian casualties' gets thrown out the window. You're right DK, wars kill civilians. But that's war. You are not going have an arena where just opposing sides can go and fight it out and the last man standing wins. War is hell and non-military people die.  

He also did a history of some of the Islam fanatics and traced some of their ideas back to Nazism. Some of these leaders learned at the feet of Nazis, so this guy calls them Islamo-Nazis. So not only do they have a hatred spanning back to before King David's time, they get even worse ideals and ideas from the Nazis.

Israel is just trying to survive when every country around them wants to eradicate them. Like I said, they're not altogether innocent when it comes to the proper treatment of people. But these other countries nitpick, a few casualties here, three Israeli children there. So, yes, Israel will strike back and strike back hard. I think a good analogy is if somebody kept shooting up your house and nobody stopped them, and you had the means to defend yourself, what would you do? Negotiate? Give up your backyard because you think they'll stop shooting? The treatment of your neighbors after a temporary cease fire might just be a little harsh.

Peace treaties mean squat. Ceding territory means squat. "Oh just give us this piece of land and we'll quit firing missiles." That lasts until Hamas or other terrorists finishes rearming, as you said.

I don't know what the answer is but treaties haven't worked. Not when you have Islamic fanatics with a deeply embedded, long held, continual hatred of Israel and the Jews.

I won't get into your views about Obama (although he has succeeded in doing what was feared he would, in many areas) but he, like every other predecessor, can't do anything about the situation. Reagan, both Bush's, Clinton, Carter, Johnson, none of them because it isn't as simple as peace treaties and cease-fires until we 'can work things out.' You can't work out deep seated hatred.

Israel hit back because of the three kids who were murdered. I'll bet if you asked, Hamas would say they killed the Israeli kids because Israel did something a week or two earlier that pissed them off, and Israel would say they only did it because Hamas did something two months earlier and so on.

It's a long and complicated story over there with both sides having right and wrong views. Muslims have battled Christians and Jews for centuries with each having right and wrong views. I don't know the answer. I don't think anybody does.

Well said, Sib.  If there was an easy solution, it would have already been found.  However, rule of law should apply to all parties and enforced.  It it the lack of enforcement, IMV, that is at the heart of the problem.  Resolutions, treaties, cease-fires, etc., mean nothing unless enforced.  Who is to enforce them?  It takes a netural body to do that and the only neutral entity is the UN.  Unfortunately UN Forces are usually a show of force with no authority.  They carry guns without authorization to use them.  There is no end in sight.

However, the neutral party would have to put up with resistance and 'potshots', as we did in Iraq and Britain did in India. Or, like I mentioned with Yugoslavia, the neutral party would have to be a dictator just killing any uprising. I don't think it would be possible to have a neutral party be neutral. I think politics would make that party lean one way or the other (maybe both ways on any given day). I think that party would be resisted or hated by both sides and constantly defending itself rather than the enemies of either side. The UN is pretty much of a joke with too many cooks who can't decide on what goes into the recipe in the first place and whatever they decides ruins the stew anyway.

Sib, I agree about the UN lacking power. 
The UN was established for a good reason and it has helped to prevent conflict, however politics, as you mentioned, plays too large a role.  Doing what is right is seldom the outcome.  When you one or more Super Powers that can veto any vote, the end result becomes political.  If votes of the entire body were accepted and enforced, a better result would ensue.

Then there are those who fear a "super world government."

I have always believed that a nation's history and culture dictate the type of government that serves them best.  We don't even have democracy - we try to push our ideal that we don't even have on countries with no appropriate history to implement it.  Sure, it's nice when people get to vote for their leaders.  However, when they are still living in a patriarchal society where the leader is the ultimate ruler based on their religious laws - well, some other form of government is needed besides democracy - they have no practice with democracy.

True, DK.  Forcing democracy on a country that doesn't understand what it means is stupid.  A recent example of this is America's effort to force democracy on Iraqi.
An effort to educate would be a good first step.

The following website I found to be very information for those wanting to know what caused the problems in Palestine and the continuance of hostilities.


 http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story725.html

Lots to read on this site.  I also found the reader's comments interesting.