Anonymous wrote:It's is Israel's fault. They need to go back to per 67 borders.

Let me guess -- you didn't bother to read the article before chiming in with your opinion.

It's is Israel's fault. They need to go back to per 67 borders.

Anonymous wrote:Why do I need to choose a side? Can't I feel both that Hamas has committed horrible acts of violence AND that Israel's response has been disproportionate? And that they should both stop and come to the table to negotiate a lasting political compromise?

+1. Unless you choose one or the other, you will be labeled either someone who promotes child killing or annihilation of Gaza. There is no middle ground for most of the posters here who consistently favored annihilation of the other. Then you wonder why there is no viable solution to protect BOTH sides.

There's enough vitriolic language here (occasionally disguised as 'oh, but I want peace' but nuke 'em) that explains why and echos what is going on across the ocean.

Anonymous wrote:Why do I need to choose a side? Can't I feel both that Hamas has committed horrible acts of violence AND that Israel's response has been disproportionate? And that they should both stop and come to the table to negotiate a lasting political compromise?

+1

Why do I need to choose a side? Can't I feel both that Hamas has committed horrible acts of violence AND that Israel's response has been disproportionate? And that they should both stop and come to the table to negotiate a lasting political compromise?

I thought the above piece was very balanced. Thanks for sharing.

How about pro-peace? Stop killing, period.

However, there's no getting around the fact Gazans are sitting ducks in a bathtub. Israel controls two borders, air space, and water access (naval blockade since 2009). They even limit fishing. Egypt controls one border. There is nowhere for an ordinary Gazan to go.

Israel controls imports and exports. Gazans can't make money on any exports any more. The poverty rate has escalated. They turned to tunnels to get fuel and food in fromEgypt mostly, but those are being destroyed too by the Egyptian military.

So if Israel won't allow them to make a living (exports), control much access to food and goods, etc., and they can't leave to try to make a better life (or now to escape the shelling), they have to rely on Hamas for almost everything.

Israel contributes much to this problem. There are other ways to solve it than killing killing killing.

I've posted plenty of times that the British need to take a lot more responsibility in terms of blame (they redrew the entire ME post WW1 without any foresight).

That said, Pak and India is very good case study - while relations are not good, neither side denies the other's right to exist.

Yes the fight over kashmir and other tensions exist, the existential threat from one towards the other are relatively subsided.

Palestine and Israel could learn a lot from this as India could still hold a massive grudge from 'losing' all of the territory that is currently pakistan, but for the most part they are over it. (as an indian-american i would ideally like to see re-unification but it is a pipedream).

I don't have to choose a side. I think both peoples deserve a country.

Are you "pro-Israel" or "pro-Palestine"? It isn't even noon yet as I write this, and I've already been accused of being both.

These terms intrigue me because they directly speak to the doggedly tribal nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. You don't hear of too many other countries being universally spoken of this way. Why these two? Both Israelis and Palestinians are complex, with diverse histories and cultures, and two incredibly similar (if divisive) religions. To come down completely on the side of one or the other doesn't seem rational to me.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/post_8056_b_5602701.html

[ Edited to comply with copyright laws. ]