Sunday, May 23, 2004
One state solution for Israel and the Palestinians?
The operating assumption among most is that the best way forward in the intractable conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is a partition along the 1967 borders. The Oslo peace accords hewed close to this theory, and the recent "road map" to peace attempted much the same.
Partition, however, isn't the only way forward. Gadhafi is of the opinion that a one-state solution has a better chance of truly bringing peace to the region, and felt so strongly about it that he pulled out of the recent meeting of the Arab League because of their refusal to consider any one-state solution.
Gadhafi has a rather mixed track record on the road to peace. Up until a year ago, he was well on his way to building weapons of mass destruction, and has provided support to terrorist organizations in the past. His conversion, as it were, is likely more self-interested than selfless.
On the other hand, Gadhafi IS Arab AND nationalist, and his current track record would seem to indicate that he views peace as the best means to prosperity for his fellow Arabs. I found this outline regarding some proposals related to a one state solution, and to be honest, they seem quite reasonable. Whether or not they are feasible given the current hatred which exists between Israelis and Palestinians is an open question.
This site has a bunch of links relating to a one-state solution.
The operating assumption among most is that the best way forward in the intractable conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is a partition along the 1967 borders. The Oslo peace accords hewed close to this theory, and the recent "road map" to peace attempted much the same.
Partition, however, isn't the only way forward. Gadhafi is of the opinion that a one-state solution has a better chance of truly bringing peace to the region, and felt so strongly about it that he pulled out of the recent meeting of the Arab League because of their refusal to consider any one-state solution.
Gadhafi has a rather mixed track record on the road to peace. Up until a year ago, he was well on his way to building weapons of mass destruction, and has provided support to terrorist organizations in the past. His conversion, as it were, is likely more self-interested than selfless.
On the other hand, Gadhafi IS Arab AND nationalist, and his current track record would seem to indicate that he views peace as the best means to prosperity for his fellow Arabs. I found this outline regarding some proposals related to a one state solution, and to be honest, they seem quite reasonable. Whether or not they are feasible given the current hatred which exists between Israelis and Palestinians is an open question.
This site has a bunch of links relating to a one-state solution.
Let's go one better
California wants to ban teenagers from using tanning booths. I think that's cowardly. Teenagers clearly are a danger to themselves and others. To protect them (and others) from bad choices, I think we should encase them in large blocks of styrofoam until they are 18. In so doing, we'll ensure they only watch the RIGHT TV shows, eat GOOD food, DON'T have premarital sex, DON'T smoke, and don't say rude things to adults outside gas stations. It's the sensible thing to do.
Think of the children.
California wants to ban teenagers from using tanning booths. I think that's cowardly. Teenagers clearly are a danger to themselves and others. To protect them (and others) from bad choices, I think we should encase them in large blocks of styrofoam until they are 18. In so doing, we'll ensure they only watch the RIGHT TV shows, eat GOOD food, DON'T have premarital sex, DON'T smoke, and don't say rude things to adults outside gas stations. It's the sensible thing to do.
Think of the children.
Blah Blah Blah, more politics
Gas prices are high. Kerry says it's all Bush's fault, and its horrible, HORRIBLE that Americans have to pay so much for gasoline in these trying times. This ignores the fact that, adjusted for inflation, American gas prices are LOW by historical averages. That doesn't mean that Americans might not feel like they are spending more, partly because low gas prices have enabled so many Americans to buy HUGE cars that suck gasoline like it was a Super Big Gulp with the top taken off.
High gas prices have NOTHING to do with oil diverted to the strategic oil reserve (the Republicans are right on this). The real reason is that Asia's fast growing economies (particularly China) are facing exploding demand for oil, and that's putting pressure on oil prices. Should we stop trading with China in order that we can pay less when filling up our SUV?
Kerry also wants us to put pressure on the Saudis to pump out more oil. That's a VERY strange thing to ask, given that Kerry is, at least in theory, an environmentalist. It also seems a strange way to REDUCE DEPENDENCE ON MIDDLE EASTERN OIL (something Kerry claimed to want in his radio show).
Of course, Bush doesn't say anything more sensible on the issue of gasoline.
As an aside, we have two choices for any political office, and we've had only two choices for the past 100 years. For whatever reason, we can't seem to see the way straight towards changing a system that lets a mere two parties have such a lock on political power. I gagged when presented with Bush or Gore in the last election (both unpalatable, in my opinion). I'm gagging a bit less this time around, but I'm a bit tired of watching Kerry play the demagogue in his war of attrition with Bush.
Gas prices are high. Kerry says it's all Bush's fault, and its horrible, HORRIBLE that Americans have to pay so much for gasoline in these trying times. This ignores the fact that, adjusted for inflation, American gas prices are LOW by historical averages. That doesn't mean that Americans might not feel like they are spending more, partly because low gas prices have enabled so many Americans to buy HUGE cars that suck gasoline like it was a Super Big Gulp with the top taken off.
High gas prices have NOTHING to do with oil diverted to the strategic oil reserve (the Republicans are right on this). The real reason is that Asia's fast growing economies (particularly China) are facing exploding demand for oil, and that's putting pressure on oil prices. Should we stop trading with China in order that we can pay less when filling up our SUV?
Kerry also wants us to put pressure on the Saudis to pump out more oil. That's a VERY strange thing to ask, given that Kerry is, at least in theory, an environmentalist. It also seems a strange way to REDUCE DEPENDENCE ON MIDDLE EASTERN OIL (something Kerry claimed to want in his radio show).
Of course, Bush doesn't say anything more sensible on the issue of gasoline.
As an aside, we have two choices for any political office, and we've had only two choices for the past 100 years. For whatever reason, we can't seem to see the way straight towards changing a system that lets a mere two parties have such a lock on political power. I gagged when presented with Bush or Gore in the last election (both unpalatable, in my opinion). I'm gagging a bit less this time around, but I'm a bit tired of watching Kerry play the demagogue in his war of attrition with Bush.
