Well, Clay...I am disappointed -- but not surprised -- that you skipped D-Day altogether.

Not enough hyphenated-Americans on the beaches that day, I guess...they were just plain ole Americans [and our allies, of course].

You present a pro-Hamas drawing instead.

But that's probably just me...as the usual suspects here will make clear with their little votes.

That is a person in the cartoon, not a political movement and why shouldn't one speak up for the Palestinians? Are you saying that it's OK for a radical movement to invade a country? and, when the people defend their homes, they are labeled terrorists, herded into a little strip of land with a cage over it...that's OK with you? What could possibly justify the atrocities that the Zionists are inflicting upon the Palestinian people.

If you believe there will be peace in Israel I've got some beachfront property for sale on Lookout Mtn.

Those living in the Palestinian Area outside Israel are still alive, aren't they? Peaceful, unarmed non-Israelis are allowed to stroll through Israel and live, aren't they? The same is not true for Israelis outside their own border...not even within their border. The terrorists sponsored by Hamas kill them on a regular basis.

All the Israelis want is to be left alone and secure...and they have teeth and the guts to use them [unlike us]. The rest of the Arab world wants them dead and will stop at nothing [including nukes] to accomplish that.

The figure in the drawing DOES represent Hamas, intentionally or not, as well as other such groups. Hamas IS the elected representative of those living in the Palestinian Area [other than Israel].

BTW, that wasn't Israelis dancing and celebrating in the streets on September 11th, amazonmuze.

According to the Global-Warmers, EaTn, you might have that beach after all. Hold onto it for a while...

This one "really" showed your "true colors"....

rolando,

I respectfully disagree.

First: I don't think Clay has to do a D-Day cartoon. Clay's strength is to look at issues of injustice.

D-Day was a heroic event and there were issues of justice that surrounded it. But a cartoon on it would have been commemorative. Google excels at those kinds of images.

I think Clay should play to his strengths.

Second: I don't think just because you oppose new settlements in the west bank doesn't mean you are pro-Hamas. Afterall, just because I agree with you sometimes, this doesn't make me a conservative. It means we have common ground.

In my estimation, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict goes beyond the settlements. But stopping new settlements is essential in the road to peace.

Afterall, how would you feel if you woke up one morning and found that your neighbor had put a new driveway to his house through part of your yard that you weren't using? Then he put a fence around it? I think your relations with your neighbor would be contintious until the issue was resolved.

Remember the Memorial Day 'toon, moonpie? No injustice there, either. But a 'toon was produced...and a good one.

Those men on those beaches and dropping from the sky literally saved the world. We would assuredly speak German with a Nazi accent today if they hadn't been there.

Basically, since 1967 the Israelis have been literally fighting for THEIR existence. There is no Palestine as such...it is NOT a country but historically an area that includes Israel itself. So Israel has just as much right to the "common ground" as those who live around them and who want to seize the land. The 1967 war was brilliantly fought and Israel won that ground by right of conquest...and kept it as a buffer between the Muslims around them and themselves.

I used Hamas as a symbol in my post...a symbol of all those who would force the Jews into the sea or worse through acts of terrorism. Israel was a desert when the Jews arrived after the war, it was much like the land Clay depicts. Google Israel and examine the satellite photos -- where it is green today is Israel, the brown is where the "Palestinians" live and have lived as long as the Jews or longer.

I didn't mean to imply Clay was pro-Palestinian or pro-terrorist; I see him as an humanitarian. But I believe that taking one's country [wealth] and giving [redistributing] it to another who did not earn it may be humanitarian but it reduces all to the lowest common denominator. It does NOT uplift the lowest.

The conflict is indeed beyond the settlements; it is beyond Palestine. It is basically a religious war and includes essentially all of the Muslim countries in the area [with few exceptions] ganged up on Israel. None want Israel to exist; the Muslims have a holy war against the Jews...and everyone else, actually. It is in their Koran.

If we are not very careful, Israel will use its nukes to stop Iran if that is the only way it has to survive. They are serious.

In any case, moonpie, I agree with you...Israel has no business building anything there; it should be a de-militarized buffer zone...but neither does it belong to the "Palestinians". The land is under contention.

First, as they might say, since I am neither Israeli nor Palestinian, I don't actually 'have a dog in that fight'. And yet, I can understand how the 'latter' might be envious (even to the point of)feeling like the proverbial "red-headed step-child" since the world, led by the then-American hierarchy, helped Israel in 1948 realize that which the Lord had been promising them for several millenniums.
Of course, we know little of how God wished the Arabic people to be dealt with, but we have much evidence to conclude that the Israelis were as much their own enemies as any other occupier of the region throughout history.
I think (and of course this only my opinion) the Israelis should be giving the Palestinians the same sort of benefit of the doubt, today, as the Americans gave them, nearly 61 years ago.
Just think W.W.J.D. if nothing else.
Thank you for your time attention,
Woody

I have been trying to catch up with all you smart people.

I agree with Rolando up to a point. (I hope he recovers from the shock!)

The Israelis did make their portion green and viable.

Back, many years ago after WWII, an organization of secular consistancy, sought to foster education, welfare, and other advantages. Evan Israel and other Arabian entities aided the effort and supported the group, as did other nations.

Slowly, over the years, the religious zealots took over citing forged documents. It became entirely militant and in 1987 things really began to get hot. The Arabs and other nations began to withdraw their support as this happened.

I also agree that the Palastinians have a right to the area not occupied by the Israelis. I think Hamas is just eager to take over what the Israelis produced, instead of working to better their own condition. This was caused by individuals in Hamas. The "common man" in Palastine, is always caught by the circumstances foisted off on them by this "leadership",

I also think that the Israelis should keep their hands off the land outside of the area of the designated portion assigned to them after WWII.

As a side note, I remember sitting next to an Israeli woman about 50+ years ago in an airplane, who stated that
they never had trouble with the Arabs and relations were friendly until the British interfered, somehow.

If my information is in error, I welcome correction. I know this is incomplete.

Woody, What is W.W.J.D.?

O.K. guys, Bush I, Clinton, bush II and Obama have all asked Israel to stop Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Somehow, in my mind;s eye, I see all those militarily protected developments as a sort of, well, giant "finger" aimed at the USA.

At the end of WW II the western powers(read the US and England) created Israel on land that was not theirs to give.The Palestinians never agreed to give give up part of their territory;it was taken from them.We could have given them Wales;we could have given them Mississippi,but Palestine wasn't ours to give.We invoked the Might Makes Right doctrine and have created 60 years of hatred and bloodshed.This is a perfect example of government intervention with unintended consequences.

No one can or should deny that Israel has made the desert bloom and contributed much in many fields of endeavor,but with 20/20 hindsight the world would have been better off by absorbing Jewish refugees throughout the countries of the world rather than forcing the partition of Trans-Jordan.

The cost of our decision in 1948 has been staggering,not only in dollars and bloodshed,but in damage to the US reputation as a fair and honest broker.But what is done is done.We and Israel must move forward and sort things out as best we can.

In the long term it now looks as though the US will continue to weaken economically and,by extension,militarily.That is by no means assured,but it looks likely.If so, Israel may be looking toward a future without the US umbrella,and that would change everything.Their Arab neighbors see history in terms of centuries,not years or decades.Israel is Less than 5 million people in a sea of Arab humanity.I would put Israel's chances of surviving into the 22nd century at less than 50/50.

Miss Clara, I'll be glad to remind you and anyone else who may have forgotten that 'trendy' little ditty (W.W.J.D.)from a decade or so ago.
It was "What Would Jesus Do?" It was all the 'rage' back then.
Maybe it's time we revived it and put it to good use, once again.
Thank you for your time and attention,
Woody

"No two historians ever agree on what happened, and the damn thing is they both think they're telling the truth." Harry S. Truman.

Here is an interesting, seemingly objective short history of the area in question.

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.h...

I personally dont think that the new settlement area is going to make a difference. They will still fight and kill one another. Its not going to change anything except change the area of a war zone. They dislike each other and lots of countries want to wipe Iseral off the map. A new place to call home will not change that and anyone who thinks different is delirious. Its been this way for a long time and its not going to change unless peoples hearts change and I dont see that happening anytime soon despite what Obama thinks he can do.

It's so painfully hard, Woody.

I am not superstitious, and I do not believe the world is any more "fallen" today than yesterday. Full of folly and hate and hurt, yes. But all things considered, I am with Cabell on the world:

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds; and the pessimist fears this is true."

That said, I will second you Woody in sharing the very mortal desire that some sort of Peace that Passeth Understanding could cover the Middle East and heal it.

Christ--both his mortal and mythic parts--was too good for any of us, whether we are here in East Tennessee or there in the Levant. But still we try. Still we try.

Whenever they have gone off on church-building missions, I have often commented to my dear sweet brother and a cousin how, as a student of history, I really do not find that "a little more God" is what the Middle East needs.

Of course, my irony was supportive. Gods that have been "too little" _have_ been the problem, and the impoverished and destructive vision of gods and prophets that we still project on to that landscape goes on and on.

It is not about "the Past." It is about the fanaticism of those living in the Present, and the hate and the hurt are justified by their different dreams of what "the Past" means.

You're right, Snooksie; they have been at each others' throats for millennia. They are not about to change now, no matter what.

InspectorBucket -- Good points; good post. Thanx.

Rolando,

I went to the site and found it informative, but I'll have to go back and find where I left off. It was loooong!

Inspector Bucket, I agree that it would be nice if people would forget the past and deal with NOW!

But, I find that hard to do. I can forgive but not forget and am forever wary. Perhaps nations feel that way, too.

I can only hope.

"Protect Israel at all costs," and the "Palestinians have a right to be there" as well.

Good luck with that one.

I would be in favor of giving Isreal the Republican State of Florida. They would make great US citizens. That idea has as much chance of sucess as well they both need to have a country.

aae1049, Cool! There used to be a large contingent of probable relatives down there, somewhere.C:-) NICE people, mostly! Always a bad egg somewhere! But then, they probably refugeed somewhere else after the Cuban boats landed. I haven't been in touch for many years.

Hey! That's some mix. Resentful Seminoles, escaped Cubans,
Republicans, displaced Israelites, Indian/Pakastani innkeepers, retirees, and hurricanes. Anything else?

Oh, YES! Politicians and Spring Breaks!? Oh and decimated reefs.

Don't forget the incompetent hanging-chad voters! And their Supreme Court!

There it is..must be mass hypnosis or just a good propaganda machine at work..i am talking about the total disregard for what i've said: the fact that Palestine was invaded and the world looked the other way, just like you're doing right now..what part of Zionist Invasion is not visible to you..? the Palestinian people live ina cage provided by their captors; all i ask is that you think about what you would do to defend your homeland; how would you feel?..nothing more complicated than that..no hidden meanings or agenda..look at it for what it really is..the zionist's dream for a homeland is not a pretty picture and the spin that's been put on it over time, through every media possible, is coming apart; we are seeing the true terrorists (with all tha nuclear/bacterial/viral/toxic chemical arsenals) and the backing of our government; If you were the vanquished, wouldn't you be happy to see a blow to your captors' supporter?