posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:45 AM
reply to post by MrXYZ
It may also be instructive to look at it in a more historical basis, with less parallels to the current situation.
The native americans effectively dominated the continent prior to the arrival of the various europeans, then over time, the euopeans started to spread
and take over increasing amounts of territory previously held by the indians, induced various controls, shuttered them in certain areas, and generally
acted in a somewhat-comparable fashion.
What happened? We had ongoing hostilities with the indians up through the 1890s, about 120 years after we recognized this (parts of it, anyway) as
our land and declared the founding of the US.
Were the native americans terrorists? No, they were defending they and theirs. Were they happy with what we had done? Of course not. Did they
react violently? Sometimes yes, for fairly obvious reasons. We were taking their land and property and attacking their societies and cultures,
resources, and so forth.
It's simply common sense that when you come in and start taking over peoples' previously-held land, treat them unequally and control/limit them, and
have ongoing hostilities with them, things get unpleasant and there's resentment on all sides. It happened here, and just looking at the historical
comparison, there could easily be another 60 years of hostilities in Israel, with a possible result (barring changes) being the decimation of 95% of
the 'indigenous' palestinian population with those remaining effectively being shuttered in reservations and otherwise acclimated - to their
cultural loss - into Israeli society.
And to those who say they should just leave and go to other 'arab' nations - would it have been right for us to just say the indians should have
just sucked it up and left 'america'?
Just some things to think about.