There are certainly extremists on both sides of this debate and there are mothers and children on both sides. It would be equally awful to be an Israeli family living in fear of being bombed as it would be to live in Palestine under Hamas and face the retribution of Israel.

The problems of the Middle East are insurmountable and the flames of discontent and hate are fuelled not only by religion but by dispossession.

It would be difficult for the Jews to depart Israel just as it would be for the English to leave Northern Ireland or for Australia or America to hand back land to its indigenous people.

Regardless of the history and the injustice to the Palestinian people with the world advocating the settlement of Israel, Israel is here to stay.

The real question is whether there can ever be peace and some form of give and take on both sides to ensure that the citizens of Israel and of Palestine can live in harmony and peace if not with each other, by each other's side.

One solution would be to go back to the original UN resolution that madated definite Arab and Jewish states, one area for the Palestinians and one for the Israelis. Both states would have access to the sea (a port) and a share of arable land and water. After the Arab war in opposition to the formation of Israel, the Arab state was never realised. It is too late to talk about hindsight and indeed lack of foresight and while this solution would not be easy it is a possibility and one that would see a fairer distribution of land.

It would involve an agreement between the two nationalities, mass movement of people, a change in mindset and probably an element of force to ensure the extremist elements are hindered in resistance.

Is this solution or one like it any more unthinkable than the current situation.

Blimey! Some weirdo views popping up now.

Get back to basics and some facts. Was 6000 dead and wounded Palestinians (largely women and children) a reasonable response to 20 Israelis killed by rockets in the last 7 years?

Skip all the crap. Yes or No.

Stan1

If your talking purely numbers of course the answer is no. An astute reader in our local paper compared the attack by Israel to a similar scenario that of the English mounting missiles on Ireland after a spate of bombings by the IRA in London. Of course this did not happen and would have merely inflamed the situation.

Stan 1 ..

Blimey! Some weirdo views popping up now.

Get back to basics and some facts.

Is it acceptable to fire rockets, non stop for years at your neighbour trying to kill them ? (Just because they weren't successful at killing, they certainly were successful at terror weren't they?)

Skip all the crap. Yes or No

So you judge conflict by how many were killed when and under what circumstances, correct? So if Hamas had bigger rockets, like the ones they were starting to use and could kill more Israeli from a distance - would that be OK, would you then criticise them?

Skip all the crap. Yes or No?

Or would you then fall into the wierdo views catagory?

Skip all the crap. Yes or No?

Are you an apologist for terrorists?

Skip all the crap. Yes or No?

Jodi Darling,

As a person who speak arabic, and love follow the middle east (not just Israel and its mates ;-)), I am sorry to tell you, that until Muslim will keep killing other Muslim in the middle east the Jews and the Christen (who are almost eliminited in Iraq and are running away from Egypt);
why they should treat you better then them self. Every time a new group go to power, they start to exploite other groups. It is nothing against you (or Israel) personally.
the main problem that I can see, and I realy hope it will change, is the they always see what wrongs the other side did. They never try to understand where did they go wrong and how they influence the other side...their is a word for it, REPONSIBILITY !
Which they dont like to practice.

Sorry
Hope that help

I find the implied sexism of the piece interesting.

Mothers and children are the subject of concern.

Does that mean that every father in Gaza and the relevant parts os Israel supports either Hamas's or the Israeli actions?

Does that mean that far more women are opposed to the violence than men so the lives of men are less important or less deserving of sympathy than that of women?

If that's what's implied where is the evidence?

If it's not implied then why no mention of concern for the innocent men caught up in this conflict who also feel the pain of threat to themselves and their loved ones?

Is it a reflection of a lack of concern for the lives of innocent men caught up in a war not of their choosing or a play on the sexist attitudes about men still to prevelant in society.

R0bert