I realize this is not a directly foreign policy class-related post, unless you count the US’s notorious support of Israel or our recent book reading on the Middle East, but I found it interesting because of an article recently posted about the Chilean and Jordanian heads of state meeting.
Chilean President Michelle Bachelet said she and visiting King Abdullah II of Jordan agreed the Middle East should strive for “balance” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Bachelet said Chile and Jordan share a vision of “balance between the right the state of Israel has to exist within safe borders and the right of the Palestinians to a free and sovereign state.” (Agence France-Presse, 10/20/08)
The first thing that struck me was how was how common (aside from a few strong opinions) a “balance” is sought after between the Israelis and the Palestinians. While it’s a word that rolls easily off the tongue, it is such a hard thing to accomplish in reality.
That peaked my interest… looking at possible “balance.” I searched and found this:
[...] Israel vs. PalestineI realize this is not a directly foreign policy class-related post, unless you count the US’s notorious support of Israel or our recent book reading on the Middle East, but I found it interesting because of an article recently posted … [...]
But that’s not what they were talking about was it. How would the Israel Iran balance look?
Right… sorry, I should have clarified. The data I found on Israel’s military was a tangent from the original article. I had simply typed in “Israel Palestine balance” to see what would come up… this military inventory caught my attention first.
Maybe they shouldnt have fired rockets and started a fight with such a strong opponent. Im not looking to fight Mike Tyson or Bruce Lee are you? Here is some compact history for the ultra liberal morans who support the palistinians. The underdog isnt always the right team to cheer for.
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
thats morons (funny word to misspell) lol!