"A disappointed Gaza could not be reached for comment"

(title - hat tip -1970's Weekend Update)

--------
Michael Totten has a great post on the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, with a link to an AP summary of the story.

The Israeli/Palestinian conflict has become embedded in our cultural discourse, and is often held up, by the left and by the Arab/Muslim world, as a singular example of western "oppression". Here is my attempt at defining the two sides of the discussion.

For the pro-Palestinian crowd, primarily on the left, but with a healthy contingent of right-wing anti-Semitic groups and of course, most of the Islamic world, the simple analysis is:

Britain and the west took land from the Palestinians and gave it to Jews, creating hundreds of thousands (millions?) of refugees. Displacement, followed by occupation enforced by the US funded Israeli Army, are the central grievances of Palestinian supporters.

On the other hand....

The right, and supporters of Israel (even some on the left like Alan Dershowitz) blame the current and past problems primarily on Arab intransigence, and their reliance on terrorism and violence to acheive an unreachable goal - the elimination of the modern state of Israel.

Israel was created in 1948 to allow both Arabs and Jews to share the land. But at no point in the last 57 years was Israel allowed to live in peace. The Arab world has refused to improve the plight of the Palestinians in order to perpetuate the fight against Israel. Attempts at compromise, reasonable offers to settle land disputes, and peace treaties, all were rebuffed by Palestinian and Arab leaders.

So who is right? Are Arab Palestinians victims or aggressors?

The Jewish/Muslim question is vital to global stability, as important, in the long-term, as anything that is happening in Iraq or Afghanistan. Read Totten's post for some interesting background on the subject. (My thoughts in parentheses).

As always, there is a very informative point-counterpoint in the comments section on Totten's post. (As a side-show, the slug-fest between TallDave and The Commenter is classic blog warfare, not to be missed. Navajos, Bantu tribesman, George Washington all make an appearance.)

Siding with the Prosecution, we have comments from someone who calls himself "Crouton" (using a classic "victim" analogy)

"By massacring and stealing the land of the Native Americans, The English settlers placed themselves in clear and present moral danger by surrounding themselves with fanatics who want them dead.

I will never understand the insanity of you people. Up is down, down is up. Is your judgment so impaired that you can't see how morally corrupt the above statements are?

I give up.

I hope the air is pleasant on the planet you are on. I only wish that you could comprehend that these attitudes, born out of either stupidity or a basic lack of human decency - a lack of empathy for the millions of dispossessed Palestinians rotting unjustly in refuge camps, for decades - are the reason they hate us. "

(Not very civil, but to the point. And, very representative of the pro-Palestinian argument).

Commenter Kevin Peters responds:

"Rotting in refugee camps. You are right. Some of the longest lasting refugee camps in the history of the world. And just think, surrounded by arab neighbors who share their language and share their religion and many of their customs. And yet none of them took in their Palestinian brothers who they are so concerned about. In fact many of them make them carry special passports that only allow short stays or they do not allow them in at all. I wonder why. Maybe we should have copied that lovely middle east custom and kept the Cuban refugees in the prisons. "

For a more historical perspective, we have a summary of the "land" question in Palestine, and some reasons why the Jews are there in the first place.

From LibertyDad:

"Palestine had long been under the Ottoman's. Zionist Jews had begun emigrating there since the late 1890s, and were peacefully buying it. And making it more productive, thus more attractive to the economically less advanced non-Jews. Before WW I the Ottoman Turks controlled it, including deciding who owned what; afterwards the British the French controlled it, deciding who owned what, and trying to stop Jews from peacefully coming, while allowing more Arabs. Then WW II, including the fact that Hitler's Muslim Mufti of Jerusalem was calling for more Jew-hate murder.

Holocaust (Shoah), many survivors to Palestine, a two-state UN plan discussed, Arabs disagree, Jews declare independence. Israel/Jewish independence very similar to Burma's independence, or India's, except that a) the Jews wanted a Jewish state, and b) the Arabs around them, who did not control Palestine, nevertheless didn't want the Jews to, and c) Egypt and other Arabs attacked Israel while calling for Arabs in Israel to leave."

(In other words, the State of Israel, conceived through Zionism and supported in the early 20th century by Britain and diaspora Jews, had only become a reality because of the Holocaust. This is why Holocaust revisionism is so important to the anti-Israel crowd.)

And what are the origins of the Palestinian refugees?

"Today's Palestinians are those Arabs who followed the Jew-hating advice to leave, so as to allow more slaughter of Jews. And in the wars, the Jewish Israelis won; and won; and won. Arabs who didn't leave are doing fine as Israeli citizens."

(Palestinians originally left the area primarily on the advice of the leaders of the Arab world, who planned, in 1948, and in subsequent wars, to roll into Jerusalem and "drive the Jews into the sea". Didn't want to unnecessarily harm any Arabs in the process.

Things didn't work out as planned. Israel repelled every attack by the Arab world, each time keeping land won in these wars. To the victor goes the spoils...)

The future?

Again, LibertyDad,

"Gaza is soon to be Palestinian land; and Pali land only. The problems there, which are likely to be many, will be Pali problems. If the Palis can't create a peaceful society there, they won't deserve any more in the West Bank or Jerusalem. "

------

This will be the next question. Do the Palestinians take Gaza, embrace peace, and try to build a normal, modern society for their children? Or, does Hamas and al Fatah continue to rule the Palestinians in a culture of violence and anti-Semitism?

Will Palestinian leaders and the larger Arab world still want to "drive the Jews into the sea"?

At some point, hopefully in my lifetime, we will be able to see a productive, peaceful Palestinian state. Maybe, this week, we have seen the first real step in this direction.

(Well, maybe in my children's lifetimes.)