Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Tom Jones wrote:Sorry Melika but I don’t agree!!

Let’s leave the heritage and history issues aside, and talk present day realities!!

As you know, the Gulf does not totally belong to Iran!! The Gulf legally belongs, in part, to all the countries that have shorelines on it. Each country’s territorial waters (for up to 12 nautical miles) is considered part of the sovereign territory of that country. The rest is international waters!!

So don’t you think that the name of the Gulf should be agreed upon jointly by Iran, Iraq and the Gulf States because they all own it!!!

Never heard so much crap in my life. One thing Jones...know your history! Rookie!

RobbyG wrote:

Tom Jones wrote:Sorry Melika but I don’t agree!!

Let’s leave the heritage and history issues aside, and talk present day realities!!

As you know, the Gulf does not totally belong to Iran!! The Gulf legally belongs, in part, to all the countries that have shorelines on it. Each country’s territorial waters (for up to 12 nautical miles) is considered part of the sovereign territory of that country. The rest is international waters!!

So don’t you think that the name of the Gulf should be agreed upon jointly by Iran, Iraq and the Gulf States because they all own it!!!

Never heard so much crap in my life. One thing Jones...know your history! Rookie!

Second that!

So cause Indian Ocean does not belong to India we should change the name to "Tom Jones Ocean"!

melika969 wrote:

Bomb the crap out of it [Iran] before those religious lunatics send us some warheads this way

No No No NO!!!
I hate war!

But but but...

"All I Wanna Say Is That..., They [Nutters] Don't Really Care About Us !!!" [Michael Jackson R.I.P.)

Should we wait and collect warheads?

I just wonder with all the sunctions being put to iran rigth now with all this nuclear talks, the persian gulf will surely become history and lose its name to arabian gulf...

its just WATER ppl.

rudeboy wrote:its just WATER ppl.

With a historic nomenclature...

It has always been the Persian Gulf, or as we say Khalije Fars
&
It has always been the Arabian Peninsula, as we say Al Jazira Al Arabiya

Changing the historical name of the gulf takes a lot of time & efforts, and it's way too far for our Arabian brothers to do so.
Persia as an empire really owned this historical name!
In addition to the main cities along the Iranian coastline, the Persians also established couple of important cities along the coasts of Oman (Sohar) with a great fort called Rostaq that is still existing! Also along Eastern region of Saudi Arabia, and even inside the desert of UAE (Al Ain). A lot of the terms regarding fishing & pearl diving used in the GCC culture is actually based on Persian heritage/culture. Sadly, a lot of people dont know these facts for that such information are being neglected & ignored on purpose to hide any Persian traces in this region. Mission accomplished, by nationalist Arabs who try to brain-wash people with a misleading version of history.

On the other hand, nationalist Iranians are being ridicilous when they claim that Bahrain is part of Iran, and try to convince Iranian people that Bahrain must re-unite with Iran again. That's just as bad as how Arabs offend the Iranians by trying to change the Persian Gulf name.

Would there ever be any wise leadership to guide their nations properly with RESPECT?

RobbyG wrote:

Tom Jones wrote:Sorry Melika but I don’t agree!!

Let’s leave the heritage and history issues aside, and talk present day realities!!

As you know, the Gulf does not totally belong to Iran!! The Gulf legally belongs, in part, to all the countries that have shorelines on it. Each country’s territorial waters (for up to 12 nautical miles) is considered part of the sovereign territory of that country. The rest is international waters!!

So don’t you think that the name of the Gulf should be agreed upon jointly by Iran, Iraq and the Gulf States because they all own it!!!

Never heard so much crap in my life. One thing Jones...know your history! Rookie!

What’s the matter with you Robby?

Are you that thickheaded to know that history cannot not change the present?

All you seem to know how to say, like a broken record, is “know your history!”

I honestly don’t give a damn about history, and about who was powerful and who owned what or who named what? I read history and enjoy learning about what happened in the past, but all that will not change the realities of today.

You can live in the past if you want, but we don’t. We live in the present, and we have to deal with today’s realities not with some irrelevant historical stories!

The Arabs used to refer to Israel as Palestine, and they used to blackout the name “Israel” from all the world maps in their school textbooks, but now they don’t. Why? Because they are beginning to accept today’s reality that Israel will not go away.

Iran needs to come to the reality that it is no longer an empire. It has to make peace with its neighbors for its own good, and if that means tolerating the fact that the Arabs call the Persian Gulf the Arabian Gulf, so what!!! The Iranians can continue to call it the Persian Gulf, but they cannot force the Arabs to call it as such.

And, truthfully, the whole thing looks to me as utterly unimportant and petty in the first place.

Oh…and by the way, Melika, for your info, the Indian Ocean was not named by the Indians but by the early sea traders, and the part of it that borders the Arabian Peninsula is called the Arabian Sea. But most importantly, the name was never in dispute as in the case with the Persian Gulf.

All I’m saying is: if there is a such dispute, and in order to have peace and good neighborly relations between all the parties, they either have to find a resolution to the dispute, or simply not to make it a dispute (i.e., by not making a big deal out of it!!!)

Pure a simple!!

Tom Jones wrote:

RobbyG wrote:

Tom Jones wrote:Sorry Melika but I don’t agree!!

Let’s leave the heritage and history issues aside, and talk present day realities!!

As you know, the Gulf does not totally belong to Iran!! The Gulf legally belongs, in part, to all the countries that have shorelines on it. Each country’s territorial waters (for up to 12 nautical miles) is considered part of the sovereign territory of that country. The rest is international waters!!

So don’t you think that the name of the Gulf should be agreed upon jointly by Iran, Iraq and the Gulf States because they all own it!!!

Never heard so much crap in my life. One thing Jones...know your history! Rookie!

I honestly don’t give a damn about history, ...

Pure a simple!!

That was obvious.
If you really knew what influence Ancient Persia had in the region, you would have responded with more respect towards historical perspectives.

Just because the Arabs have a bit of Western support now, doesn't mean that Persian history is suddenly wiped out! From an historic perspective, the oil-powered Arabs are just opening their eyes in the region!

Perspective mate. Keep some historical perspective.

You tell him RobbyG!

Just an observation - the Arabs can't complain too much, there is after all the 'Arabian Sea' and the 'Gulf of Oman'.

Even oil in the region was first exploited in Iran (by what became British Petroleum) and for much of the last century Iran was 'our strong guy' in the region. Then there was no question about the Persian Gulf changing its name. But then again, our American friends aren't interested in ancient history!

It's a bit like Bush and his pals accusing the Iranians of being uncivilised (in the historical sense) - the irony is staggering coming from a nation that's a mere few centuries old. But I guess that too would be lost on some of our friends here.

Cheers,
Shafique

TJ,

As I said if you are igonrant about nationalism and history, keep it to your own and don't preach persians about it!

Indian Ocean was a joke, sorry if u didnt get it!

BFD.

I don't know any Western who calls it the 'Arabian Gulf". It is the "Persian Gulf" - Khalas. How do you write Khalas in "persian' (ehr, Farsi).

hehe, That would be "Paayaan" in persian!

melika969 wrote:hehe, That would be "Paayaan" in persian!

Thanks and Paayaan to you too then!

Considering Iran needs all the friends it can, isn't this just winding up other arab nations?

If adhminejad, had just concentrated on jobs for the people and signed the oil/nuke fuel deals with russia (so they get to annoy USA but not the world) they would be sitting pretty now.

Roadtester wrote:Considering Iran needs all the friends it can, isn't this just winding up other arab nations?

If adhminejad, had just concentrated on jobs for the people and signed the oil/nuke fuel deals with russia (so they get to annoy USA but not the world) they would be sitting pretty now.

What do you mean? Everyone loves Iran. It has more friends than any other country in the world. I heard His Excellency President Admahdinejad say it

melika969 wrote:TJ,

As I said if you are igonrant about nationalism and history, keep it to your own and don't preach persians about it!

Indian Ocean was a joke, sorry if u didnt get it!

No Melika, I am not ignorant about nationalism and history, I know all about it, much more than you think.…..

You can sit and talk all day about nationalism, history, heritage….and how great you were hundreds or thousands of years ago.....…….but then what???

Tell me something. How is all that talk about your great past going to solve your problems of today??

And not just you dear. The Arabs and Moslems also do the same thing every day.

We need to concentrate on the present and the build the future, not daydream about how great we once were!

As to the name of the Gulf, you can call it anything you want as far as I am concerned, but to try to force your neighbors to call it the same thing, and to threaten them by banning their airlines from coming to Iran, is a bit ridiculous.

My point is: The Arabs have been calling it “The Arabian Gulf,” for at least 50 years (correct me if I’m wrong), and they are not about to change. Either live with it (as you have been doing until last week), or sit down with the Arabs to find a resolution to this dispute, or take inflammatory measures that will create more problems for Iran and the region, which, as we all know too well, is the last thing Iran needs at this time!!!

Roadtester wrote:Considering Iran needs all the friends it can, isn't this just winding up other arab nations?

If adhminejad, had just concentrated on jobs for the people and signed the oil/nuke fuel deals with russia (so they get to annoy USA but not the world) they would be sitting pretty now.

You can't blame the Iranians for showing a bit of nationalism. Its only sad that its leadership is binding support for their cause over this. But hey, history won't change, regimes do.

First, what on earth do u know about What Iran need in this time?!!

Second, defending our heritage and history is not daydreaming! Future will be built on the past history’s infrastructure!

Third, Arabs can call it anything, important is their naming is not acceptable anywhere but in their Arab world!

Fourth, we never LIVED with their calling it Arabian Gulf, you just were not aware of our objections.

End of.

melika969 wrote:First, what on earth do u know about What Iran need in this time?!!

Second, defending our heritage and history is not daydreaming! Future will be built on the past history’s infrastructure!

Third, Arabs can call it anything, important is their naming is not acceptable anywhere but in their Arab world!

Fourth, we never LIVED with their calling it Arabian Gulf, you just were not aware of our objections.

End of.

I learned about I ran and what it needs from you, on this forum!!!!

Well, it appears your government’s latest move has actually worked. You’re supporting it now!!!

(I’m just teasing you!!! Mel…. !)


I’m tired of talking about the Gulf, let’s put an end to it!!

Perhaps they should be more concerned with their "Palestine" instead of trying to offend a whole nation by manipulating their heritage & history.

I always make it clear to everyone .. If Arabs calling it "Arabian Gulf", let it be so ..
But on the other hand, I'm calling it "The Jewish State of Israel" instead of "Palestine", and I live to see the Israeli flag rise upon it's embassay here! And let Israel expand towards Jordan, Syria, and Egyption desert! Let them continue on manipulating the natives history & heritage and let the Arabs live with it

If it's taking them too long (60 years) to free their so called "occupied lands" & the continous humilation, then let the Arab politicians live with the fact of ISRAELI's existance and I request from all the world not to give any sympathy to the spoiled Arabs who wants to claim something that they dont own.

No more double standards, welcome to reality.

symmetric wrote:Perhaps they should be more concerned with their "Palestine" instead of trying to offend a whole nation by manipulating their heritage & history.

I always make it clear to everyone .. If Arabs calling it "Arabian Gulf", let it be so ..
But on the other hand, I'm calling it "The Jewish State of Israel" instead of "Palestine", and I live to see the Israeli flag rise upon it's embassay here! And let Israel expand towards Jordan, Syria, and Egyption desert! Let them continue on manipulating the natives history & heritage and let the Arabs live with it

If it's taking them too long (60 years) to free their so called "occupied lands" & the continous humilation, then let the Arab politicians live with the fact of ISRAELI's existance and I request from all the world not to give any sympathy to the spoiled Arabs who wants to claim something that they dont own.

No more double standards, welcome to reality.

Good argument.

symmetric wrote:Perhaps they should be more concerned with their "Palestine" instead of trying to offend a whole nation by manipulating their heritage & history.

I always make it clear to everyone .. If Arabs calling it "Arabian Gulf", let it be so ..
But on the other hand, I'm calling it "The Jewish State of Israel" instead of "Palestine", and I live to see the Israeli flag rise upon it's embassay here! And let Israel expand towards Jordan, Syria, and Egyption desert! Let them continue on manipulating the natives history & heritage and let the Arabs live with it

If it's taking them too long (60 years) to free their so called "occupied lands" & the continous humilation, then let the Arab politicians live with the fact of ISRAELI's existance and I request from all the world not to give any sympathy to the spoiled Arabs who wants to claim something that they dont own.

No more double standards, welcome to reality.

I totally agree.

The Arabs should stop “daydreaming” about “liberating” all of Palestine.

It seems every time the Arabs go to war against Israel, they sadly lose more land.

If they make peace with Israel, the Middle East will be a better place, and both Israel and the Arabs will benefit from mutual economic trade, and from having more money allocated to development instead of military spending!!

I’m not saying the Palestinian plight is not just, but whether we like it or not, the realities of today say Israel is more powerful than the Arabs, and is here to stay.

Eventually, the Arabs will have no choice but to accept this reality, and deal it. But the sooner they do that, the better!!

TJ - you may be surprised to hear that the Arabs have indeed adopted the course of action you have outlined - they have indeed offered Israel peace, recognised it as a state within the expanded borders it won in 1948 (going from 55% of the land to 78% of the land, with Palestine dropping from 45% to 22% of the combined land allocated to Israel and Palestine by the UN).

It offered all this in 2002 in the 'Arab Peace Intiative' which is still the basis of all peace plans.

Israel is very good at spinning a story and the current fallacies are that it is the Palestinians who are not talking peace (when in fact it is the Israelis that are continuing to build on the 22% of the land they captured in 1967 - illegally according to all legal judgements), and another example of blatant lying was the myth they put out that Hamas were the ones who broke the truce in 2008 (when it was actually Israel who broke it on the day the US went to vote).

In the thread - Palestine- Push for Independence, you will see that the Palestinians are trying to make a diplomatic breakthrough by declaring independence for the 22% of the land that the world does not recognise as being part of Israel. In my discussions there with FD, I summarised the issues discussed by stating the following facts:

1. Israel has made no concessions in the peace negotiations - it has been all the Palestinians
2. Israel broke the truce and lied about why it was bombing Gaza and killing civilians (by saying Hamas broke the truce)
3. Israel have 78% of the land and Palestinians are settling for 22% - but Israel is reluctant to settle for this and seems to want more - specfically building more illegal colonies in the 22% that is not Israel.
4. Israel is unequivocably breaking international law in East Jerusalem by annexing it.
5. B'tselem say Israel in East Jerusalem is discriminating against the non-Israeli residents.

(Sorry, now you can go back to the Persian/Arabian Gulf debate - I've nothing more to add on that topic)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:TJ - you may be surprised to hear that the Arabs have indeed adopted the course of action you have outlined - they have indeed offered Israel peace, recognised it as a state within the expanded borders it won in 1948 (going from 55% of the land to 78% of the land, with Palestine dropping from 45% to 22% of the combined land allocated to Israel and Palestine by the UN).

It offered all this in 2002 in the 'Arab Peace Intiative' which is still the basis of all peace plans.

Israel is very good at spinning a story and the current fallacies are that it is the Palestinians who are not talking peace (when in fact it is the Israelis that are continuing to build on the 22% of the land they captured in 1967 - illegally according to all legal judgements), and another example of blatant lying was the myth they put out that Hamas were the ones who broke the truce in 2008 (when it was actually Israel who broke it on the day the US went to vote).

In the thread - Palestine- Push for Independence, you will see that the Palestinians are trying to make a diplomatic breakthrough by declaring independence for the 22% of the land that the world does not recognise as being part of Israel. In my discussions there with FD, I summarised the issues discussed by stating the following facts:

1. Israel has made no concessions in the peace negotiations - it has been all the Palestinians
2. Israel broke the truce and lied about why it was bombing Gaza and killing civilians (by saying Hamas broke the truce)
3. Israel have 78% of the land and Palestinians are settling for 22% - but Israel is reluctant to settle for this and seems to want more - specfically building more illegal colonies in the 22% that is not Israel.
4. Israel is unequivocably breaking international law in East Jerusalem by annexing it.
5. B'tselem say Israel in East Jerusalem is discriminating against the non-Israeli residents.

(Sorry, now you can go back to the Persian/Arabian Gulf debate - I've nothing more to add on that topic)

Cheers,
Shafique

Personally, I dislike Israel not because of it's conflict with Palestineans only, but for their sick mentality and thoughts which is not different than the mentality of the nationalist Arabs by the way.

Nationalist Arabs caused themselves all this mess and they deserve all this humilation. They tortured and humilated other people of different ethnicity in the region (like the Kurds) for nothing just to Arabize some land that they DONT OWN. People already got Arabised and changed eventually be it by force or choice, it just happened.

And now history is repeating itself, as we see a bunch of intruders (non-native jews) who think they are the chosen nation are Jewnizing or Israelinizing the Levant region by killing, humilating, stealing, and kicking out the Arabs from their land. Why do Arabs seek sympathy? Why did they believe and support their nationalist leaders? It's even .. 1/1.

You really think Iraq (atleast N.Iraq) is of Arabian backgrounds? Or even Lebanon and Syria? Let alone North Africa region. How different can the Palestinans be from the native Assyrians of Iraq, or Kurds of Kurdistan region, or Pheonicians of Lebanon, or Amazighs of North Africa?

Zionists = Nationalist Arabs
Same filth

Despite that Arabs are so weak now, yet they still got some nerve to offend a neighbouring nation by trying to change a historical name, the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Gulf. Untill people learn from their mistakes, let the humilation & torture continue.
Looking forward to see a moderate NON-nationalistic Arab leader to fix this mess in a proper way to bring back the dignity of the Arab people.

That is my point of view from a secular political prespective.

But if you want my Islamic thoughts, I will simply put it in one sentence ..
"Revive a moderate & modern Khilafa, but keep it in the hands of a non-Arab".

Interesting viewpoint Symmetry. I tend to agree with your secular perspective.

Symetric - I too don't dislike Israel's actions because of the religion of the one's occupying Palestinian land - but rather because of the actions themselves.

Arab Nationalism, interestingly, actually arose in Lebanon because the Christian Arabs were concerned that the 'Arab' Identity was being subsumed into an 'Islamic identity' (recommend a book on Lebanese history 'A House of Many Mansions' by Salibi).

The abuses of minorities is a relatively recent phenomenon - and whoever does it is condemned by me. In fact Arabs were at the brunt of 'colonial powers' from the decline of the Arabic Islamic empire when the baton passed to the Ottomans. The desire for an Arab homeland and autonomy is what Britain exploited in the first world war (TE Lawrence etc)

Zionists are no different from other groups who oppress minorities, from Arab oppression of Kurds to Indonesian atrocities in East Timor, Chinese in Tibet etc etc

What does set the Israeli actions apart though is the spin that it is a clash of religions, when in fact it's all about the land and matters of international law. The fact that many prominent Palestinian politicians are Christian (and the fact that Fatah/PLO is secular) is conveniently glossed over.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:TJ - you may be surprised to hear that the Arabs have indeed adopted the course of action you have outlined - they have indeed offered Israel peace, recognised it as a state within the expanded borders it won in 1948 (going from 55% of the land to 78% of the land, with Palestine dropping from 45% to 22% of the combined land allocated to Israel and Palestine by the UN).

It offered all this in 2002 in the 'Arab Peace Intiative' which is still the basis of all peace plans.

Israel is very good at spinning a story and the current fallacies are that it is the Palestinians who are not talking peace (when in fact it is the Israelis that are continuing to build on the 22% of the land they captured in 1967 - illegally according to all legal judgements), and another example of blatant lying was the myth they put out that Hamas were the ones who broke the truce in 2008 (when it was actually Israel who broke it on the day the US went to vote).

In the thread - Palestine- Push for Independence, you will see that the Palestinians are trying to make a diplomatic breakthrough by declaring independence for the 22% of the land that the world does not recognise as being part of Israel. In my discussions there with FD, I summarised the issues discussed by stating the following facts:

1. Israel has made no concessions in the peace negotiations - it has been all the Palestinians
2. Israel broke the truce and lied about why it was bombing Gaza and killing civilians (by saying Hamas broke the truce)
3. Israel have 78% of the land and Palestinians are settling for 22% - but Israel is reluctant to settle for this and seems to want more - specfically building more illegal colonies in the 22% that is not Israel.
4. Israel is unequivocably breaking international law in East Jerusalem by annexing it.
5. B'tselem say Israel in East Jerusalem is discriminating against the non-Israeli residents.

(Sorry, now you can go back to the Persian/Arabian Gulf debate - I've nothing more to add on that topic)

Cheers,
Shafique

As you said, this topic is about Iran, so I’ll say it quickly and briefly.

Shafique, your points are all good and valid!!

But what do we do??

The way I see it, with every passing day, the Arabs lose more…and their negotiating position gets weaker and weaker. Why? Because they themselves are much weaker than Israel, and they are hopelessly divided. As such, their bargaining chips are dwindling to nearly zero.

Even the Palestinians themselves are divided (fighting with each other), and can’t agree on who should represent them!!

Hate to say it, but they are all pathetic!!!

Tom Jones wrote:

shafique wrote:TJ - you may be surprised to hear that the Arabs have indeed adopted the course of action yo
As you said, this topic is about Iran, so I’ll say it quickly and briefly.

Shafique, your points are all good and valid!!

But what do we do??

The way I see it, with every passing day, the Arabs lose more…and their negotiating position gets weaker and weaker. Why? Because they themselves are much weaker than Israel, and they are hopelessly divided. As such, their bargaining chips are dwindling to nearly zero.

Even the Palestinians themselves are divided (fighting with each other), and can’t agree on who should represent them!!

Hate to say it, but they are all pathetic!!!

Well, the first thing we should do is separate out the Israeli spin from reality.

The solution is really quite simple - the Arab peace plan is on the table, and the Palestinians and Arabs have already agreed to peace. It is only the Palestinian side which has made any concession according to international law and it is the Israelis who are dragging their feet and who want to continue to hold the illegal colonies they've built.

Once we establish that there should be a just, negotiated solution and chastise the side who is not negotiating in good faith (but is blaming the other side in the media), the issue resolves itself.

Even the divisions in the Palestinians is manufactured - first Israel help set up Hamas, then - more recently - the US fomented the 'civil war' in Gaza that led to Hamas taking over (see article below). Again, beware of swallowing the spin without questioning:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/feat ... gaza200804


So, with all the concessions made ONLY by the Palestinians - I think its unfair to blame those being occupied for the current state of affairs, especially as they HAVE shown they can make a truce work, are willing to negotiate and have very reasonable demands (that Israel stops building illegal colonies before resuming talks, doesn't unilaterally take more the 22% of the land remaining etc)

Cheers,
Shafique

Shafique, you really need to read Noam Chomsky's - Failed States, as this book provides crystal clear information and commentaries from defense analysts and policy planners how the status quo is maintained and how superpowers gain the critical leverage they need to access strategic resources in the ME over time.

I talked about the absence of Arab democracy recently. I initially thought it was solely due to Arab leaders and their autocratic and non-secular movements, which is the main reason. But when I read how Arab states are supported (bought) by subsidies and technology for the tripolar world powers...you start to understand why democracy in the Middle East is never interesting enough for a superpower who needs to secure resources for its existence.

Just put the puzzle together with US/Israeli policy funding Hamas as a reason to maintain the status quo. Also, since the 1990's Osama Bin Laden has grown his terrorist movement Al Qaida in the ME but without the succes he wanted it to be, that is until Bush and Cheney/Wolfowitz invaded Iraq. Bin Laden's movement soared after the fatwa was released from Cairo's oldest islamic institute that opposed US forces on Islamic grounds. The growing terrorism that resulted from this fatwa is now used a motive for preventive warfare.

In the 1980's, Sadam Hussein received 5 billion dollar in aid to buy American technology which included nuclear, viral strains for chemical warfare and what not else.
During the Iraqi invasion in 2003, American forces secured the infrastructure and oil wells but guess what, some 100+ nuclear/viral facilities that were guarded properly under Saddam, where left for looting! A Jordanian journalist gave notice of information that traces of nuclear material were heading into Jordan, where the trace went lost.

To me it becomes clear that this seems all an effort to strategically move the pawns where they will be used in some later stage to attack nations with nuclear aspiration like Iran. It doesn't matter who got the material looted from Iraq (perhaps followed by the CIA, who knows) but countries that are sponsoring terrorist movements will be subject to manipulation and threat of force. I bet you a penny on it that Iran is going to be bombed in the future. I even care to speculate that towers (as in chess pieces) are being moved to facilitate that outcome just as Iraq was covered under WMD, only from Reagan's nuclear reactor agreement in 1982. It turns against you one way or the other if you are not of use to a superpower anylonger...

The status quo is maintained because short term power and wealth are way more interesting than survival of human lifes, even if it affects one own people as can be seen from multiple reports of chemical risks in the US and the lack of investigation in the 9-11 tragedy. This Palestine crisis will not be solved. From a superpower perspective, peace in the ME is like giving up your own prosperity for the benefit of another. Why lose the leverage?