Yet again, the middle east is in flames. In response to indiscriminate rocket attacks from Hamas into southern Israel after a ceasefire of sorts, Israel has launched a major military operation against Gaza in its own version of 'shock and awe'. Currently over 300 are estimated dead, not all members of Hamas, and there is expectation of a ground assault to follow.

Will this however obtain the Israeli objective of a cessation of Hamas rocket attacks? Is this going to further the aim of the two-state solution? Certainly, Israeli attacks in Lebanon in 2006 seem to have so far stopped further Hezbollah action in the north.

However, although it may win the individual battles, the victories may be increasingly pyrrhic. Palestinian opinion is increasingly hardline in response, Hamas after all was democratically elected in Gaza, and does not recognise Israel's right to exist. Opinion in the US is not as one sided as it once was.

Israel needs to talk to these hardliners, not bomb the shit out of them. As it likes to remind everyone how it is the only democratic middle eastern state, it has a moral imperative then to show restraint and stop being the bully, even if provoked.

The NI troubles were nowhere near as intense but there are plenty of parallels. The Brighton bomb nearly wiped out the entire British cabinet, the bombing of Canary Wharf paralysed London, and thats not to mention the incessant destruction of Belfast city centre. The British may have engaged in plenty of 'dirty tricks', but at no point was there systematic bombing of the Falls Road or South Armagh. NI has moved on because of dialogue. Sinn Fein, similar to Hamas, remember at one point had the objective of uniting Ireland and throwing out the British by force. There are lessons to learn.

Both of them are in the wrong but Isreal even more so with it's intentional theiving of land with it's 'settlements' and it's ability to find any excuse every year to batter the Arabs a bit.

Having said that the Palestinians do themselves no favour when supposedly their representatives permit rockets being fired into Isreal.

Fed up with it tbh.

Both the Israelis and Arabs are as bad as eachother. Might as well just let them fight it out until theyre sick of it like here.

Just wonder why this is here? There are no real parallels with situation in Ireland unless you want to go way back to the point where the violent Celt invaders drove out the indigenous Picts.....my own ancestors have Viking roots, making us all invaders one way or another. As I see it, when complex problems get reduced to simplex versions based on historical dogmas, then veiled up under romanticised drivel, there is always trouble. We used to say that the definition of a Sinn Fein supporter was someone who thought that the fantasy film "Darby O'Gill and The Little People" was actually a documentary. The trouble is, once people get an air-lock into their heads, they start killing those who don't share it.

I started this before I realised a discussion was ongoing in the general Skybar. I suppose it should have been "Conflict in the Middle East, An Irish Perspective".

To be honest the whole Ireland thing for the last 30 years was pretty small fry compared to the problems in the Middle East. Attrocities like 9/11 directly stem from that conflict. It irritates me when I see people try to compare the problems here to there - chalk and cheese. The Isreal/Palestine conflict is on a completely different scale.

Not to minimise the deaths and all that took place here but some perspective is needed I think.

I think there are plenty of similarities:

Its a territorial dispute
There are two principal groups of people separated on religious grounds
One group (the stronger one) uses a conventional army
The other group (the weaker) one uses guerilla tactics (freedom fighter or terrorist depending on your point of view).
The weaker group is supported by neighbouring nation(s)

Although there are many more complicating aspects to the Middle East, these basic similarities allow extrapolation from what went on in NI to the Middle East.

Its really wasnt that bad in Northern ireland for loss of life after the initial violence in the early 70,s. Im not trying to take away from or deny the individual pain alot of families went through but after about 1975 there was generally no more than 100 killed every year in the troubles and that compares to road accidents in Northern ireland which Generally average over 100 deaths per year if i can remember correctly. For a while there was 100 or more being killed every in bagdad by bombings and sectarian shootings every day with some attacks claiming 2, 3 or even 400! I believe in the middle east the hate is much more deep rooted than here and the dfference in idealogies too great. Do you think the Northern ireland peace process would have got far if everytime Dissidents had attacked the RAF had sent in warplanes and tanks to hit west belfast?

I don't know, the British have been pretty awful to the Irish over the past 4 centuries or so, something that isn't taught in British schools. I had to learn about Irish Independence, the failed moves for home rule/missed opportunities by Gladstone in the Victorian Period, the potato famine and Civil War through extra-curricular study.

In the civil war something like 40% of the Irish population was wiped out. That almost registers as genocide.

If anyone has a right to feel pissed off and aggreived with the British it is probably the Irish - at least the Arabs have a whole sub-continent to live in... the Irish only have one island in the Atlantic.... and lots of them got fed up and moved to the States... I don't blame them.

Of course the scale is nowhere near the same in terms of loss of life, thats not what I'm arguing. Its the parallels between the two regarding the nature of the conflict.

The last line in Festivephone's post is exactly what I'm getting at. The IRA inflicted horror on a much more massive scale, at the very least in terms of destruction of property, than Hamas ever have. We would not be where we are today if the British response was to send in the RAF.

Please note I'm not making any reference here to who was on the side of right or wrong. Theres another thread for that.

I don't know, the British have been pretty awful to the Irish over the past 4 centuries or so, something that isn't taught in British schools. I had to learn about Irish Independence, the failed moves for home rule/missed opportunities by Gladstone in the Victorian Period, the potato famine and Civil War through extra-curricular study.

To be honest, Welsh students have enough to learn about the actions of the English against the Welsh, let alone the Irish later on. :p Though, tbf I had to learn most of that through extra-curricular study.

British Education, even within Britain is incredibly England-Centric. Even the Scots have the similar problem when it comes to regional historic education. Whether that's done on purpose, or whether the events in England are more important in an historical context is upto you to decide.

I suppose what I'm saying is that, while you may hold the view that all Britons share some historical outlook, I'd argue differently. I think there's probably so much to cover that only select events are chosen to be part of the curriculum.

Let's also factor in that the U.K has hardly been democratic in the past when it comes to enlarging its influence, so its no-wonder that elements of history that have the tendency to invoke nationalism and seperatism is purposefully omitted.

In the civil war something like 40% of the Irish population was wiped out. That almost registers as genocide.

If anyone has a right to feel pissed off and aggreived with the British it is probably the Irish - at least the Arabs have a whole sub-continent to live in... the Irish only have one island in the Atlantic.... and lots of them got fed up and moved to the States... I don't blame them.

I'm not really going to act as a mouthpiece for the British Empire of the past, but it seems to me that the British Empire didn't want to lose the importance of the Irish in the U.K. By the time discussions came about making Ireland a dominion of the U.K, with all the rights thereof (like Canada), it was FAR too late. The Irish were rightfully pissed off to the point of no return, much like the American colonists, who later declared independence.

FTR, I'm not part of the "gentry" class of Wales, my grandmother was born in Cork and moved over, so I hope my post doesn't reek of British propaganda, merely trying to bridge the gap between what the British *wanted* to achieve in the long run for Ireland, and what *actually* occured. :)

Good read - good post^^

+1

:)