As related as it is to gold price to a degree, as we all know that conflict seems to perk price, this topic could easily drift into a discussions of ethics, politics, sides and questions of right. But the challenges are provoking, and perhaps politically dangerous to examine. Who is feeding the present troubles the most, and who are the protagonists historically seem to be the questions asked.
History and Affiliation:
-----------------
The Phillistines mentioned in the Jewish writing were the Greeks. This was always known to modern Greeks but few others gave it credit. We think our science and archaeology are without question but it is only recently the identity of these people became known to us by recent digs. Egypt was ruled since before Cleopatra by the Greeks and later by the Romans. Syria was settled by Greek and earlier Assyrian peoples. How much earlier were the primitive Assyrians? Not much by our standards today. The Scythians held sway in the northern and eastern Middle east. The Celts tribes, trading with the Babylonians since 3000 BC, probably gave them steel, were in that area as well. The Samarians too, probably the Samaritans of the Jewish writings, travelled, settled and fought as far west as modern Greece. The Samarians were a Russian tribe who encountered the Greeks from the Black Sea to Anatolia, and fought with them from horseback. The Greeks knew them as the Amazons as their horse Cavalry were all women bow warriors. The Samarians were Russians, and the Scythians we discover, another horse culture of the steppes, were the ancestors of the modern Ukrainians.
The Jews themselves using an Asian derivative religion of monotheism and different alphabet than the other Semitics used, probably lived on the North Shore of the Black sea 6,000 years before year 0. Later they moved to southern Babylon when they got wet. It may be that they met westward migrating groups from China at this time, the Tocharians. Phrygian, Luvian Tocharian and Jew moved west, with the Jewish tribes spreading from the Ukraine to Spain, some settling in the ME under Eqyptian, Greek, Assyrian, then Roman rule. If they ever did have their own state it would have been briefly between the Greek -Phillistine, Assyrians and the Ptolemaics. It seems probably that the Jews were originally Indo-Europeans from mid Asia. Language, religion, alphabet and their own early writings of westward immigration into Iraq at a very early time, (now known to be 5800 BC), suggest this.
The Jews being a different non Arabic or other middle eastern race would explain why they had such a strong policy (death to intermarriers) against mixing with other peoples. (Phineas). Having a different alphabet certainly suggests strongly that their language group is from a different origin than Semitic.
Who started it
------------
There is no question that the Palestinians did not ask to be ruled by anybody with a cultural or heritage claim to the middle east.. The Greeks, Romans, Lebanese or Syrians have as much claim to the area as the Jews or Palestinians do. Nevertheless now we are in a modern situation where state lines have been drawn by force and reinforced by the propaganda of ancient tomes and some rather slanted archaeology. When you have to do that to reinforce your position, deciding claims of right seems moot. Treatment of the Palestinians, who have the freedom they might never have had otherwise to claim dis-inheritance of self determination, has not been a model or tolerance. Tolerating non stop rebellion has never been easy in any state.
The question is where will it all end? Who is throwing rocks to get it going now? Some would have it that it is sheer Palestinian obstinacy backed by a belief that with all the Muslim states behind them one hundred per cent they can force the Jews out eventually. Others say the Jews are forcing the issue in every way they can to justify a take over and subjugation of the Palestinians.
So two questions have to be asked. Are the Muslim States behind them 100%, or merely against others, for politically convenient reasons? And will something give if the US decides to get its oil elsewhere?
Even with Oil out of the balance the US cannot afford to let the Middle East degrade into a squabble first with the Jews and thence amongst every other autocratic ME state. The real trouble with the ME is not just "Arabs" and other Muslims kicking Jewish butt, but with Muslim states rebelling against one military and autocratic rule, nominally Muslim, to get another military and autocratic state with religion as it's main excuse. In exchange for political suppression, they get suppression of any sort of independence or freedom - down to suppressing even having a good time on a Saturday night..
We see Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Arabia, Algeria, Pakistan, even Indonesia, and Northern India perilously close to having their government's collapse to a permanent night and fog of religious extremism cloaking the development of an enlightened and peace seeking people. All these states have less than fully supported governments and also possess radical, extreme and violent cultures expressing a purity of faith and implacable rebellion against any sort of rule by vote. It doesn't look good long term.
There is one phrase in Mohammed's writings that irks me. "We shall" ..( convert them) .. "by the sword if necessary." I wish he hadn't said that. It seems to give fuel to the faithful to justify their worst acts in the interests of religious purity. It is extremely hard to argue with statements from a man's religion on any reasonable grounds that he will accept. It you argue his interpretation is biased or incorrect, he avers that you are criticizing him without knowledge, if you argue he should have a more enlightened view he says you are criticizing his prophets and anyway you are not much better.
Here is hoping for a better dialogue with these states in the future. Perhaps we can get some agreement with the Muslim states that A. they really don't have to conquer or convert the rest of the world. and B. a little bit of personal and political freedom won't make them go to hell in a hand basket.. C. the Jews are the least of their problems. While we are at it, perhaps we could convince the the Jews (Israelis) themselves to seek a more enlightened view that would help them live peacefully, and not in the process have them commit suicide by trusting the untrustable. ie. a foreign government's good intentions.
Someday man will realize he fights so many wars against his own extinction and ignorance that he does not fully know, that he need not fight any more with his neighbours, and besides he may need their help some day. Making enemies is not an ennobling artifice. Trouble is both sides have to refrain from this for peace to reign.
EC<:-} |
