Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eoj
Of course, we know that in the past Israel has stopped building settlements as a gesture of goodwill but that has never stopped Hamas from firing rockets at civilians.
Israel has also recently offered to stop building settlements if the Palestinians would agree to recognize Israel as a legitimate state. But they refuse and continue to fire rockets.
It doesn't seem that building settlements has any effect on the peace process, whatsoever.
So, the ONLY logicial place to start is to demand an end to the firing of rockets upon civilians, unequivocally.
|
I love language and logic.
In the bolded sentence, you're saying that Israel offered to stop settlements as a condition of the Palestinians stopping their offensive bombing. The logical conclusion to this is that you are valuing the settlement building as a negative and undesirable action that Israel offers to stop in exchange for the Palestinians stopping their negative and undesirable action.
So you implicitly demonstrate to the reader that the settlements are a net negative contributor to the process. But if they are as you clearly imply, then they can't have zero effect on the peace process, which is what you claim later on.
The mess in the region is confusing, and there are horrible things happening to real humans. Therefore some rational thinking is in order rather than muddled messages. Muddled thinking is what rationalizes the missiles and bombing from both sides.