Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

required field,
excellent idea - start one :)

I think we should leave the problems for them to discuss.

Governments should be elected by the people of the two countries without any external interference. They can/will then solve their problems.

Those who live there have received enough ideas.

Unfortunately, no country is an island unto itself.

Sometimes, it is useful to have "unbiased arbitrators" or somebody to give both sides a kick up the ?

Also, neither sides in the problem are independent, they are funded from outside their own frontiers and armed by outside agencies.

Check the true economy of Israel.

Seems to me, that Israeli "government minister", in the shape of Benjamin Netanyahu, has been rebuked by America after the atrocities of Gaza and told to go home and think again!

Is there going to be further changes in America's Middle East policy? Does Israel have any oil for export?

UN Gaza inquiry 'to proceed despite Israel'

Mr Goldstone said he was "disappointed" Israel had given no positive response, and said his team would enter Gaza via Egypt if Israel refused them visas.

The UN wants to investigate whether Israel and Hamas committed war crimes during the January conflict in Gaza.

Israel accuses the UN branch carrying out the mission of bias against it.

The UN Human Rights Council has been accused of singling out Israel unfairly, and is viewed by some as having less credibility than other parts of the UN.

But correspondents say the selection of Mr Goldstone, a respected South African war crimes prosecutor who is also Jewish, as head of the inquiry has given it greater clout.

Public hearings

Mr Goldstone said his team had hoped to visit southern Israeli towns which have suffered Palestinian rocket fire , before entering Gaza from Israel.

But if Israel failed to allow the investigators passage, entering through the Rafah crossing on the Egypt-Gaza border would be a "second choice".

He said that after talks with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the team had decided to hold a series of public hearings.

If these could take place in the Middle East "so much the better", but if not they would be held in Geneva, with witnesses flown in or testifying via video link, he said.

Most Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are unable to leave because of Israel's blockade on the territory.

Israel has given no official response to the inquiry team, but media reports have suggested it does not plan to co-operate.

Israeli ambassador in Geneva Leshno Yaar told Associated Press earlier that the council treats Israel "unfairly" and that "justice cannot be the outcome of this mission".

Inquiry conclusions

Several investigations into alleged violations of international law during Israel's 22-day operation in Gaza, which ended on 18 January, have now reported back.

Mr Ban has requested more than $11m (7m) compensation from Israel for damage to UN property in Gaza, after a limited UN inquiry accused Israel of targeting known civilian shelters and providing untrue statements to justify actions in which civilians were killed.

The report found Israel to blame in six out of nine incidents when death or injury were caused to people sheltering at UN property and UN buildings were damaged.

The Israeli military has concluded in an internal investigation that its troops fought lawfully, although errors did take place, such as the deaths of 21 people in a wrongly targeted house.

Meanwhile, a fact-finding team commissioned by the Arab League said there was sufficient evidence for the Israeli military to be prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and that "the Israeli political leadership was also responsible for such crimes".

It also said Palestinian militants were guilty of war crimes in their use of indiscriminate attacks on civilians.

About 1,300 Palestinians died in the January conflict. Israeli and Palestinian estimates differ on the numbers of civilian casualties.

Ten Israeli soldiers were killed, including four by friendly fire, and three Israel civilians died in rocket attacks by Palestinian militants

Perhaps, the crazy gang are crazier than they realised.

The present American administration has reviewed it attitude to Israels Right winged governments.

Obamas rebuke of Israel of its obsolescent stance on the Two State and its abuses by of the Palestinians by its settlement policy have as I stated earlier are the changes I predicted.

Any reasonable group would apologise for their previous abuse. I doubt the member of the crazy gang are capable of doing so.

I think I would prefer Obamas backing than theirs.

Anyway the following is worth a read!

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isAKh8QC0tqYG5gzrDQpY8PFZnmwD98ERFCG3


Clinton: Israel must halt West Bank settlements
By ROBERT BURNS 9 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urged Israel in unusually blunt terms Wednesday to completely halt settlements on land that Palestinians claim as part of a future state of their own.
In remarks to reporters at the State Department, Clinton said President Barack Obama had made clear last week during talks at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that stopping settlements is a key part of moving toward a deal establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel.
"He wants to see a stop to settlements not some settlements, not outposts, not 'natural growth' exceptions," Clinton said, referring in the last case to population growth on existing Israeli settlements in the West Bank from births and from allowances for adult offspring of settlers to buy homes near their parents.
"We think it is in the best interests (of the peace process) that settlement expansion cease," Clinton added, with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit at her side. "That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly. ... And we intend to press that point."
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is putting settlements at the center of his talks with Obama at the White House on Thursday, and he has said he won't resume peace talks without a freeze. Clinton was having dinner Wednesday with Abbas.
Obama has made clear that he supports the creation of a Palestinian state, and in remarks last week he noted that under a previous arrangement known as the "roadmap," which dates to the Bush administration, the Israelis agreed to halt West Bank settlements, along with certain steps by the Palestinians.

Extract from Obama's interview.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1243872310592&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The president reiterated his view that striving for a two-state solution would also require imposing a total freeze on Israeli construction over the green line, including putting a halt to expansion attributed to natural growth. He also voiced understanding for Israeli apprehensions, saying Palestinians would have to fight terror and end "the incitement that understandably makes Israelis so concerned."

However, Obama said, "Part of being a good friend is being honest, and I think there have been times where we are not as honest as we should be about the fact that the current direction, the current trajectory in the region is profoundly negative, not only for Israeli interests but also US interests. And that's part of a new dialogue that I'd like to see encouraged in the region.

Fred



Didn't realise that America was still bailing Israel out to the tune of 3.5 billion a year

Only $50billion to General Motors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, General Motors probably more important to them!

Should have been the other way round - $3.5bn to GM and $50bn to Israel; then the US wouldn't have to worry about the Middle East, just leave it to the Israelis to sort out.

According to Gideon Rachman in the FT today, the scuttlebutt in D.C. is that the Isrealis intend to "take out" Iran's nuclear plants later this year -- and the Americans don't know how to stop them. The problem for the Americans being that this would wreck Obama's Middle East initiatives.

Obama has already wrecked his own plans by loudspeaker diplomacy - shades of the unlamented peanut farmer.

MM
I also suspect that unofficially the Americans may be quite pleased if the Israelis stop Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Haystack. Do you mean they can tolerate the cost of doing so.

America has been so associated with Israel appalling humanitarian record in the past that the economic repercussions would be too painful.

I think after Iraq that the Americans are wisely "once biiten twice shy".

If they do attempt to take Iran's Nuclear program down, the Middle East will be a cauldron for the next 30 years, rather than a bubbling pot for the next 10years.

Israel needs to put its clubs down and be a little more humble at the negociating table.

From earlier postings, the latter seems a little to difficult for many of them.

I wish Obama every success in knocking heads together.

Iran's nuclear plants is not he same as Iran's nuclear bomb plants though.

If Israel received $3.5bln a month from the USA, Obama can ask them to do whatever he wants.

Obama is wrestling with the realities of Government. He was going to close Gitmo -- now he's not -- now that he's party to the information about who they're holding there. He knows he can't let them go, no-one else wants them -- he's stuck.

Bush's stance was not as unreasonable as it might seem. His attitude was that the USA was at war with Al Qaeda. In a war environment you take prisoners and it is not usual to let them go while the war persists. It is also not usual to have trials for prisoners of war. You just keep them locked up for the duration. Most were captured in war zones as combatants. In fact Bush used to use that very phrase 'enemy combatants' to describe the inmates of Guantanamo.

"The Obama administration has said some of the Guantanamo detainees, now numbering about 240, will be freed while others will be put on trial. A third category involves some prisoners deemed too dangerous to be released. Major human rights groups said the policies will still allow the United States to detain prisoners seized far from a battlefield and that key definitions were left out, such as what constitutes "substantial" support for a militant group."

MM is right. Obama reminds me of Blair, he talks a lot and does it very well but when the details of the issues are investigated very little seems to come to fruition. I believe he is sweet talking the Middle East now to try and offload the G'mo prisoners. Not much has really changed in my eyes.

Disagree, Blair was intellectual shallow, egocentric and a chameleon, similar to with Wisteria. Both have their appeal to some of the shallow thinkers in the middle classes

Obama, I think is highly intelligent and has thought out policies, although the latter will take some skill to implement. I also think his core moral values are obvious and again thought out, not whimsical like Blair's were.

Interesting to watch Obama's tour through the Middle East and the new "moderation" in American politics.

I didn't say he wasn't intellectual, I simply compared him to Blair in that he is promising policies that I can't see him being able to deliver. In some ways I see him as being nothing more than a travelling showman enchanting the shallow thinkers you refer to (and he spends far too much time on TV for my liking).

It will be interesting to see if he can offload the G'mo problem on the Middle East, he has a head start in that the Human Rights Act won't stop him sending 'enemy combatants' to places that may be a bit rough with them.

Showing moderation in the Middle East is just as unlikely to solve any issues as being hard line imo.