Help me understand a few things please....

[The Straight Story]

I have heard things similar to the following:

If Nation X keeps up with what they are doing, then they are just breeding more terrorists.

Or something along that same line:
'Nation X pissed off group Y and should have expected that group Y hates them and would attack them'

2 Examples:
It is no wonder they flew planes into our buildings, we have made them hate us by our actions (though I gotta say, I don't think I would hate one country enough to kill thousands of it's people. I just don't see it as a good moral decision. I think bush is wrong too - but we call him on it and don't make excuses for him, I feel the same way with other people who have a choice to make and then make a bad one. The people who hijacked our planes suck, and are as bad as bush is. They were evil and there is no excuse.)

Israel's bombings are breeding new terrorists who will take revenge.

Now I don't hear these things worded exactly like that, but you get the idea.

MY TAKE ON IT - flip it:
Everytime some terrorist blows up a bus, plane, market place, etc they are breeding hatred with people who have a lot more weapons and resources. So they should not be shocked when they piss off someone who has the weapons they wish they had and then uses them with as much mercy as they showed.

WHY do we expect so much restraint from one group while saying we understand why the other group does what it does? (which appears to be a subtle shrugging of the shoulders and blaming the victim for forcing the perp to do what they did)

So yeah - actions by one state may breed terrorists. But terrorist's actions breed that state spending more on weapons and defense - and the desire to use it to stop said actions.

You want peace? There are two primary methods for that it seems:
1. Get everyone to agree to live peacefully
2. Get rid of the people who don't want to live peacefully so that we end up back at #1.

In the end - it all sucks. People die, left and right. No one wants to lay down their arms because they just don't trust the other people. Flaming rhetoric does not help in the trust issue. Suicide bombings don't help. Blowing up people from the air and treating people like they don't belong does not breed trust either.

The ME won't have peace. Neither will the rest of us. Humans have been at war with each other since time began. We are not a trusting lot. If bush came out tomorrow and said 'trust me, I know I was wrong before but you can trust me now' would you?

I got more hope that the Cleveland Browns will win a superbowl than there being peace in the ME....

[MADem]

1. Yep. Sad to say, peace is an elusive thing. Best we can hope for is

simply less war, I guess. Or smaller wars. Or less lethal wars.

There will always be some asshole, somewhere, who wants to take a shortcut or get in some other nation's face for something or another. I don't think there's been a day in recorded history where there wasn't some conflict going on somewhere....

[izzie]

2. Put it into every day living

Why would a 200 pound man beat up a 100 pound women and then why would she burn him up while he sleeps? I would call it rage on both sides. Both are stupid things to do and there was a better way to get out of it for both but neither took it. And the parents and children of these two had to also pay for this. Plus the tax payers for the up keep if these children. Not a win for any one.

[The Straight Story]

3. Well said, better than I did :)

But then I was half asleep while writing last night...