Where is the Bravery?

What does it take to be considered brave? Does it have to involve running into a burning building in order to save a basket full of kitties? Is it the act of joining the military in order to defend your community? Though both of those acts are extraordinarily brave, we all don’t have to be a soldier or a cat saving master to be considered brave.

We live in a time when it seems that American bravery is all but dead. From our high ranking political leaders to our run of the mill average joe citizens all you see is cowardliness.

Politically our national leaders here in the 21st century are very mundane and more likely to be a shill for a high profile interest group then they are to be champions of the people. The two examples that come to mind is the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and NSA controversy occurring right now..

When it comes to Palestine and Israel our national leaders are all vehemently pro-Israel. That is not the problem though. As Zack Beauchamp explains in his article on vox.com: Why the US has the most pro-Israel foreign policy in the world, American politicians support Israel for a various number of reasons. On rare occasions American politicians actually stand against Israel. The problem lies not in the support for Israel, but in the support for Israel when Israel is obviously doing something wrong. The recent events which are going on in Gaza, under the name of “Operation Protective Edge” are some of the most blatant acts of war crimes in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to date. Over 1,000 human beings have been killed on the Palestinian side and around 50 humans have been killed on the Israeli side. Israel has targeted areas around schools and even hit schools themselves during this conflict under the bogus excuse of weapons being near the school. Yet these actions are actively endorsed by the American government with little protest. For example the Senate voted Unanimously to support Israel in its recent campaign and America is the only UN nation to vote no to an Israeli war crime investigation. So where is the bravery? Will no one stand up in congress and declare Israel equally responsible in the bloodshed, will anyone even stand up and question Americas role in the killing of people who have done us no wrong? Sadly it does not seem like any American politician is brave enough to risk their political career for the right thing. When you have millions of dollars being spent by pro-Israeli lobbies on organizing votes and campaigns against anyone who dares to stand up to Israel, it is no wonder that American politicians are meek and weak against Israel.

Foreign policy will always be messy, and sometimes it is hard to be brave when thousands of people are being killed (sarcasm), but what isn’t hard is domestic policy or at least it shouldn’t be. The United States has recently been exposed to be no better than the former Soviets and their massive internal spying system. The NSA has been in the news a lot more thanks to Snowden and it really exposes our government to be the biggest group of cowards there has ever existed. Now before I continue with my rant I will say this, having an external intelligence gathering agency that is actively working to  acquire the upper hand on our foreign competitors is acceptable. The problem occurs when you turn that system inward. What that portrays to me is that you now fear your citizenry, the same people whose support our government needs in order to maintain the republic, the same citizens who benefit from living in a secure free America are now the targets of our spy agencies. A brave politician would dismantle the domestic spying components because they would trust the people the same way the people trust them.

They say that government is like a pendulum, eventually it will swing in the other direction and create a whole new era. Well at the moment the pendulum is swinging in a direction that is filled with cowards rather than actual leaders who are willing to do unpopular things for the good of the community.

World Unity

The world around us seems to be falling apart. Global conflict is imminent it seems. In the Middle East you have a slew of disastrous time bombs waiting to go off. The Syrian Civil War is a playground for Iran and her allies VS Saudi Arabia and her allies, Iraq is in the throes of another Civil War with a radical Islamic Group ripping the country apart in it’s quest for Caliphate, Israel is continuously attacking Gaza and Palestine with weapons that out match anything the Arab population of that territory could ever bring to arms, Ukraine and Russia are at  each others throats in what can only be called a proxy war by Russia using armed rebels to take over the country, the countries of Latin and Central America are in a chaotic struggle between civil society and warlord rule which is starting to impact the United States in negative ways and that is just the stuff I have been keeping up with. It truly seems to me and to many people out there that “shit is going down.”

All this violence that is going on now is only stifling our development as a species. We have progressed so much it would be a shame if it stopped now due to large scale global conflict that decimates the human population. Human societies though seem to be the most counterproductive on the planet. Unlike our animal shareholders on this planet we have a sense of self awareness that allows us to understand this one basic concept, we are all the same person. It sounds naive and very “hippie” to say it but people in China have similar concerns as people in America as do men and women living in Gaza to men and women living in Israel. Even though people living in some parts of the world have it harder (Gaza compared to America) we are all still connected by our humanity. From our basics needs like food/water, shelter, companionship, economic livelihood (regardless of what economic system you use) to the desire we all have to see our children grow and prosper in a world much more kinder and peaceful then ours today.

Yet even though we have these shared desires we are still separated due to our own creations. The two largest that I see that stand in the way of global unification is uncompromising faith (Radical Religion) and the nation state system.

Religion is a very tricky topic to cover because honestly I do not want to ban religion or destroy religion. In fact I hope to one day live in a world where man can worship how he or she deems fit without fear of attack for their "misplaced" faith. Yet no one can deny that religion plays a role in division. Even though the Christian and Islamic faiths both call on unity, compassion, and love their more radical adherents (more so muslims in the modern era then christians) tend to see things differently. Many radicals, again more Muslims then Christians due to the era we live in, use religion as a way to divide and conquer, for evidence of this just simply look to Iraq and Syria were we have shites, sunnis, and christians at each others throats. In the United States and Europe Christian citizens of these countries (not all but some) view Muslims with suspicion and even hate, while Muslims return the favor by viewing their new host countries as Kuffar (non-believers) and inferior, creating a sense of fragmentation rather then unity.

The concept of the nation state has also hindered our progress in the modern era. Now you have a system in which nations only tend to look out for themselves and ignore the rest of the people on this earth unless it can benefit them in a strategic or economic way. For example the United States, Russia, and the European nations all have some of the most advanced military, economic, and social systems on this planet yet their energies and resources are spent on non-cooperation with the other. Imagine if instead of the Cold War after WWII we have a unified Europe with Russia allied with them, instead of spending billions to out power the other we could have spent billions on global education, healthcare, and dare I say it even space travel to beyond the moon and stars. The levels of advancement we reached with atomic weapons could have been used in energy creation and solutions to problems such as global pollution or drug addiction.

Instead we continue to do the same thing over and over, kill, compete, and satisfy only the self, while making sure the other struggles to do the same. We only see the differences, I hear it all the time on the news and online. When we look at other people we point out their flaws and how they are different from us, we never look at them and say hey they have the same needs and hopes as I do.

Foreign Militaries More Important then American Highways

Over the past few months, Democrats and Republicans have been battling it out in the Senate and the House over domestic spending bills such as ones for our ailing infrastructure and the immigration crisis we are having on our border with Mexico. On both issues, we are hearing Republicans cry over too much spending by the Federal Government, and the Democrats crying foul on how all the Republican solutions are too short term to really do any good. Both sides when it comes to domestic spending are so far apart they cannot even see each other anymore.

                Yet there is one area of spending that brings these two rival parties together, foreign aid to our dear Middle Eastern Allies (the big three Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia take up the most). Let us take a look at the most recent example, Israel. Israel is currently in the middle of a conflict with its neighbor Gaza who just happens to not like Israel's existing thing its doing.  Israel recently asked the United States for a little extra cash to help it defend itself against a 3rd rate power. Israel asked an additional $225 Million to be added to the  $621.6 Million already promised in early June in a military spending bill[i]. The Senate Appropriations Committee voted unanimously on the bill, even though part of the money went into foreign hands. [ii]

                This type of spending is common in the United States Congress and it is not just Israel that benefits from this type of spending. Saudi Arabia sees huge donations to their war chests as well. Just this past year Saudi Arabia was included in a $10 Billion dollar deal for military aid.[iii]

                While countries like Saudi Arabia, which doesn't let women drive or travel long distances without a male guardian, and Israel who continuously violates Geneva War Conventions receive millions and billions of dollars worth of American aid, we peons of America AKA the citizens of this country are constantly ignored and left with nothing more then a dysfunctional government that can't even agree on whether or not they should fix the highways!

---

[i] (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/07/23/372426/us-sets-225-mn-for-israels-iron-dome/)

(http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.605370)

[ii] http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140717/CONGRESSWATCH/307170032/Senate-Panel-OKs-Pentagon-Spending-Bill-Its-Fate-Uncertain

[iii] http://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

The Keys For Success in the Middle East: Representation

            When one looks at governments in the Middle East one thing is glaringly obvious, there are many authoritarian regimes out there. With the exception of Turkey, Israel, and to some extent Iran free elections are a rarity, social freedoms are appalling, and the ability to progress economically and through the classes is almost non-existent. On the one hand, you have Secular states that run on military might and cater to religious conservatives by "applying" Islam into the constitution. The second alternative you see in most Middle Eastern countries again is the religious nation, like Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations that proclaim the rule of Islam and nothing else. Both these scenarios bring nothing but misery to the majority of the people living under them. So what is the solution to this chaotic mess? Many would argue that you need a purely secular state with God stripped from the constitution the likes of those nations found in Western Europe and North America. Others would make the claim that the Arab-Muslim world in particular needs to move more towards an Islamic Caliphate based on the teachings of the Prophet, the likes of which this world has not seen since well the Prophet and his followers. I would argue that neither is plausible due to the complexity of Middle Eastern Arab society. A purely secular nation will ostracize religious conservatives and a purely Islamic Caliphate will do the same to religious minorities (Islamic and non-Islamic) and non-believers alike.  Before any of you, start beating the drums of war and claim that under a purely Islamic Caliphate religious minorities will be protected, I understand, and acknowledge that during the Islamic Caliphates throughout history this was observed. At the same time though the majority of the Caliphates, Sultanates, and other Islamic dynasties that practiced Islamic law were run by the military generals who did not practice any form of representative government. Therefore, I personally believe the best solution to the problem with government in the Arab-Muslim-Middle East is a fusion of these two practices. 

            What will this fusion look like? I have a rough outline in my mind that I will share now so it may be dissected, analyzed, and I hope improved upon. First, let me begin by stating that the government I have in mind for the Arab-Muslim Middle East is heavily influenced by Western styles of representative government with a dabble of Islamic influence thrown in. This government which I will call for the time being as the Representative Caliphate will resemble the United States system more than others. 

            In a representative Caliphate, you have four key ideas: Representation, Balance, Centralization and finally Separation. I will begin with Representation only and will follow up with subsequent posts regarding the other key ideas.

            Representation is very self-explanatory. For any nation, hoping to progress and modernize it must give its people a voice. In the Arab world, especially the people lack a voice. Representation is based on who has the most money and the most power in the nation. In most countries, the representation is just a façade and in others, they do not even pretend to have representation. How would representation look in this government? The Western world and the Islamic faith give us two beautiful examples of how representation should look. First, let us look at the western example of the United States, which is comprised of several small republics. The United States utilizes a Bicameral Congress, which has equal representation by states (the senate) and proportional representation based off state population (the house). Such a system is easily producible in the Arab-Muslim-Middle East. The Quran speaks of Shura in three places and in Islamic history; it is known that the"Rightly Guided" Caliphs used Shura. Shura is the consultation of those who will be affected by decisions being made. When a nation makes decisions, the people (citizens) will be affected, making it necessary to consult them. Since it is logistically impossible to consulate every citizen, having representatives for groups of citizens is the most efficient way to organize consultation.  The Shura Council as I am dubbing it can be modeled off the United States Congress. An upper Shura can represent equally while the lower Shura can represent based on population. 

            What is the power of the Shura Council? For the time being the powers of the council are simplistic and based entirely off the of the United States Congress. The power to levy taxes (Jizya), the power to write and pass legislation, the power to declare war and approve treaties and so on. Again this portion of this fictional government is not yet complete it is still in the planning stages. 

            Who qualifies to be a citizen that gets representation and who qualifies to be the

representative? This question is easy, yet it will cause the most problems. Everyone who has citizenship in this fictional Arab-Muslim Nation regardless of sex, orientation, ethnicity and religion or lack thereof has the right to be represented and anyone meeting a certain age requirement has the right to represent. Many conservative Muslims out there will be against women and religious minorities being able to run for political office. To them I say this, are they not a part of the nation? If they are citizens then they have a right to choose those who they wish to represent them and that means allowing members of that group to be able to run for political office. It is a simple logical fact that in order to have a fully represented population you have to represent all the diverse groups in that population. This means Arabs, non-Arabs, Muslims, non-Muslims, men and women all have the right to be represented and represent.

            Why does representation matter? In an area of the world as diverse as the Arab-Middle East, you need to give the people a voice if you are to have an effective government. As we can, all see from observing past and present authoritarian regimes a lack of political voice for the people leads to terrible government policies. These policies range from the endless spending done on the military while neglecting the educational system to the excessive life styles of many top officials while the rest of the country goes hungry.  With representation the people can send messages via elections, they can send people to the Shura council that will actually support legislation that benefits the people and not just the ruling regime. With representation, the government will actually need to depend on the people for the power and not just assume it has the power. 

            In conclusion, representation in the form of the Shura Council and based off of the United States congress can lead to better political participation by ordinary citizens, which in turn can lead to better government policies. Next week I will discuss Balance and Centralization in terms of an elected Caliphate and an Islamic Judiciary.

Islam's Plurality: How it Hinders Government.

Person A: "Islam and government do not work well together, look at the failed experiments in the Middle East." 

Person B: "You can't count those countries they aren't following Islam correctly, if only they would follow Islam the way it is supposed to be followed you would see how great Islam can be for a government!"

            That conversation or a similar variation of it has been hashed out hundreds if not thousands of times between Muslims and all other groups of peoples (including other Muslims). What is the problem with this conversation some of you might ask, Person B is 100% correct, we can't judge Islam and government based off of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the other usual suspects in the Middle East. Au contraire my dear reader we can judge Islam and its affiliation with government based off of these countries because countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and so on are products of Islam in some shape or form! 

            My argument is that due to the plurality of Islam and its lack of centralized authority we should not expect to see a successful modern Muslim nation the likes of which many Muslims want to see or claim could be seen if Islam was just followed properly. For the record I understand that Turkey is a Muslim majority nation, but it is (for the time being) a secular state. With that being said let us continue down the path of Muslim plurality and its hindrance of Islamic government. 

            According to various sources, the Muslim population hovers near the 1 Billion persons mark. As most people know, the Middle East is home to many Muslims as is south and central Asia. Of these billion or so Muslims, you have various religious sects, Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Alvei, Ismali, and this is not counting the various different sects that exist on a local or regional levels. Aside from sects, you have yourself different schools or branches of Islam that again differ based on your sect. For example, Sunnis have the Hanbali School and Shia's have the Twelver branch. This all seems very complicated I am sure so here take a look at this chart to see a visual of the picture I am trying to paint.

Do you see the level of complexity found in Islam? This does not bode well for any type of government. Let me explain. What makes a government run properly? Laws. The United States runs (or at least used to run) on a set of written laws (rules and regulations) created by man. These laws govern how the government, states, and citizens are supposed to interact with one another. The Quran also prescribes some rules and regulations for the interaction between men, but there is a small little problem. The Quran is supposedly God's written word, which is the same God who burns people who commit sin by disobeying his laws; therefore people who believe in an afterlife REALLY, REALLY stake their future on following laws ordained by God.  How is this a problem? Well the problem lies in the simple fact that God's word is uncompromisable. Now whether you are religious or not, it is true in Islam that God has the final say, and that God's words cannot be altered. Here is how this creates a problem for a Muslim government. 

            What school will run your country? Which interpretation of Islam will you take as your source of law? These are all important questions because now you are choosing which laws are the true laws of God and which are heretical. For example in Saudi Arabia which embraces a strict interpretation of the  Hanbali Sunni school you have rules that makes life for Shia's and other Muslim minority religious groups quite difficult. Many in Saudi Arabia's ruling religious elite view Shia, Sufis and other Sunnis who do not prescribe to their way of thinking as religious heretics who are not part of the Umaah. This makes running an effective government very difficult since a good portion of your population is discriminated against and deemed as not a member of your community. How are you supposed to grow as a nation when you exclude members of your community based on their religious beliefs?

Person B:  "Reform!! Reform!! We need to Reform Islam!!"

            Wow person B is chalked full of great ideas aren't they? No, they are not. Reforming Islam is simply out of the question for many Muslim because they believe the gates of Ijithad have closed many centuries ago and that all current understandings of Islam and its laws are as good as they are going to get. Therefore reforming Islam is seen as changing God's word. In a Muslim nation, the rules you get are the rules you are stuck with. You can't change the fact that Muslim women can't hold the highest seat in the land because that would be changing God's word. You cannot reform the fact that Shias are sometimes excluded from political and social participation because that would be changing the word of God. This inability to change and reform Islam and its laws hinders the ability to form a strong and effective Muslim government, the one our Person B wants to see emerge. 

Person B: "Hmm but the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) managed to do it!?! If we just go back to the way he did things we can surely create a powerful Muslim nation."

           

            Person B is partially correct. According to most sources, Muhammad did manage to unite a diverse group of Arabs who ranged in their religious belief under the flag of Islam and managed to conquer all of Arabia before the time of his death. The error many Muslims make is that even if we go to the ways of the prophet it will still fail because you need a prophet. During the time of Muhammad, he was the only source of Islamic interpretation. You want to know what a sura means, go ask Muhammad. You want a ruling on something you do not understand and think might be haram, go ask Muhammad. He was/is the perfect Muslim, nay the perfect Human being. He had a one on one connection with God and was judge, jury and executioner of God's laws. Without a prophet, you can attempt to do things the way he did, but I bet my bottom dollar many people will argue over whether the prophet actually condones an action or not, resulting in the same situation we have above. 

            Without a central authority figure that can deem something Halal or Haram, Muslims are left to their own devices, which as we saw above results in various religious interpretations. 

            The only solution for the Muslim Middle East is to somehow find a way to utilize man made governments that allow you to amend and reform, like the constitution of America for instance and still keep their Muslim faith a part of it. If they cannot figure that out then we can all sit here and watch one failed Islamic nation after another rise and fall through the annals of history.

.

My Skepticism Towards Government Conspiracies

            For the record, this is not an expert's opinion. I am but a simple amateur making an observation about certain "political" beliefs regarding the American government that I find common in a few circles.  Again, for the record, I do not believe that the United States government is the perfect apple on the tree either, I know for a fact the U.S. government has and continues to participate in covert illicit, corrupt, and horrendous activities, both against its own people and those who fall under their sway.

            The argument I am trying to make is in regards to the conspiracy theories that surround the United States government, in particular the ones that follow the simple narrative that whenever something bad happens the U.S. government is the one behind it. Alternatively, replace the "U.S. Government" with the term New World Order, Stone Masons, Globalists, Zionists, etc, and you have the same narrative. For example in recent news the Sandy Hook school shooting has conjured up many beliefs that the U.S. was behind the attack in order to come up with an excuse to take "our" guns, or the most famous one of all 9-11 was carried out by the government in order to "insert theory here." I personally do not buy into the notion that the government is secretly behind all the incidents that occur and that a systematic takeover is occurring. What I do believe in is coincidence, pure luck of the draw, human emotions, and ultimately economic reasoning. All these incidents are too complex to narrow down to a single motive such as the government wanting to take all our guns away or the government blew up the towers to invade Iraq or set up a military state in the US. By doing that, we are ignoring the real, complex and very important issues that led to these horrible incidents

.

            For example in the Sandy Hook case, by wasting time and automatically chalking it up as a government conspiracy you have officially stopped looking for serious solutions to the problem. Issues like the lack of mental health care or the simple failure of mental health care is an issue necessary of exploration. In addition, issues like the state of the American family in which moms and dads are raising children in single parent homes that lack proper financial and emotional resources. Or, exploring issues such as the impact of violence on young children and the ease of access to violent material. Again, these are all issues that can be explored, but the conspiracy theorist has already pinned down the main problem, the government, all other issues are ignored and thus the problem continues.

            The example with 9-11 again portrays how serious issues are ignored and the conspiracy thrives. By believing, the government is behind the attacks we are choosing to ignore the social, political and economic reasoning behind the attacks. We are brushing aside the years of US domination of Muslim majority countries in which either we supported regimes (such as Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, etc) in harassing their citizenry or we ourselves have personally harassed their citizenry through either sanctions or violent attacks (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Etc.) That is not the only issue being ignored. Muslim Majority countries are a hive for Muslim extremism due to a promotion of the conservative elements of Islam and lack of education. These conditions along with constant exposure to negative contact with the West breed Islamic terrorist who use religion to promote their cause and sway the uneducated.

            By using the Government, New World Order, or what have you as the scapegoat every time an incident occurs you are not doing anything but deluding yourself and ignoring the real problems that require your attention.

            Again I do not believe our government is perfect, far from it, I know we do some shady stuff. We have overthrown dictators and installed puppets, we have a drug war going on but the only thing it does is line pockets. However, I strongly believe that these incidents are happening due to cause and effect rules, rather than systematic governments take over.  

The Arab Mistake & The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

This recent escalation of violence between the Israelis and Palestinians (Hamas Faction) has got me thinking about how this whole problem could have been solved in a much more peaceful way. Now quickly let has recap the origins of the conflict.

             Issues between Palestinians and Jews living in the Palestinian territory began to occur during the late 19th century with the rise of Zionism and Arab Nationalism. Both these philosophies claimed to represent the freedom their people desired. The Zionist a freedom from persecution in a new land and for the Arabs, self rule away from the Ottomans. The territory was largely an Arab-Muslim majority with a minority group consisting of Arab-Christians, Arab-Shia and Jews. With Zionism encouraging immigration to Palestine and Arab Nationalism encouraging establishing a majority Arab nation, the two sides were destined to collide at one point or another.

            Violence began when Jewish immigrants arrived in droves into the country. As more and more Jews arrived, they would purchase land from wealthy Arab owners and replace the Palestinian workers with Jewish workers who could not afford to buy their own farm so they would work on someone else's.[1] This caused a feeling of displacement in some Arab-Palestinians. Coupled with a threat to their national identity the Palestinians chose to respond to these encroachments with violence. This meant to scare away settlers, but in response to this violence, the Jewish population organized its own fighting force known as the Haganah. From this point on the Arab and Jewish populations of this region have been in bitter conflict, with factions and whole nations rising on both sides in an unrelenting struggle in which no one truly wins and everyone loses. The biggest defeat and easily the largest mistake made by the Arab Nationalists was to attack Israel on the day it declared itself independent.

            Now I do not claim the Arab Nationalist are the ones that started the conflict nor did the Zionist movement. The demographic situation in Palestine coupled with an unrelenting Jewish zeal that only wanted Palestine and no other country and an uncompromising, stubborn Arab population that turned down any negotiation attempt was perfect for this type of territorial conflict. Therefore, both sides can share some responsibilities for the continuation of the violence. With that being said, I repeat: The biggest mistake was to attack Israel instead of recognize it. By attacking Israel in 1948, Arabs across the region committed themselves and the Israelis to half a century of chaos. The war in 1948 and the subsequent Arab defeat allowed Israel to establish its borders and presence in the Middle East as well as doom the Arabs in a cycle of revenge. As the years went on the Arabs invested money in their military and tried a number of times to defeat the Israelis, such as in 1967, 1973, and the terrorist campaigns starting in the 1980's and continuing on into the present day. All this has led to a shrinking of Palestinian territory, military defeat or stalemates and finally plenty of atrocities and despair on both sides.

            Some of you are probably wondering how the Arab-Israeli conflict could have been solved peacefully if only the Arabs would have recognized Israel and not have attacked it. If Arab nations had been able to accept Israel, it would have opened up the doors to a solution possibly sooner in the century and in a much more peaceful and just manner. How? Well the Arabs having accepted Israel could focus on providing their Palestinians Kin the resources they needed to establish a state alongside Israel such as schools, hospitals, and basic infrastructure.  Aside from aiding the Palestinians, the Arab states could have begun to invest in their educational systems, modernizing their countries and establishing political and economic relationships with countries like the United States. These investments would have led to a much different Middle Eastern situation. With an educated population and stable modern economy the Arab world would not be the hot bed of terror and conflict it is today. Instead of the resort to violence to achieve its goals, this union of Arab states or league of Arab states or whatever you want to call it would be able to use its political and economic influence to lobby the United States the same way Israel does with APAIC. APAIC'S ability to persuade both Republican and Democratic politicians with the promises of finances and votes really plays a key role in the Palestinian and Israeli conflict. Instead of having politicians that only represent the interests of Israel; you would have an organization garnering support for Palestinians on the other side, in theory creating a much more balanced American involvement in Palestine. Sadly, the Arabs did not choose this route, instead they chose violence and the lobby groups now present in the United States are fractured and focus on self-interest rather than unified efforts at helping the Palestinians. Instead of learning from this endless violence, they continue to fight and have now Islamized the situation in order to garner greater Islamic support from around the world. In response, the religious right in Israel is moving in on making Israel a much more Jewish state, turning this in into a religious conflict. Out of this conflict, we also get the terrorist conflict of the 20th and 21st century. Seeing as how America favors Israel more than Palestine, several Anti-American terror groups and nations emerged promising to bring the war to America. A series of hijackings and attacks led up to the 9-11 attacks that pit America directly in conflict with the fringe of the Arab/Muslim world.  So in theory if the Arabs would have accepted Israel and concentrated on developing a Palestinian state, internal improvements such as education and by modernizing the country the Arabs could have secured a free and much more acceptable Palestine with little to no violence (again depending on things play out).

            Due to the current movements in the Arab world dubbed the Arab Spring nations like Tunisia and Egypt have moved toward a much more representative version of government. Yes they elected "Islamist" to rule over them, but guess what? It was a democratically run election and both Egypt and Tunisia have a long way to go before they reach the levels of democracy found in the West, but they are on the right path. With that being said these two nations alongside an aggressive Turkey and a wealthy Qatar can hopefully push the Arab world and the greater Islamic world toward a much more civilized way to deal with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Again this will all take time!  

            This is just an un-researched theory and not to be taken as fact. If anyone has another alternative theory or something to prove me wrong or help me understand please email me with it or leave it as a message!   

           

           

---

[1] Quigley John B. (2006) The Case For Palestine Pg. 6