Victory at what cost?

Submitted by Angie Jackson (United States), Jul 26, 2009 at 10:28

But what about cases where true, unquestioned victory is impossible, and the best one can hope for is a stalemate? Violence without victory is senseless, and I wonder why you offer such unmitigated support for Israelis over Palestinians. In a case such as theirs, what's needed is to end the violence, provide hope and opportunity for their children, and work to reduce the effects of religious and ethnic hatred between the two peoples, so that peace can continue.

Peace is always the end goal of war, just a better peace than you started off with. If Israel is able to have peace (no more bus bombs, no more check points, no more settlements) and also have their own state recognized and secure, why do they also need to destroy Palestinians, who have lived for the past three generations in refugee camps?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".