How effective will be US-Al Qaeda compromise and Israel-Hizbollah compromise?

Question

Peace is good for the world, hence each party in the conflict should try to accommodate the other and achieve the world peace.

Answer 1

Accomodating monsters like al-Qaida and Hezbollah involve either conversion or dropping dead. Sometimes peace comes at too high a price. Forget peace, bring GREAT JUSTICE. :D

Answer 2

1. Neither Hezbollah nor al Quaeda has said it will, nor is it likely that either would, keep any promises ever made.

2. Both are admitted terrrorist organizations. The one blew up and murdered US diplomats and US marines. The other blew up the USS Cole. «Negotiations» are impossible with a terrorist organization.

3. Aside from the hatred and vengefulness there's a more basic element. Western societies have a culture of compromise. Arabs are steeped in a culture of «immutable justice». The two sides would talk past each other. The problem is that Western (American anyway) notions of «shock and awe» are useless in that situation, as we have seen.

4. Peace is great. Sometimes, however, you need the police, or the coercive force of the state whether police or military, to keep a festering sense of injustice from disrupting the international order. The mistake people, including most of the Peace Now! crowd make is assuming that others think the way they do. «Rationality» does not translate universally. And when the muddle of religion is added, things get worse. When each of two disputing sides knows that he/she holds the Sole Truth (never mind the Sole Meaning of Life) there is no argument except absolute coercive force that will keep the peace. (The dispute is typically over land or water, but it can be over something else.)

Another point is that neither international law nor a general consensus has ruled on the following question: Since title to most of the earth's land was taken by force (invasion, slaughter, etc. by Gengis Khan, Mohammed, the Romans and others, etc.) in a manner that is illegal today, how long to such «squatters» have to sit on the land to get good title?:

a) to the beginning of recorded time?
b) till the memory of man runneth not? (But different memories say different things; as Benedict Anderson and Ernest Geller teach us, national myths are easily invented and forever believed)
c) 500 years? Where does that leave Ulster?
d) the demise of all the former owners (Native Americans, First Canadians, indigenous peoples generally)
e) World War I (the Ottoman Empire's demise). Many Muslims and most Islamists seemingly want to bring back the Khilafa (you can Google that). The founding of predominantly-Muslim nation states
f) World War II (and the founding of Israel; decolonisation between 1948 and 1970)

But I digress.

Answer 3

Yes, peace is good for the world, but peace doesn't come cheap. And in the middle east there can be no compromise as the Al-Qaeda and Hizbollah are only out for the total elimination of all Infidels.

If you were to have the Muslim world change the Quoran then maybe you could have a compromise but until the Quoran is changed, the Moslim radials live only to kill all the Infidels in the world.

Must like Hitler did to the Jew and Catholics in WWII.

To have compromise you need to have two parties willing to change something in their beliefs. I am afraid that thousands of years of hate passed down over generations will take thousands of years of non hate to be passed down over generations.

Compromise is not in the vocabulary of the Islamic faith.

Answer 4

I can't really imagine anything happening in the forseeable between Al-Qaeda and the US State Dept that could be called a 'compromise'. Al-Qaeda is such a loose grouping of extremists with similar ideology, no-one could speak on behalf of all of them.

As for the Middle East, by past experience, both sides will sign some hard-won agreement with great fanfare, handshaking and plentiful photo opportunities. Then rush back home and start off all over again after a couple of weeks break.
Both will blame each other for the breakdown and the rest of the world will tear its hair out. It has no chance of being kept, so why even ask for the promise? Very sad but very,very predictable.

Answer 5

Bin laden was asked to leave his home land because of his radical idealogy, then the Saudis asked him to leave and seem he spent some time in another Mid-east country, which is why he wound up in Afganistan. He gained some followers and he is not fond of the Muslims that shunned him.or they him and his Al Qaeda tribe.of Terrorist. The Muslim nation expelled him I see no way USA can reach any compromise. As for Hezbollah/Shi-ik political party and the Hezbollah guerrillas Israel could release Lebanese held in their prisons since their withdrawal from Lebanon, as a start toward better relations.

Answer 6

Problem number 1. It is illogical to think that an organization thats sole purpose is to create terror in order to achieve its objectives (that is destroy Israel and other western countries and turn the world into a muslim society) is capable of negotiation and compromise. This is a war of ideology, and to think that Rice or Powell or anybody else can come to terms with these people is just not thinking realistically. This battle will never end. Never.

Answer 7

You got this wrong. No way in the world you can compare Hizbollah to Al-Qaeda. Hizbollah is in a self defense from the aggression of Israel. The story goes back for years of aggression from Israel and they only respond to this

Answer 8

Yes peace is great for the world, but to obtain it there will be great sacrifices because war is meant to be continuous, not to be won. True peace will only occurs when there is nothing left to kill. As a human race it is natural for us to retaliate until losses are too great to continue its support.
Look at history of many wars, WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, there was a significant loss of life before a compromise was reached. It can be even quoted from Einstein on war: "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." This suggests that loss of life would be significant enough that civilization as we know it would be practically nonexistent

Answer 9

the problems seem to be far, far deep-rooted and one always does not get the clear picture. US-Al Qaeada compromise ? Never, given the way things are goin rite now. Israel-Hizb may still be a possibility and to be thought of. See the site :
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middlee...
you will see the ground reality of the conflict that is raging on now in the mid-east.

Answer 10

Compromise is not part of the fabric of the Middle East.

they have practiced genocide since before the word existed.

They have hated and killed each other since before Islam, Christianity, and even Judaism.

Religion is only the most recent excuse for their hatred.

Someday we won't need oil and it won't matter if they kill each other off.

until then, we have to pay lip service to the concept of peace.

It sure would be nice if I were wrong.

Answer 11

World Peace sounds great. Too bad it is just a platitude with no one believing or doing anything to create it. It is always a sound bytes in pageants & campain speeches. Both side have too much vested interest in their side being right to even listen to the other.