Palestine and Israel Essay Example for Free

Palestine and Israel testifyBefore a conflict takes place, there is usually a dis restrainment between the concerned parties. In the gaffe of the Israel and Palestine, aggressive dialogue has never been set to foster talk rather than war. When this is absolutely seat in to practice, the result give be successful owing to the fact that three forget be a less possibility of the occurrence of the war therefore saving the lives of the large number that would have been missed during the war.Conflict basically entails a situation where twain parties ar not in agreement close an issue. In this case the parties usually steep in face-off therefore limiting any diplomatic relations between the two sides. From the perspective of Israel, Palestinians be considered as caring out baneist activities, therefore in order to cub such activities, they have to distort and prevent them from doing so. This forces them to deploy troops to Gaza to try and incumbrance this kind of terro rist attacks to its citizens.This however ought not to be the case since the deployment of the troop without talk signifies that one party is not in any attempt tom perceive dialogue which would have solved the problem. Terrorism as considered by Israel is an act that leads to hysteria or a type of violence. It is the experience of fear or terror as the proximate int dismiss of that brutality. .Terrorism may also be defined as the performance of acts of violence directed against a state or a pigeonholing of people with the aim of intimidating them so as to achieve ones political goals.It entails making other people suffer so as to intrust accredited messages to the relevant authorities about dissatisfactions or certain grievances. War is not justified at all in the case of the isrealites and the Palestine since they all suffer the consequences. For whichever reason a group of people or an individual decides to perform acts of terror, it just cant be justified because there are give out ways of solving disputes. For an action to be termed as justified, its end result should be practised enough to justify the act.War is not because the end result is fear, frustration and terror to a certain group of people. Taking cases like the recent Israel invasion into Gaza is not justified since many innocent lives were doomed and property destroyed. That is not a morally right end result since it only leads to suffering and ill to the innocent Palestinians who were caught in the commotion. This coupled with the fact that the objective is not always achieved this way, renders war inappropriate and should not be given a chance at all. War only victimizes people who are really innocent.All these victims only act as objects cosmos used by a certain group of people to achieve their own unique absurd kicks. The innocent victims who perish are used to affright a certain group of people or governments. The ones who are sent to commit such an bodily process are also be ing used as objects by their masters to achieve their objectives. They are human beings beings and most often than not they end up perishing together with the innocent victims. There are better ways of settling soulfulnessal differences without necessarily having to express ones frustrations through taking away innocent livesDuring the confrontation between the two sides, war crimes are usually committed where there is usually a rear of tube of contract set by the international organizations about activities not to performed on the civilians,. This entails aspect that is carried upon with the main intentions of make aggravation or harm to the immediate neighbor not necessarily for revenge purposes. When the Israelites and the Palestine engage in war, there is usually closing of property and the loss of lives of civilians a factor that clearly results to mental problems to the people who are caught up in the cross fire .In this case, those affected usually end up suffering and as a result the economic growth of the countries are hindered. Within the closing of the facilities such as schools most of the youth and children end up engaging in a reengage mission and this in turn results to their influx in more terrorism attacks (Verhoeven,J eds) . Their can be understating within the two group in the event that all the previous are laid forward and analyzed critically through dialogue since by engaging in war, no sounding solution will be achieved.In the event that there is peaceful negotiation within the two groups, the society will whole benefit since there will be absence of the destruction of property and the two groups will embrace individually others culture and live together in harmony . The society will also organise economically owing to the absence of sanctions that hinder a particular side from transaction and trading with the other.When things are clearly talked out between the Israelites and the Palestine it is depicted that there will be an agreement if each side decides to forget what was in the past and follow concepts that will sustain the future of the children of the two countries (Simon Schuster) . On the other hand, dialogue is the key aspect to a successful ceasefire since all the two sides will be able to come up with their proposal and at the end of the day a consensus can be attained if they are all willing to let loose what was seen as a conflicting situation. . In a normal circumstance the issue of dialogue when there is conflict always solves the problems, since human being are bound to conflict and at the same time they can reach an understanding.When the palatines and the isrealites embrace this aspect, the equity can be clearly seen therefore at the end of the day the two sides have to agree on whether to adopt the changes or not. Talking other than war on the other hand will shows the intenders of the war on the negative impact that can be produced in the event that it happens. When a person is conv inced that when he or she goes to war death will be the consequence, then resulting result will be a change in that thought. One will unquestionably consider his or her deportment other than death (Barry). Therefore, the use of dialogue is a more concerned issue. In this scenario talking outshines the view of war since, with appropriate dialogue between two parties at war, there will be no or a small chance of the occurrence of the war.Conclusion Talking thins out other than war is the only solution that will make it possible for most of the people who might be caught up during the commotion to be safe. In reality, the safety of and individual is very vital. talking other than war definitely is a good idea since the Palestine and the isrealites will be able to look back on how the situation has be devastated as a result of the war and in return think of build and sorting their issues without indulging in war. The impact of war carries a social problem since with total destruction of the facilities that people are able to obtain their basic commodities, lives are usually lost.In some case there is disease outbreak and food shortages therefore resulting to starvation of the affected individuals. Work cited Barry, R The truth about Syria, Palgrave MacMillan, 2007 Verhoeven,J eds. Peace creation in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Lynne Reinner, London and Bolder, CO, 20 Simon Schuster,. The peace within Palestine not apartheid, 2006 Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Brief History retrieved on twenty-third February from http//www. mideastweb. org/briefhistory. htm The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in a Nutshell on 23rd February from http//www. mideastweb. org/nutshell. htm A Synopsis of the Israel/Palestine Conflict on 23rd February from http//www. ifamericansknew. org/history/