Edwin Pawlowski > wrote:
>And where did this "land" issue come up and why? This is not a situation
>where tree branches are hanging over the neighbors fence. Millions of lives
>around the world have been lost over the centuries in the name of religion.

It came up where nomads with no title to the land were
displaced by a power that had taken the land from the
kings and governments who owned it but lost the war
that was won by the power (that power being first the
Ottoman empire and then the British empire).

The kings accepted defeat, but the nomads didn't like
being displaced.

And somehow that they forgot they are nomads. Some of them
were somewhat settled, but nonetheless they were legally
squatters and had no title to the land they were farming
and building houses on.

They didn't own it then, the person who did own it then
doesn't own it any more, and the people who do own it now
do so legally.

But ever since they lost the land, the nomads have
pretended it's a religious issue in order to build
political momentum for their goal of starting a war to
take the land back.

It's hopeless for them. The Arabs have peaked in wealth
and have never fully supported that war. But there is
enough money flowing in to make them a dangerous pest.

And if the more radical elements get the overwhelming
power of nuclear weapons, it could get very ugly.

But that would win them nothing but a day of dancing in
the streets. The world will never allow them to keep what
they irradiate.

Unless maybe it's strawberries or beef. Irradiating is
good on food and bad on things that eat. Ob. rfc-wise.

--Blair