For there to be success, “Peace” ought to be a mutual liking and / love in men’s minds, and all ‘kind’ men would possess such a liking.

If all men aspire to enjoy peace, then they ought to extend their hand-shakes to the other and bear no ‘ill-will’ against the opposing party.

In fact, in the first instance, there need not be any ‘opposing’ feelings towards the other party at all.

When men feel good and at ease with peace, then there would be peace which is as opposed to war.

Let all warring men and women lay down their ill concocted weapons. In that manner, there would be more peace around us.

What leads to war? First, it was the land. Men aspire to have greater control of the land around them. They want to exert their muscles and minds over others. They want to rule, and yet the do not know how to be good rulers.

Therefore, as rulers or authoritarians, they need to know how to make others comfortable with their usurpation of others’ rights.

Without the above knowledge and understanding, there would be war. In war-time then, they seek God’s help when they are on the verge of losing out in their dirty ‘wars’ against God’s other beings.

Amen.

Jenny Tan

Rather than naively taking out the religious aspects, there are several ways to achieve a solution. A complicated problem requires a complicated analysis with a simple but profound solution.

1. Reexamine at the simplicity of the political solution: a two-state solution simply requires that each state recognises and respects the existence of the other. All other tactics to obstruct this process reflects an indirect denial of real peace. For example, if Singapore/Indonesia refuses to recognise Malaysia as a legitimate country, why bother talking about a truce or lasting peace with them? Wiser to prepare secretly for the coming attack.

2.The diplomatic solution is now offered by President Obama. He is likely to convince Iran and all the proxy elements of the Arab world to lay down their arms for peace. But this peace won’t hold because it is merely diplomacy laced with great rhetoric from an ambitious world leader. Read his inaugural speech:

“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

This means a voluntary disarmament which will eventually be a prelude to rearmament. An unclenched fist can easily become clenched with a nuclear bomb later on.

3. Lastly on the question of who is right or wrong. I suggest to the Reverend that he seeks guidance from Jesus’s advice to judge a tree by its fruits. How many Jewish and Arab friends do we personally know from both sides of the issue.

Finally, we should learn to see the problems of the Middle East from the perspective of a Martian who has no vested interest. Which party in this conflict is unreasonable, barbaric, illogical and religiously extremist?

Maybe, he will say both parties are equally so. But ask him further, show him the history of this conflict which extends to Abraham’s relationship with his two sons Isaac and Ishmael and you may arrive at a truly objective view.