I wasn't attacking religion. I was providing all the context I'm aware of for this conflict, and you've added the big one to the mix I didn't even think of: fiscal viability.> ok...since were attacking religion. saying

But it's 2015, and it's time for all imperfect people to grow up. and i agree. so lets frame it in terms of poverty. The israeli have done well by themselves, and honestly i think it point to one SINGLE, controllable fact. Israeli women are allowed to work. if you want a poor nation (excluding being rich in oil), the best way, in my opinion, is to disallow half your work force from working. (yes i know there are some jobs women can fill.) data  and i'm going to suggest that israel is more inline with european numbers than middle east numbers. extrapolating that, what you have is a country of wealthy (and i'm not going to discuss how this came to be, but its probably more than simple hard work) people, and a country of poor people. Is it surprising the poor people want what the rich people have? or that the rich people think the poor people are scum? in my opinion it boils down to economics. For peace to exist israel has to invest in palestine. However, historically, the rate of return on these investments has made them a poor choice. '94 accord, best deal the arabs and palestine were going to get, and they turned it down, but this is a whole different world now. israel hasn't gotten weaker and has only dug into their stance further. So now, on top of economic problems there is an air of political problem. Obviously the politicians can't blame themselves even though that's who they should blame. so they lash out. again, surprised that starving, impoverished, nearly jailed (don't fight me on this i'm trying to be un-bias, but clearly i am) Palestinians would do such a thing? and i'll add that it is in american and Israeli interest for this to happen. gotta sell those new planes and bombs to someone. your choice, israel is oil, palestine is fire (or vice versa), and all america wants is a great big explosion. the Palestinians had as likely a chance of voting out hamas, as israelis did of voting out netanyahu, both of which have been bad for their countries, again IMO. so how do we get to peace? its more than religious differences, its more than economic differences, its more than cultural differences. How can two such parties live so close together? As an extrapolation to europe, to what level should Europeans expect immigrants to join their culture? if you move somewhere with no intention of changing your culture, simply because it is 'safer' or 'better' there, are you really escaping the problem, or just bringing it with you? its a tough question that can't be answered overnight. and now for the big reveal. i'm a jewish american, or am i an american jew? either way, i was at least posed the question of what does it mean to be A-b vs B-a, the dogma being, you're both. my own conclusion has led me to secularism. so whether you are orthodox judaism, or devout Muslim, the answer to your question comes back to the religion. by adhering to millennium old traditions neither will be able to live peacefully with those that are different from them. how this applies to a world where there are large swaths of muslim theocracies, and but one jewish theocracy is for you to decide. i wouldn't suggest the destruction of either religion, but i fear, the annexation of israel will lead to the end of Judaism. maybe thats just my bias, but given the levels of anti-semetism, and anti-immigrant (mostly muslim mind you) in europe and worldwide, i have a problem not believing this. weird way to end it but, yeah, its a big mess that may only be solved through fire. or one side giving up some of themselves to join the other. (which i will add seems to be the case for large numbers of muslims living, mostly peacefully in israel, even if they are lower class citizens. i of course would rather them be treated as humans, but, what do i know...)