Rick posed an interesting conundrum on another thread. He made some comment about the need for peace in the Middle East. The problem with his comment was the lack of definition of the bogus word “peace.” What exactly does that mean? Well, for most of the Cold War, “peace” meant stasis, meaning a balance of power, detente, an absence of actual combat. Frankly, the Middle East is, in so many ways, remarkably peaceful. Any unrest in the Middle East has come from unconscionable tampering with the status quo during five years of the current American regime meddling with something it doesn’t understand. I’m not sure why Obama misses the point, but the PLO and Israel are remarkably happy with the status quo, and don’t want an American forced “settlement.” Indeed, the PLO is fully cognizant of how well peace worked out for Sadat. So if peace is stasis, the Middle East is at peace, and will only improve when the United States stops stoking flamings out of something this is nothing more than harmless embers. Peace is one of those fuzzy American values that doesn’t translate outside of our little island. Nor should it.