Arthur Hertzberg confronts the conflict that is occurring in the Middle East with an open view. He seems to have no objective except to find the best possible and most efficient way to solve the problem that has arisen between the Palestinians and the nation of Israel. His claim is that the United States of America must do something to stop the violence from reoccurring. Throughout his argument he gives many possibilities as to what the United States can do. He then backs each of them up by explaining the outcomes.

Hertzberg focuses primarily on gaining the attention of American citizens. Everything that he writes is directed towards the interest of Americans rather than the people that are actually fighting the war. This

Hertzberg concludes by recapping his entire paper and stating all the main points. This is one of the best things that people can do when trying to persuade the reader. Most people remember what they read last. By putting the most important information last they are guaranteed to remember, if not act on his thinking. The very last statement he makes gives him almost total credibility because he admits that there is no easy solution to the problem faced, but if the United States is willing the situation will improve.

Throughout his entire paper, Hertzberg continually makes great arguments. Everything that he says is relevant and has support to back it up. He also always looks at the predicament from both sides rather than being completely biased the entire paper. I believe that anyone going into this without any prior knowledge on the Middle East would have to agree with the claims made by Hertzberg because they are all valid. The final thing that Hertzberg did throughout the editorial is that he continually admitted when he did not know something, or when there might be a problem with one of the possibilities that he came up with. I now totally believe, because of the evidence and support that Hertzberg provided, that the United States needs to do something about the conflict in the Middle East because we are the only ones that can.

He continues his valid argument by taking into account the opposing view. He states that there would be “an outcry among some supporters of Israel,” if the United States cut some of the financial aid that is provided to Israel. He then makes the claim that there would be more Jews in Israel and the United States that would support the end of settlement than a lot of politicians think. He then backs up the statement by explaining that in 20 years if there were to be the “undivided nation” that many people speak about, that the majority of the people would be Arabic and therefore force Israel to be a democracy controlled by the Arabs or make them into something similar to South Africa. This appeals to many people because they do not realize

Some topics in this essay:
United Palestinians, Middle East, United America, West Bank”, Israel United, Israel Palestinians, South Africa, East United, Bank Gaza, Jewish Arabic, middle east, entire paper, conflict middle east, saying support, financial support, united america, help peace, conflict middle, west bank, cut financial aid, financial aid, united cut financial, settlements west,