I just came across this charming quote on http://www.machineslikeus.com/:
"You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend." - Richard Jeni
When I think about religious conflicts such as one finds in Sudan, Israel-Palestine and Iraq, I have great difficulty understanding what is the right course of action. I mean, which would you choose:
1) Intervene, and force both parties to worship their imaginary friend in peace? (Iraq - This doesn't seem to be working. They hate each other and they hate you, too.)
2) Back one side and see if it ends quicker? (Israel-Palestine - They've been at it for a long time haven't they? Still going strong...)
3) Ignore them and pretend they're not there. (Sudan - Don't even ask about Darfur.)
4) Nuke them right off the face of the Earth. (Hasn't been tried yet, but the upshot to this is:- a) no more conflict; and b) all parties involved have gotten much closer to their respective imaginary friends.)
Given the proven efficacy of 1, 2 and 3, I'm kind of partial to 4, but who am I to say, eh?