The Arab-Israeli conflict (n.) is capable of being solved if it is indeed about interstate disputes. If it is a religious conflict, nothing but violence is ahead.
The Arab-Israeli conflict (n.) is a conflict about status, a war between two peoples who feel deeply humiliated by the other, who want the other to respect them. Battles over status can be even more intractable than those over land or water or oil.
Argument (n.) fails when we mock the layman who cannot follow; a good guide leads the lost traveller back to the road, and if you cannot, admit your own incapacity.
An Argument (n.) that is incontestable often serves a patient to cloak other thoughts that want to escape criticism and consciousness.
An Argument (n.) is harmless against faith: if people are as instinct-driven as critics say, no devout believer will be argued out of his belief.
An Argument (n.) is lost at once by whoever slips into the reverse of his own meaning, and his opponent seldom fails to make the most of it.
The Arms race (n.) cannot protect nations from modern war, Jung wrote: the heaping up of arms is itself a call to war, and what is needed is to know when the unconscious bursts consciousness's dykes.
The Arms race (n.) is mutual projection: each nation projects its own possession onto its neighbour and makes the biggest guns a sacred duty — and the worst is that it is right, for all the neighbours are as afraid as itself.
Arms race (n.) is a vicious circle: nobody wants war, yet we start one to keep the other side from starting first.
Arms race (n.) can be a weapon in itself: Khrushchev believed the US used it to break the weaker Soviet economy without war.
The Battle of the sexes (n.) is politics blamed on anatomy.
The Battle of the sexes (n.) is never going to be won; there's too much fraternizing with the enemy.
The Battle of the sexes (n.) is a war in which thoughtlessness is the weapon of the male, vindictiveness of the female.