Obama’s choice on Israel
As with so many things about Obama, we just don’t know what his policy on Israel will be. But his dilemma is clear: will he appease the left wing of his party and go the Jimmy Carter route? Or will he face the facts and realize that such a course would be not only a waste of time and effort, but a means of empowering the terrorist powers-that-be in Palestine who have brainwashed and impoverished its people and helped them to embrace murder and mayhem?
I was going to write a longer piece on the subject, but Irwin Seltzer seems to have more or less done it for me. My additional question is whether Obama’s more fundamental sympathies are with those who think Hamas is a force to be moderated and reasoned with, or whether he understands the group’s implacable and non-negotiable agenda.
I don’t know the answer; I’m not sure anyone except Obama’s closest advisors—and perhaps not even them—knows. Does Obama himself know? If he doesn’t, that’s okay for now—he’s got about a week to decide.
Meanwhile, here’s the face of Hamas. See whether you think this describes a mindset amenable to diplomatic niceties, or even conventional pressure:
Like Hezbollah, Hamas believes that God is opposed to a Jewish state in Palestine… I [author Jeffrey Goldberg] asked [a Hamas leader] the question I always ask of Hamas leaders: Could you agree to anything more than a tactical cease-fire with Israel? I felt slightly ridiculous asking: A man who believes that God every now and again transforms Jews into pigs and apes might not be the most obvious candidate for peace talks at Camp David. Mr. Rayyan answered the question as I thought he would, saying that a long-term cease-fire would be unnecessary, because it will not take long for the forces of Islam to eradicate Israel.
Goldberg goes on to say that the only hope for any successful action against Hamas is to activate the help of the “moderate” Arab states to strengthen Fatah:
The moderate Arab states, Europe, the United States and, mainly, Israel, must help Hamas’s enemy, Fatah, prepare the West Bank for real freedom, and then hope that the people of Gaza, vast numbers of whom are unsympathetic to Hamas, see the West Bank as an alternative to the squalid vision of [Hamas].
Good luck on that. Talk about nation-building for democracy and tolerance in a climate and culture hostile to it! Iraq was indeed a “cakewalk” compared to the task of changing a people that has been macerated in the deepest and most irrational of religiously-driven hatreds for many decades.
I keep hearing about the need to “strengthen” Fatah, because they’re more “moderate” than Hamas.
Folks, Fatah is (and was) the core group of what we used to call the PLO. Fatah was Yasser Arafat’s organization. If I may be blunt: Fatah is a terrorist organization, and they have a long, long track record of killing people.
If anyone can introduce evidence that they’ve changed, I’d welcome it… but I haven’t seen it. I have seen evidence that they haven’t changed at all. (I still wince every time the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade is mentioned — the very name says it all: a quasi-military organization for the purpose of producing martyrs, a.k.a. terrorist murder-suicides, that name themselves after Jerusalem. And remember, they were the offshoot of Fatah, used by Fatah to do dirty work while keeping their hands clean.)
The primary difference between Fatah and Hamas, as near as I can tell, is that Fatah is willing to speak of the destruction of Israel in Arabic while wishing for peace in English. Hamas preaches genocide regardless of language.
What we need here, in my humble opinion, is not to strengthen Fatah, or Islamic Jihad, or some other organization that is somehow made to look good in comparison to Hamas. What we need is out-of-the-box thinking, a way to have non-terrorist Palestinian leaders.
For example: suppose there were an organization of Palestinians living in America, who exploit their safety here to denounce terror? Suppose such an organization, which would no doubt be critical of Israel for many things, would nonetheless say: “Shooting rockets at civilians is unacceptable. Suicide bombings are immoral. Raising one’s children to be corpses is disgusting. Anyone who supports such things has no right to lead the Palestinian people.”
There has never been such an organization, as far as I know. But it would be a mighty nice start.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
obama was pickled in an certain ideology.. so its easy to know what he will do if you combine that with the idea that staying in office can allow him to do more harm running the beast into the ground till we cry to be saved… (classic coupe).
in case you havent noticed, the guy calling for another crystal nacht had a che hat on… others have obama shirts…
ya see… if bush was really hitler, wouldnt the ones calling for the murder of the jews, marching with western nazis (something different), and with the current nazi party (green libertarian party), all knowing that their ruler knows the rules that they do.
so the question is what will he do to navigate between the two?
nothing… he is going to do what he has already demonstrated the fine art of… inaction when action would work, and action when inaction is right. or havent you noticed.
capitalism overthrew the ruling class and made them slaves of the people.
communism/socialism claims the people are imrisoned, and need to be set free from their leaders…
the latter works the same way they defined peace.
to us, peace is living in harmony and no wars. to them, as they say it, peace is no more opposition to totalitarian communism, which is why we are in perpetual war till they either get the world, or we get rid of them, which our morals will not let us (do like suharto, and clean house).
so if you play the word game… they are talking plainly…
capitalism enslaved the rulers.
so who are to be set free by communism?
capitalism made rulers of the masses.
so who are to be slaves for the new rulers?
inversion… constant inversion…
so… taking ideology.. persistence of position… and inversion… doing the opposite than what you call it… you should be able to work out what will happen…
the more you can predict the more accurate your understanding of things are.
which is why, they have already put forward a change to the constitution so that obama can rule for life. (as i said way way back… THATS why hilary was crying… the same as a sociopath who is going to jail. they dont cry for their victims, they cry for what they will lose… and she will lose being the historical hero of the fatherland who converted the great satan and enemy in the great game to a sattelite state of the soviets… given her ideology, THAT IS something a sociopath would cry about, no?)
he will do nothing and claim to be doing something… if things go good, he will take credit for the something he isnt doing.. if it goes bad, he will claim that there just wasnt enough money, or some other useful reason.
meanwhile, the oppressor classes will be brought to toe as the police and other entities play with the rules…
england has crossed the total line… we are standing on it, and voted in the one to bring us across…
if we dont do something, we will pass the event horizon and never know it. once past that, we have to finish the roller coaster ride, just as the germans did after a certain point was crossed. at that point, they stop hiding… which they have already done, but they ususally jump the gun, which is why they often fail.
they jumped the gun…
will we realize that its the obama followers that are calling for new exterminatinos of the most troublesome religion for a state which seeks to replace it? and this time christians are going too, since they foiled the plans last time.
we will not realize that the killings have started… because we will not ask the background of the attacker if the attacker is black or muslim. so we will not know that the guy that went after the elderly couple as they left the building, will be deemed crazy… not with purpose.
the incidents will be allowed to grow… it will establish the fear and the way things are using the new brutal class that each of these things manufacture.
in order to keep the lid on till it explodes in crisis, they will keep hiding the early signs. is it a sniffle? is a cold coming on? no, you wer ein the cold… etc.
if you wanted someone to die of a desease this is what you woudl do, especially if your the one that purposefully infected them.
Obama’s clearly sympathetic to Hamas but doesn’t want the tag of Appeaser in Chief. He’ll labor at accomodating the Jew Haters without appearing to. I suspect he’ll give some quiet words of remonstrance while essentially saying nothing. He’s at his best when speaking of nothing with eloquence. lol
english.pravda.ru/print/opinion/columnists/106914-Obama_Swindler_Liar-0
so much for the idea of friends.
care to see the mess thats coming. regardless of validity or not (a lot of it is valid, and havent vetted the rest), its going to throw into termoil ANY thing that he wants to do.
sign a treaty… they break it… when they do, they just claim he isnt really the president… (and the berg case was just thrown out, well one of them).
so as in history, they eat their own, and use each other.
we are in for an even rougher ride as every country will be using this crap to just not cooperate for years.
welcome to the GREAT GAME…
The ace in the hole is that Obama is now getting the security briefings with the POTUS. The information that cannot be divulged to the public for reasons of security are now being divulged to Obama. Bill Clinton was ineffective, and depended on negotiation more than he should (most likely to get re-elected, which was more important than other considerations), but he did not turn out to be nearly as dovish in office as we expected – nor was Gore at the time.
Carter, of course, is trying to erase the Iran hostage and Camp David legacy by trying to show that his method of talking, talking, would have eventually worked – because to admit otherwise would be to admit the full weight of his failure.
Belief in negotiation with the Palestinians is founded on unreality. Any contact with reality tends to be curative.
Obama identifies with the Palis. He will do everything to help them and harm Israel — everything which wouldn’t cause him political damage. He and the Democrats will blame the Jews for obstructing the peace process, demonize Christians who don’t wish to see a second Holocaust, and constantly defer to the antisemitic “international community.”
Israel is doomed. Once Iran gets nuclear weapons, they will use them, safe in the knowledge that Obama will obstruct any Israeli counterattacks. Millions of Jews will die, and the Arabs will drive the survivors out of their homeland. And then there will be “peace” in the Middle East, and Obama will get the Nobel Prize for acquiescing in genocide.
“The moderate Arab states, Europe, the United States and, mainly, Israel, must help Hamas’s enemy, Fatah, prepare the West Bank for real freedom, and then hope that the people of Gaza, vast numbers of whom are unsympathetic to Hamas, see the West Bank as an alternative to the squalid vision of [Hamas]. “
I call bullshit on that. Dealing with Fatah gains you nothing. They’ve been there before – for over 40 years now. The Palestinians of Gaza chose their leaders after Israel withdrew. I say it’s long past time to go all Scipio Africanus on them – just like Carthage.
I say give them a week to evacuate the innocent (they won’t) and then push them all – every last man, woman, and child – into the sea. Don’t leave a single stone in Gaza atop another. And then sow the site with salt.
Yeah, Israel will be scorned by the entire world – so what. SSDD
Are pacifism and surrender the only viable options for Palestine?
I agree with Trimeg. If Israel agrees to a Gaza ceasefire, that will be proof positive of its doom. The European Jews were too slow to leave Europe when they could in the 30’s, and now is a replay.
Remember when Israel took the Sinai and chose to give it up? That would’ve been a defensible home.
Bogey Man asked, “Are pacifism and surrender the only viable options for Palestine?”
Yes.
They should stop teaching their children hate and suicide bombing, allow Israel to exist and work with Israel to have a two state solution where Palestinians allow Israel to exist.
If you call that pacifism and surrender – then it is. Whatever !!!
Israel has not vowed to wipe Palestinians off the face of the map.
The reverse is true. Hamas wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map.
The PLO also calls for the effective elimination of the Israeli State. HAMAS is just a tad more truculent. Playing one side off against the other, in the long run, will not achieve the objectives of Jewish survival.
I’ve looked at so many facets of the Islamic war against our civilization that I cannot see any other way around it: we have to destroy them before they destroy us. It’s that simple. I know this won’t impress the academic crowd, but I’m not much into impressing them. They are too removed from reality.
Appeasement only keeps the beast alive. That means in the long run there is only one solution: slay the beast.
Muhammad set lose upon creation the Devil’s Perfect Instrument of our destruction.
“I don’t know the answer; I’m not sure anyone except Obama’s closest advisors–and perhaps not even them–knows.”
On the contrary, some of his most important advisors are Power, Malley, Jones… His closest personal friends include Rezko and Khalidi… His “former” mentor and spiritual advisor was Wright… They are all very open and explicit about their attitudes concerning Israel. Obama is a master manipulator, bait and switch artist, a well established liar, and probably a fraud (born in Kenya, not Hawaii, with well established loyalty to fellow tribesman Odinga, with the implications that reflects). How it all plays out depends on the extent to which the Manchurian Candidate rebels and betrays his king makers and handlers in the Democratic Party power machine to pursue his obviously personal bias concerning Israel.
There is only one viable option for Israel – to follow policy of Allies in WWII: all-out war, carpet bombing, demanding unconditional surrender from Hamas, capture or killing all Hamas leadership, establishing years-long occupation with permanent military presence, demilitarization and de-Islamisation of Gaza. Only after two or three generation of Arabs living free of intimidation and hate propaganda some responsible and democratic Arab leaders could emerge.
Sergey: exactly how do you believe Israel should undertake the “de-Islamization” of Palestinians?
Sounds like you’re looking for the Crusades, not WWII.
I haven’t heard anyone here support a Christian re-conquest of Palestine. Certainly, the lot of Arab Christians is to be pitied, though some are collaborators with the Muslim oppressors.
What I hear from Sergey and others who foresee a Carthaginian Peace for Gaza is frustration with the indecisiveness of asymmetrical warfare conducted under double standards.
The world order, which masks power politics under a veneer of liberal pieties, enables unlimited antisocial behavior at the fringes and in the cracks, while restraining those who believe in its precepts from doing much about it. So we get all external power and internal self-restraint on one side and feeble physical power without any external restraint on the other. In this inverted moral universe, powerlessness becomes a source of power, and ruthlessness becomes sacred…for some.
This can last until the threat becomes undeniable, and it becomes clear that we cannot coexist in safety, no matter how much we wish we could. In an age of nuclear proliferation and state-sponsored terrorism, that could happen in an afternoon.
No amount of unrestrained military attack can prevent or eliminate terrorism. That’s because terrorism, especially suicide attacks, are a tactic of last resort. It’s what people invariably do when they have no other weapons, no realistic hope of getting any and little or no military apparatus to defend.
Terrorist networks and financing can be disrupted and, even, destroyed, but it isn’t difficult for the terrorists to rebuild them and to evolve.
Terrorism is cheap and simple and requires little organization. It is also extremely inefficient — the dullest geopolitical weapon.
In the case of Gaza, it seems beyond dispute that the Palestinians will not simply surrender and adopt pacifism as a response to increasing Israeli aggression.
Israel has no realistic choice but to include carrots with the sticks. History shows again and again and again that if you insist that you own your enemy’s land and can and will obliterate his nation and dignity, he has nothing to lose, no reason to negotiate in good faith and something close to a moral blank check to defend himself.
The Europeans were able to destroy the Native American nation and come close enough to completing genocide to be able to eliminate the “terrorists” of their day, who had the truly awful manners to attack women, children and all civilians in cold blood.
Trouble is, even if it wanted to, Israel could not achieve that against the Palestinians, given the access to weapons and other technology.
WWII makes a poor parallel for the Palestine-Israel conflict, but if you’re going to compare the two, you need to include the details.
The U.S. never claimed to own Japan and Germany as its divine territory. Thus, all parties believed the occupations were aimed only at rebuilding the civilian infrastructure and preventing the return of militarism.
If the U.S. had insisted that Japan was an American colony and part of a Christian nation and that the Japanese people had no right to a nation, even the holocausts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not have brought an end to Japanese resistance.
Bogey man takes the side of the terrorists and excuses them by saying, “No amount of unrestrained military attack can prevent or eliminate terrorism. That’s because terrorism, especially suicide attacks, are a tactic of last resort. It’s what people invariably do when they have no other weapons, no realistic hope of getting any and little or no military apparatus to defend. ”
As long as they hear people like you exist they’ll keep trying.
A unified world with no tolerance for their tactics will help explain… IT DOESN’T WORK !
It is not a tactic that should gain them anything.
Here’s what you do bogey. Change the word terrorist to rapist. Do you excuse the rapist. Do you say, “it’s their last resort”. It’s not allowed. It can’t be allowed. Period. You show your allegiance when you write what you write. You are completely unpersuasive.
Bogey wrote, “In the case of Gaza, it seems beyond dispute that the Palestinians will not simply surrender and adopt pacifism as a response to increasing Israeli aggression.”
What should a woman do when being raped Bogey? Just take it? Israel/woman has the right to defend herself. To say that an increasing woman’s aggression causes the rapist to do more harm is the root of your perception problem. It is not the root of the problem but the root of YOUR perception problem.
Bogey REALLY showed ignorance by writing, “Israel has no realistic choice but to include carrots with the sticks. ”
Giving Palestinians Gaza was not a carrot?
Saying Israel “gave” the Palestinians Gaza is like saying Palestine “gave” Israel Jerusalem.
Israel withdrew colonists and some military apparatus from Gaza, but never lifted a full military blockade of its ports and borders.
I suspect Palestine would be perfectly happy to “give” Israel Tel Aviv, provided Israel was willing to disarm, forswear military response and accept a total blockade of its ports and borders.
ahhhh..
you are the one who needs history knowledge….
There was never a “Palestine”
I see you keep referring to a “Palestine”.
There is no amount of appeasing that will suffice in your situation.
Giving Gaza to Palestinians was not enough.
91% of what Palestinians wanted was offered by Israel in the 2000 accords.
Palestinians refused that deal.
They will never be happy until Israel is wiped off the face of the planet.
Bogey will never be happy until Israel is wiped off the face of the planet.
Bogey is the rapist/terrorist sympathizer…
Thanks for showing yourself. 🙂
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
‘Palestine’ ( Greek: Παλαιστίνη; Latin: Palaestina; Hebrew: ×¤×œ×©×ª×™× ×”â€Ž Palestina; Arabic: Ùلسطين‎ Filasá¹Ä«n, Falasá¹Ä«n, Filisá¹Ä«n ) is a Latinized name given to the region of the Iudaea Province by the Roman emperor Hadrian[6][7] following the crushing Bar Kochba’s revolt in 132-135[8] in an attempt to suppress Jewish national feelings.[9][10] In the Bible, the area inhabited by the Philistines was known as Pleshet Genesis, X.13. The Philistines were a seafaring people who lived in cities along the coast. During the Late Bronze Age, Philistia was located approximately where the Gaza Strip is situated.
Another excerpt:
UN partition
Main article: United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine
UN partition plan, 1947On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly, with a two-thirds majority international vote, passed the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181), a plan to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict by partitioning the territory into separate Jewish and Arab states, with the Greater Jerusalem area (encompassing Bethlehem) coming under international control. Jewish leaders (including the Jewish Agency), accepted their portion of the plan, while Palestinian Arab leaders rejected it and refused to negotiate. Neighboring Arab and Muslim states also rejected the partition plan. The Arab community reacted violently after the Arab Higher Committee declared a strike and burned many buildings and shops. In a speech delivered on 25 March 1948, US President Truman recommended a temporary trusteeship and stated: We could not undertake to impose this solution on the people of Palestine by the use of American troops, both on Charter grounds and as a matter of national policy.[132] As armed skirmishes between Arab and Jewish paramilitary forces in Palestine continued, the British mandate ended on May 15, 1948, the establishment of the State of Israel having been proclaimed the day before (see Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel). The neighboring Arab states and armies (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Transjordan, Holy War Army, Arab Liberation Army, and local Arabs) immediately attacked Israel following its declaration, and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War ensued. Consequently, the partition plan was never implemented.
Current status
Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the 1949 Armistice Agreements between Israel and neighboring Arab states eliminated Palestine as a distinct territory. With the establishment of Israel, the remaining lands were divided amongst Egypt, Syria and Jordan. The Arab governments at this point refused to set up a State of Palestine.
The region as of today: Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan HeightsIn addition to the UN-partitioned area it was allotted, Israel captured 26% of the Mandate territory west of the Jordan river. Jordan captured and annexed about 21% of the Mandate territory, known today as the West Bank. Jerusalem was divided, with Jordan taking the eastern parts, including the Old City, and Israel taking the western parts. The Gaza Strip was captured by Egypt.
Baklava: You used the term Palestinians, so I assume you are capable of acknowledging their existence.
Doesn’t make sense for you to deny it now.
you are foolish
What was the “capital” of “Palestine”?
When referring to people who call themselves Palestinians it doesn’t mean that there ever was a “country” called “Palestine”.
As it stands you need to:
1) Research history
2) Call terrorists what they are and not tolerate or excuse it.
Israel has been offering a “Palestinian” “state” and the “Palestinians” won’t take it.
Who are the aggressors and who is defending themselves now????
Appease the rapist all you wish. You get more rapists.
There were never “Palestinians” before 1967 – or, if they were, they were all people that lived in the geographical region of Palestine – arabs, jews, turks, etc. These thing of calling “palestinians” exclusively arabs is very new. In fact, the Jerusalem Post, before the Israeli independence was called “Palestine Post”. Was it an arab newspaper? I don’t think so.
So people who speak about “Palestine” as if it was or had ever been an independent country are wrong from the start.
Leon,
There were “Palestinians”. They just belonged to other countries and/or empires.
When part of the Roman Empire there wasn’t a state called “Palestine”. Whenever the ruling country or area, there was never a soveriegn “Palestine”.
And it speaks VOLUMES that Egypt and other countries do not form a state called Palestine yet they have dissolved those borders AS WELL.
OMG – they are occupiers to Bogey the terrorist appeaser. Look at his words. He excuses their terrorist actions….
YUCK!
Try a thought experiment, Bogey.
What would happen if Hamas said tomorrow, “Right! All this war is hard on everybody and nothing is achieved except creating more rubble in Gaza and getting a lot of people killed unnecessarily.
“Let’s tell the Israelis, we’ll live in peace. No more rockets, no more terrorism, no more suicide bombing, no more promoting a death cult in our schools, no more propaganda, no more lying. We recognize you, you are our neighbor.
“We will work on improving education and trade and rebuilding our city. Will you open the borders and help us? Will you let our people travel back and forth freely to work and trade and study?”
What would happen next?
I think this is a winning strategy in a material sense. The would be growth and prosperity. There would be no “Israeli aggression.” Gazans would have more freedom.
What is wrong with this picture?
Obkio asks, “What is wrong with this picture?
Israel exists
Baklava, this is Bogey’s thought experiment. I know that you know.
Try a thought experiment, Oblio.
What would happen if Israel said tomorrow, “Right! All this war is hard on everybody and nothing is achieved except creating more rubble in Gaza and getting a lot of people killed unnecessarily.
“Let’s tell the Israelis, we’ll live in peace. No more rockets, no more terrorism, no more suicide bombing, no more promoting a death cult in our schools, no more propaganda, no more lying. We recognize you, you are our neighbor.
“We will end the West Bank, Sheba farms and Gaza occupations, release prisoners held without trial, allow expelled Palestinians to return to their homes and rebuild the thousands of Palestinian homes we’ve bulldozed over the past decades. Will you open the borders and help us? Will you let our people travel back and forth freely to work and trade and study?”
What would happen next?
I think this is a winning strategy in a material sense. The would be growth and prosperity. There would be no “Palestinian aggression.” Gazans would have more freedom.
What is wrong with this picture?
“What is wrong with this picture?”
The so-called “Pali’s”, moslem arabs, are only interested in the complete destruction of Israel and the Jewish people. Actually, it’s a fight to the death, there is no other reality. Obama may attempt to foist a final settlement on the Israelis, but once an independent “Palestine”, with full sovereignty is established, it’s only a matter of time before they press their luck again. In that very real scenario will occur a conflagration which will make all of the previous wars, and certainly the Gaza expedition, pale by comparison. Free Shalit! Instead of trading a thousand arab criminals for one dead Shalit, Israel should agree to continue to save another thousand civilian pali’s, for the return of Shalit’s body. This is real life…
Bogey, your answer is very disappointing. Not only is it juvenile and impertinent, it’s silly and sloppy. Moreover, you escalate the issues.
If you want to say that the Gazans (and all Palestinians and Lebanese) are justified launching rockets and terrorist attacks until their maximal claims are made, just do so. I can’t think of a better way to encourage war and get mainly Palestinians killed.
Boogie Man Says:
No amount of unrestrained military attack can prevent or eliminate terrorism. That’s because terrorism, especially suicide attacks, are a tactic of last resort. It’s what people invariably do when they have no other weapons, no realistic hope of getting any and little or no military apparatus to defend.
Here the terrorists are painted as underdogs backed into a corner when the reality is that if they were willing to stop the terrorism they could easily have peace.
Terrorist networks and financing can be disrupted and, even, destroyed, but it isn’t difficult for the terrorists to rebuild them and to evolve.
Terrorism is cheap and simple and requires little organization. It is also extremely inefficient – the dullest geopolitical weapon.
In the case of Gaza, it seems beyond dispute that the Palestinians will not simply surrender and adopt pacifism as a response to increasing Israeli aggression.
In the writer’s mind Israel is supposed to do nothing about the rockets, suicide bombings and kidnappings. All the terrorists truly have to do is not “surrender” but to simply cease attacking Israel by every means at their disposal.
Israel has no realistic choice but to include carrots with the sticks. History shows again and again and again that if you insist that you own your enemy’s land and can and will obliterate his nation and dignity, he has nothing to lose, no reason to negotiate in good faith and something close to a moral blank check to defend himself.
The unspoken assumption in all of the above is that Israel is the aggressor. Any fair-minded person who has bothered to pay attention has to discard this false assumption. Israel has been attacked by various Middle Eastern despots and thugs since its creation and has no real allies in the Muslim world of nations. We all can see for ourselves how they systematically indoctrinate their psychologically defenseless children with Jew-hatred almost from their birth.
The writer paints the terrorists as super-beings with insurmountable powers of regeneration. It’s the typical manifestation of their hero-worship for the terrorists. As an alternative, depending on the advantage perceived to be gained, they will frequently fall back on the tactic of minimizing the threat of the terrorists which allows them to cast them as the underdog striking out at the Evil US. Its been my observation that Hero-worship is the preferred meme. I guess it gives them that good Chris Matthews Tingle Up The Leg.
Terrorism would be a much smaller problem, maybe no problem at all, without the support of various despot-headed nations. They use the terrorists to wage a proxy war against whoever they don’t like, the people of the US, Israel and Europe being among their more prominent preferred victims but they probably murder as many non-Westerners, if not more. I suspect that without the support of these various nefarious governments the terrorists would probably die out. The various factions frequently squabble, i.e., Fatah and Hamas, Sunni extremists and Shia extremists, but they can all be depended upon to cooperate in our murder despite their internecine differences. They are clever, ruthless and devious but they fall short of the fawning portrait painted by the writer.
The Europeans were able to destroy the Native American nation and come close enough to completing genocide to be able to eliminate the “terrorists” of their day, who had the truly awful manners to attack women, children and all civilians in cold blood.
Let’s call this the Original Sin Theory of History(OSTH). America, you see, was founded upon slavery and murdered the Native Americans and thus present-day America is rotten to the core. These two ‘sins,’ which the rest of the world, it must be pointed out, even the Muslim world, was also engaging in during that era and in previous times too(the Caliphates, the Ottoman Empire), mean that the terrorists in the minds of the proponents of OSTH must be avenging angels sowing the wages of sin upon the hapless America. This flawed, ignorant, strangely biblical view of history crops up in a lot of their comments.
Trouble is, even if it wanted to, Israel could not achieve that against the Palestinians, given the access to weapons and other technology.
Israeli could wipe out Gaza if it were willing to wage all-out war. It’s not a matter of Israel lacking the means but a matter of will. The strategy of the terrorists is one of attrition. Keep picking away. Call for a truce when the going gets rough. Use these opportunities to re-supply from Iran through Egypt and tool up for the next round of violence.
WWII makes a poor parallel for the Palestine-Israel conflict, but if you’re going to compare the two, you need to include the details.
The U.S. never claimed to own Japan and Germany as its divine territory. Thus, all parties believed the occupations were aimed only at rebuilding the civilian infrastructure and preventing the return of militarism.
If the U.S. had insisted that Japan was an American colony and part of a Christian nation and that the Japanese people had no right to a nation, even the holocausts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not have brought an end to Japanese resistance.
The trouble with the writer’s historical analogies is that they don’t fit the facts. For instance, Israel has already offered nationhood to the Palestinians in exchange for the right to exist. A more than fair trade to my mind. It was rejected, of course. The war against Israel has nothing to do with an “occupation” by Israel.
“Israel has already offered nationhood to the Palestinians in exchange for the right to exist.”
The Palestinian Authority has made clear the conditions under which it would accept, and Israel has rejected those conditions.
Israel refuses to retreat to its borders as called for by UN resolution 242 and it has refused to allow exiled Palestinians to return to their homeland.
It’s silly to pretend that there is only one side to this argument.
A solution will necessarily involve compromise by both sides, because the problems are caused by both sides.
The pathetic and so-called “Palestinian Authority” only exists because it’s benefactor, Israel, protects it and it’s collaborators from historically long-standing and typical moslem arab cultural cannibalism, and from a now Hamas led and legal and authentic crucifixion and destruction. Arafat, the Egyption, like Saddam, betrayed and robbed his, supposedly, own people. Abbas, his partner in crime, is just Arafat with a shave and a phony russian communist era PHD. He has long lived in a mansion, while his “supposed” people live in squalor. The so-called Pali’s need to go home to their judenrein state called “Jordan”, and dump the phony king Abdullah. Jews need to unapologetically consolidate their longest standing claim, ownership and control to the areas now called the West Bank. Moslems who won’t live in peace, on that basis, need to leave. Bogey the baiter needs to learn honesty. A solution will necessarily involve compomise by both sides, when both sides are willing to compromise. The truth and reality is that the so-called Pali’s will only compromise as a tactic to later continue the legacy of their so-called prophet, and more lately Hitler era judenrein extermination agenda. No lies…
“Jews need to unapologetically consolidate their longest standing claim, ownership and control to the areas now called the West Bank. ”
If by “Jews” you mean “Israel,” then the obvious reason they don’t follow your strategy is that there are too many Palestinians living in the territory. Were Israel to formally annex the territory, it would be very likely to vote against Jewish leadership, a democratic fate that is unacceptable to Israel’s current leadership.
Obviously, there is a radical minority in Israel that agrees with your “final solution” for the Palestinians.
They are exhibit A in every Arab despot’s case against compromising with Israel and in every reasonable person’s view that Israel nationalists’ claims to merely want peace are insincere.
You forget Boge…
Jordan and Egypt are occypying also…
This has nothing to do with anything except the terror,
It needs to stop
Are Boogie Man and Bogey Man the same person, or two different people? I see both posting here. It’s confusing.
Boogie and Bogey are one and the same, phonetically and in the flesh.
So, are you Boogie when you’re feeling particularly funky, and Bogey when you’re being particularly obnoxious? Just curious. 🙂
“Obviously, there is a radical minority in Israel that agrees with your “final solution” for the Palestinians.”
Parroting the term “final solution”, as if to implicate Israel with genocide (currently typical popular islamist-leftist slur high fashion), hardly gives it validity, but it (again) defines your dishonesty Bogie. People like you are the artists of the double standard, and I need not trace, digress or extrapolate on the history and details of this religious conflict for you to understand this suggestion clearly. If you’re a dedicated conservative muslim, you know this is an intractable and uncompromisable issue, so don’t lie about “compromise”. If you’re just a typically honesty challenged, intellectually retarded leftist, demonstrate the viability of your ethical position by, for example, challenging the recent Hamas crucifixion legislation, personally… If you’re more than a basic antisemitic hate baiting buffoon, as an ethically concerned lefty, legalized crucifixion should (also) be a serious issue for you. Imagine the U.N.’s indignation if the Israeli’s legislated something like that. This illustrates the nature of the larger issues clearly. You know what I mean, you people are such incredible hypocrites…
“Were Israel to formally annex the territory, it would be very likely to vote against Jewish leadership, a democratic fate that is unacceptable to Israel’s current leadership.”
Only point well taken… and which we all know unfortunately dictates that the ultimate outcome will and can only be, for the prevailing side, the result of superior military power, combined with long-term demographic growth. That has always been the case in human civilization, especially in that part of the world. The muslim world effectively controls approx. 20% of the earth’s surface, rife with various dictatorial regimes that have through history consistantly begrudged equality, to the point of genocide, to others (ie. Turks vs Armenians), and even for other muslims (ie. Darfur today). If the Israelis can’t provide a perfect democratic scenario for the so-called pali’s, and which by definition the muslim arabs make impossible, that does not make the Israelis illegitimate. What goes around comes around, as they say, no double standards, no lies, no apologies necessary, no hypocricy… Until serious consideration is given in the U.N. for the 800,000 Jewish refugees from arab countries, also victims in this struggle, and for their losses, then this debate about the so-called pali’s only serves as a bit of black humor for the amusement of fools like Bogey…
Pingback:Weekend Opinionator: The Battle Over the Battle in Gaza - The Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com
Booger says, “No amount of unrestrained military attack can prevent or eliminate terrorism.”
The Mongols largely destroyed their terrorist muslim problem largely through ‘unrestrained military attack’.
And the simple tactic of tearing down the families of homicide bombers was also a neat deterrant. Nice work on remaining ignorant of history. lol
“Terrorist networks and financing can be disrupted and, even, destroyed, but it isn’t difficult for the terrorists to rebuild them and to evolve.”
Then where’s Al Qaida in Iraq? Shouldn’t they be as active and deadly as ever instead of running and desperately trying to survive? You prove again the vacuous intellect of the Left.
“In the case of Gaza, it seems beyond dispute that the Palestinians will not simply surrender and adopt pacifism as a response to increasing Israeli aggression.”
Then why isn’t Fatah carrying out attacks in the West Bank? Perhaps because they prove you wrong by recognizing the idiocy of Hamas aggression.They after all, delievered much of the targeting info to the Israeli Air Force on what to bomb and strike. Ouch lol
“Israel has no realistic choice but to include carrots with the sticks.”
What carrots? There’s nothing left to give away. They’ve bargained away Gaza and the West Bank yet still Hamas launches unprovoked rocket attacks into Sderot. This is too easy…
“he has nothing to lose, no reason to negotiate in good faith and something close to a moral blank check to defend himself.”
Yes and the Israelis are defending themselves precisely for that reason. Thanks for pointing that out.
“The Europeans….come close enough to completing genocide to be able to eliminate the “terrorists” of their day,”
Problem here is that the ‘Indian’ nations never applied suicide bombing attacks in the name of their gods. Try again Booger.
“Trouble is, even if it wanted to, Israel could not achieve that against the Palestinians, given the access to weapons and other technology.”
Israel could annihilate every Arab in the Middle East without breaking a sweat since Arab soldiers are incompetant and badly lead. Israel proves that Western democracies are morally superior to Arab socialism.
“If the U.S. had insisted that Japan was an American colony and part of a Christian nation and that the Japanese people had no right to a nation, ”
Again your logic fails with the mention of rights since Israel delivered peace with the Arab in 1947 and they rewarded such tolerance with invasion. You leftists have a bizarre sense of what history is. Maybe you should actually read some since your failed here again.
>
Excellent point, Hong. Fatah is yet again showing a willingness to compromise and seek gains through diplomacy. It is not, as many assert here, committed to only using violence. Certainly the rivalry with Hamas plays a role in that, but, as you are so eager to point out, the fact is, they are observing a ceasefire versus Israeli occupiers. Ouch, indeed.
As for the Mongols, they were dealing with an entirely different phenomenon, as I pointed out at length. Explosives technology changes a lot.
Perhaps you should be looking at what Russia has done in Chechnya for a more contemporary, relevant, example of how total war fares as a strategy.
“Fatah is yet again showing a willingness to compromise and seek gains through diplomacy.”
Now I didn’t say quite that Booger only that Fatah isn’t the same beast as Hamas. They are clearly committed to another Holocaust but they wish to eliminate a rival first. Typical Arab politics at work. Nothing new there. The goals however were congruent with each other, just not the master.
“but, as you are so eager to point out, the fact is, they are observing a ceasefire versus Israeli occupiers. Ouch, indeed.”
I’m not eager, just telling the truth for you to listen. Your attempt to steal my ending suggests it drew some blood. Tough on you.
“As for the Mongols, they were dealing with an
entirely different phenomenon, as I pointed out at length. Explosives technology changes a lot.”
Not as much as you think Bogs, they had arrows while today there are guns and bombs but the principles remain the same. Superficial differences aside, the ideology is almost identical. Death to all non believers. The only answer of course is to bring death to the fanatics. Something the Mongols understood perfectly. Hurts doesn’t it?
“Perhaps you should be looking at what Russia has done in Chechnya for a more contemporary, relevant, example of how total war fares as a strategy.”
Chechnya has been quiet in the news. There have been no further attempts to rape little Russian girls in schools or rocket a house. You might want to expand your point before claiming one. Since Israel is no brute like your friends the Russians. The Jews actually distinguish between combatants and civilians. Any failures of the Chechen campaigns can be delivered to the boot of Russian barbarity and the lack of Iranian support for the moooslims. You lack sublety and nuance in your arguments. Your history is crudely understood. Still hacking when you should be slicing. Clumsy
“Any failures of the Chechen campaigns can be delivered to the boot of Russian barbarity.”
Absolutely. Barbarity doesn’t work. Those who demand it are ignorant of history.
And talk about lacking subtlety. The “principles” are simply not the same today as 4 centuries ago. The key to understanding terrorism today is understanding the role of technology.
You make it clear that you’d rather bend the facts to fit your argument than the other way around.
The Boog claims the “principals” of terror change with technology. Please explain how. Are you claiming it’s more terrifying to die by being blown up than to die by the sword? Is being shot by an arrow less horrifying than being shot by a bullet? Is having your village wiped out by a horde of cavalry easier to deal with than having your city vaporized by nuclear fission? How, exactly, has the “principle” of terror changed with the advance of technology?
(Boy, his answer will be interesting, assuming he can)
Oops: “principles”
“And talk about lacking subtlety. The “principles” are simply not the same today as 4 centuries ago. The key to understanding terrorism today is understanding the role of technology.”
You’re still as clumsy in your arguments as before Booger. Technology has little to play since the assassins were suicide attackers in an age of blade weaponry. Therefore the principles remain unchanged whereas you still fear confronting the truth.
“You make it clear that you’d rather bend the facts to fit your argument than the other way around.”
The fact that the Mongols destroyed the terrorists of their day? Or the fact that the midieval Moslems applied suicide tactics before gunpowder was invented? Again read the actual history of the original muslim terrorists and their defeat by the Mongols. However, because you operate on a phobia of the truth, I doubt it can penetrate your density.
Booger cannot define the principles because there is no essential difference between the Islamic terrorism of today with the past. Both are rooted in Islamic extremism. The principle of suicide attack remains unchanged while the delivery system changes. Therefore rather than struggle to form a coherent explanation he remains silent on that point.
“Absolutely. Barbarity doesn’t work. Those who demand it are ignorant of history.”
Actually it does. War by it’s definition is barbarous but it can successfully annihilate a threat. The Mongol liquidation of the Assassins being a proven example.
Which Hong do we believe, the one who wrote several days ago “Barbarity doesn’t work,” or the one who writes today ”actually, it does.”
You give away your game so easily, Hong. Strip away the witless ad hominem, and all you’ve got is a cheerleader’s uniform on. Yeah, we know which side you’re on, but it’s obvious you’re not driven by any principles and a little to slow to pick up the contradictions in your own comments.
To you, barbarity is just fine, provided its done by your team. When the other side does it, barbarity is the ipso-facto definition of moral inferiority.
You certainly correct that some things never change. But it’s actually neo-cons who are at the forefront of pushing the idea that WMD has changed everything as regards fighting terrorism.
Were you living in a cave in the run up to the Iraq war? How many times were we told that it was a new era, a new kind of threat. We had to go beyond self-defense and reaction, because ”the confirmation of our suspicions could be a mushroom cloud.”
I’m perfectly willing to have a discussion with you, Hong, but you really should lay off the ad hominem, you’re not very good at it.
And…
suicide attack by bowman or spearthrower is no threat to any military, anywhere. No wonder the Mongols made short work of them. Suicide attack by jumbojet or by WMD, even, by plastic explosive via mass transit, is a whole other ball game.
Is it funny, or sad, that you won’t acknowledge that simple fact?
“Which Hong do we believe, the one who wrote several days ago “Barbarity doesn’t work,” or the one who writes today ”actually, it does.””
You apparantly lack the nuance to understand the point. That war can solve some dilemnas but not all.
And that some savagery and barbarity is common in all wars.
“You give away your game so easily, Hong. Strip away the witless ad hominem, and all you’ve got is a cheerleader’s uniform on. Yeah, we know which side you’re on, but it’s obvious you’re not driven by any principles and a little to slow to pick up the contradictions in your own comments.”
Actually, you are the one guilty of ad hominem since you have little else to say beyond crowing your hatred and bigotry Boogster. My ‘contradictions’ are the workings of your paranoid imagination along with perhaps that sad and pathetic sexual fantasy you have of me in a cheerleaders outfit. lol
“To you, barbarity is just fine, provided its done by your team. When the other side does it, barbarity is the ipso-facto definition of moral inferiority.”
Barbarity is never fine but necessary in war but war is not when targeted maining or killing of civilians. That’s terrorism. It’s the only objective as your terrorist mooooslems seem concerned with. Your inability to differentiate that distinction is proof again of the crude and unsophisticated nature of your reasoning. It’s embarassing watching you handle debate so poorly. Your frustration is beginning to reduce you to tantrums. It’s quite amusing.
“You certainly correct that some things never change. But it’s actually neo-cons who are at the forefront of pushing the idea that WMD has changed everything as regards fighting terrorism.”
I don’t apprecite the anti-semtic slur neo-con since it’s obviously another rough attempt at hiding your bigotry. As for WMDs, we argued the need to end terrorism because of 9/11 not WMDs. That’s simply a strawman (bogeyman) argument you’ve established booger.
“Were you living in a cave in the run up to the Iraq war?”
You apparantly still live in the cave since the war was motivated by far more than fear of a WMD armed Iraq. In your simplistic fashion you absorbed the one issue and discarded the others. This is further evidence of your intellectual flailing about boogertronic. You haven’t succeeding in even convincing yourself of such a false presumption.
“I’m perfectly willing to have a discussion with you, Hong, but you really should lay off the ad hominem, you’re n”ot very good at it.”
Clearly your offended by my words although calling you Booger is hardly ad hominem compared with your hate and anti-semitism. If I wasn’t any good at whatever you’re complaining about you wouldn’t need to return to express your wounded pride now would you? You’re perfectly willing to apologize for the terrorists but that’s hardly the same as ‘debate’. It’s simply a desperate attempt at avoiding the poverty of your cause.
“And…
suicide attack by bowman or spearthrower is no threat to any military, anywhere. No wonder the Mongols made short work of them. Suicide attack by jumbojet or by WMD, even, by plastic explosive via mass transit, is a whole other ball game.
Is it funny, or sad, that you won’t acknowledge that simple fact?”
The simple fact was that suicide attackers during that age came in the form of a man charging his victim with a dagger and stabbing repeatedly until both were killed. One by the dagger and the other by the victims bodyguards. Had you been less lazy and studied the actual history of the Assassin organization, you’d have avoided this neat trap. It is embarassing for you that you’re too complacent to do your research.
First the Jews, then the Arabs, then the Byzantines, then the Persians, then Egyptians, then Moors, then Spanish. With the Mongols they finally met their match (until Mongols converted to Islam).
Boog boy should learn history before typing up his big, misinformed mouth.
The Jewish religion has a very long, wonderful history and its followers account for an astounding quantity and quality of contributions to civilization, particularly in the West, from Freud to Marx to Einstein and on and on. Contemporary American humor is, for the most part, Jewish humor and the Jewish contribution to the broader American worlds of arts and culture is virtually immeasurable.
Jews are very well represented in the legal, medical and financial professions in America and wherever they are allowed to live free. They are leaders as well in the world of philanthropy. These great achievements come primarily because of their traditional love of learning and the extremely high value they place on education, individual responsibility and liberalism. As a group, their contribution to peace and prosperity in America is far greater proportionally than that of the Christian majority.
I am not Jewish and I don’t agree with some of what the religion teaches, but I have nothing but the deepest respect for the people who make it their faith.
To suggest that I’m somehow anti-Semitic, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, is yet another example of how little Hong has to contribute to intelligent discussion.
Booger says,
“To suggest that I’m somehow anti-Semitic, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, is yet another example of how little Hong has to contribute to intelligent discussion.”
Touched a nerve didn’t I? You can call yourself tolerant but your apology for Islamic terror betrays your true self. You’ve been unable to even properly define the principal differences between medieval and modern islamic terrorism (because there is none). You’ve been given opportunity after opportunity by myself and others here to enunciate your opinions in a logical, coherent manner but mostly you repeat obsolete leftist dogma. I and others without much effort have demolished your ‘arguments’ and you return to abuse and disgrace the English language ever more.
So yes, you are an anti-semite. You are a bigot and prejudiced in favor of islamo facism and other racist and dogmatically intolerant beliefs. Your arguments have been ham-fisted and embarrassingly inept. You have an incomplete and childish grasp of history and a painfully weak understanding of debate. You frustrate easily and throw tantrums when Fisked. It has been a pleasant distraction humiliating you online. Please continue.
The Palestinians, like their Zionist adversaries, are drunk with the wine of romantic nationalism, and so they also see the conflict in epic, mytho-historical terms.
And that is why they will win, because they quite correctly believe that Israel, as it is presently constitutionally defined, will not last forever. And so they do not settle for crumbs now when they can have the whole loaf in the future, by which I mean one Palestinian Republic for all its people.
Israel’s army chief, understanding this dynamic, knows exactly what must be done: “the Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people.” Indeed, if the Palestinians saw themselves as history’s losers, they would take what little they have now.
The metaphor of mediation comes to mind. The Israeli’s bluff, telling the Palestinians to settle less or lose big-time. The Palestinians say: your defense is crumbling before your eyes, see you in court, assholes.