Home How Israel's Peacemaking Endangers Itself and the Stability of the Region
Home How Israel's Peacemaking Endangers Itself and the Stability of the Region

How Israel's Peacemaking Endangers Itself and the Stability of the Region

When Israeli leaders embarked on peace negotiations with the Islamic-Marxist terrorists who called themselves representatives of the ""Palestinian people", they hoped to improve relations with the Muslim world. But not only did Israel not succeed in improving relations with the Muslim world, but its bid for peace has actually destroyed its old relationships which were built on a certain respect for Israel's staying power.

The more Israel has traded land for peace, the more its staying power has diminished. There is no better place to see that shift than in Turkey, formerly Israel's closest ally in the Muslim world. That relationship was built not on mutual friendship, but mutual respect. Today Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu envisions a region in which Israel ceases to exist and is replaced by a Muslim-Jewish protectorate of Turkey. In 1986 that vision would have gotten him laughed off the podium when through war after war, Israel proved that it would not be pushed into the sea. But in 2011, with two Muslim terrorist states under international protection inside its own borders, and an American administration pushing for a handover of half its capital, Davutoglu's vision of the destruction of Israel has become the basis for Turkish policy toward Israel. And the only way that Jerusalem can improve its relations with Ankara is to change that perception of its destructibility.

The so-called Peace Process has dramatically undermined Israel's viability as a state in perception and reality. And American and European pressure on Israel to create a terrorist state within its borders has undermined regional stability and sped up the process of regional Islamization. Israel has gone from a regional power capable of guaranteeing the security of American-allied neighbors such as Jordan, to a state under siege by rockets falling on its own towns and villages. If Turkey's Islamists needed proof that Iran was the future and Israel the past, Hamas has been helpfully supplying it.

A post-Israel region is the brainchild of the same Leftist-Islamist alliance behind the overthrow of Mubarak. Their method for realizing that vision has been the constant stress on Israel's responsibility to create a palestinian state as the only means of bringing peace and stability to the region. Arab leaders were only too happy to echo the call in order to distract attention from their own local tyrannies. Now those same leaders are falling and the region is less stable than ever, despite two decades of misanthropic peacemaking with red-handed terrorists. Will the Saudis reconsider their campaign against Israel now that it stands as the only regional counterweight between the Iran and them. Probably not, because Israel has become too weak to be respected.

By agreeing to the peace initiatives of western powers looking to appease the Muslim world, Israel has destroyed its own relations with them for the same reason. Israel's ties with the American people might be based on religious and cultural values-- but its ties with the United States government have always been based on mutual interest.

The relations of the United States and Israeli governments did not derive from religious values-- but from growing Soviet influence in the area. The Kennedy Administration turned to Israel as a potential ally when the fall of the old colonial backed monarchies and the rise of new Soviet allied regimes endangered American influence in the region. For all the rose colored romanticism and the breathy conspiracy theories about the Jewish lobby that the US-Israel relationship has been cloaked in, it was always one of mutual interest. The JFK and Golda Meir quips or AIPAC's lobbying were frosting on the cake, but they weren't the cake. The cake was that the US needed a stable regional ally as a proxy for American interests and Israel needed to align itself with a world power.

During the Cold War when countries were being labeled in one of two colors in a global game of chess, that alliance stayed strong. But with the fall of the USSR, the Western powers decided to employ Israel in a sacrifice play to the Muslim world. Israel was still a powerful piece, but one that no longer fit in the new game. The new gameboard was no longer a polar match between two global coalitions, but every country for itself. And by sacrificing Israel, Western governments hoped to 'capture' alliances with more valuable Muslim countries. It was a treacherous move, but one that Israel should have been prepared for over the years. Instead Israeli leaders convinced themselves that some arrangement with the terrorist gangs was in their interest. An arrangement that has gone from an autonomous territory to an independent state with its capital in Jerusalem. And even as a new Cold War began forming, with the Muslim world aligned against the free world, Western governments have kept on making the same sacrifice play over and over again. With the same results. Israel is weakened, and the Muslim world remains unappeased.

At a meeting with Jewish leaders, Barack Hussein Obama told them to "search your souls" over whether Israel really wants to make peace. But all those leaders need to search is Israeli cemeteries filled with the graves of thousands of victims of the peace process. Perhaps there they can search the souls of the thousands of men, women and children, blown up in restaurants, gunned down in schools and on roads, tortured to death in the No-Go Zones of the Palestinian Authority. They are, in the memorably gruesome words of Rabin, "Sacrifices for Peace", human sacrifices served up on the burning altar of diplomacy in an endless holocaust of appeasement. Every inch of territory that Israel has given up into the hands of terrorists, has been used as the front line of terrorism. If Israelis are less eager to be served up as human sacrifices to the Muslim Moloch, that should call for soul searching not by them, but by the Western governments who have blindly supported Muslim terrorists leaders Arafat and Abbas, and their murderous campaign against Israeli civilians.

Under Netanyahu, Israel has come to play the role of the reluctant sacrifice. Unwilling to say yes, but unwilling to say no, either. Too polite to object to its own execution. And so by way of momentum, no has become yes. As it always does when the victim is unwilling to take a firm stand and deliver a firm, "NO". The slippery slope of concessions is still sliding. Netanyahu hopes to ride it out long enough till Obama and his "enormous hostility toward Israel" is out of office, but he is more likely to end up buried underneath it. That is what happened in his first term. And even if Obama loses in 2012, it is still no solution. Obama may be going further than anyone has before him, but like Davutoglu he could not do it if the model weren't already there. Whoever succeeds him will almost certainly pick up where he left off.

The model is that Israel makes "Sacrifices for Peace" until either the region is stable or the Jewish state ceases to exist. Since the region becomes more unstable as Israel continues to weaken itself, the appeasement must go on until Israel is destroyed. Or until it finally finds a leader with the courage to say, "NO" and mean it. For two decades Israel has stood at the execution block, trying to negotiate peace by piece. "How about a finger, sir. Or my left big toe, I don't use it much anyway. My right foot then, it's far out there and populated by settlers, and my chest will be more defensible without it. Not good enough? Alright then, both my feet and half the fingers on my left hand. But that's here I draw the line!"  But the line is always drawn at the neck. Sooner or later it always gets down to the head of the matter.

A terrorist state was never workable as a means of stabilizing the region. But as a way of whittling down Israel to the point of non-existence, it has performed brilliantly. And by undermining Israel, the road was open to bringing down every marginally Westernized country in the region. The AKP took over Turkey, instituting an EU approved regime of terror against opposition politicians and journalists. The Islamists are on the rise in Tunisia. And without their victory in Gaza, the Muslim Brotherhood might never have succeeded in toppling Mubarak. The fall of Turkey and Egypt's secular governments marks an end to Western influence in the region. And Israel remains alone, a flickering candle in the growing dark. If it goes out, the hour of the Caliphate comes.

But who benefits from this scenario? Western leftists are playing the anarchist to the Muslim bolshevik, tearing down the system with no real concern for what rises in its place. Their wonderland of democracy and civil rights is as real as Utopia and Erehwon. Already the persecution of Christian Copts in Egypt has reached a fevered pitch. And International Women's Day was marked in Tahrir Square with assaults on the few hundred women that dared show up by men shouting that their call for equality was against Islam. Like Lara Logan, they had to be rescued by Egyptian soldiers, who after the removal of Mubarak, represent the only alternative to Muslim mob rule. And as goes Egypt, so goes the region.

When Western governments made their sacrifice play of Israel in the early 90's they were playing from a position of strength. Now they are the weaker players, besieged by oil money and immigrant demographics, with the pointed towers of minarets rising around them, while their own sources of strength falter and fall. The European hand-wringing over multiculturalism and America electing a wartime leader with a Muslim background so he could tour the world and reassure Muslims of our good intentions are signs of drastic weakness. In the nineties Western governments were using Israel for their sacrifice play, now they are reduced to sacrificing their own countries and values in the hopes of appeasing the growing rage of Islam. A growing rage fed to fury by their own concessions.

American influence in the Middle East began to wane under Carter, but it has been completely destroyed in only two years of Obama. Western leaders prattle about imposing a No Fly Zone over Libya, as if that would matter in a conflict that will be decided by fast running gun battles between mercenaries and rebels on pickup trucks, and even the occasional scimitar. The left has gotten what it wanted. The West exists now only exists as a market for Muslim oil and surplus populations. And the Islamists have gotten what they wanted, a chance to seize power through populism. If Israel is going to survive that environment, it will not do so through concessions or by riding the merry go round of Western diplomacy.

The Munich Pact between Chamberlain and Hitler has been characterized as "the nadir of diplomacy-- a personal deal between two men at the expense of a third party." That aptly describes the sacrifice play in which panicked Western countries compel Israel to make sacrifices to appease the Muslim world. Chamberlain described the pact as "the last desperate snatch at the last tuft on the very verge of the precipice." That too describes the present day attitudes of Western leaders snatching at tufts of grass to avoid going down into the precipice of the Jihad. Lord Birkenhead, at the time the pusillanimous Lord Halifax's parliamentary secretary, described Chamberlain's pleading with Hitler for peace as, "effusive in the eagerness to continue the process of surrender."

The French went into the Munich Pact with a proposal for the occupation of portions of Czechoslovakia by German troops. If Hitler agreed to their proposal, they would "demand acceptance from the Czech government. If Czechoslovakia refused, conclusions could be drawn which did not need to be defined more closely." The conclusion being that either Czechoslovakia could cooperate with a French proposal for its own dismantling, or it could be dismantled without the utterly useless 'guarantees' of the French government. Two years later, German troops would be occupying France and the men who had sold out Czechoslovakia would watch German troops march through Paris.

But men have a way of learning nothing from history. Karel Schwarzenberg, the Czech Republic’s foreign minister, has rejected any comparison of Israel and Czechoslovakia, saying that, "Czechoslovakia in 1938 had no friendly neighbors... but Israel has quite an important ally in the US." Much like Czechoslovakia had important allies in England and France. Schwarzenberg also rejected any analogy between the West Bank and the Sudetenland, saying that the West Bank "belongs" to the Palestinians, "They are the main inhabitants. The analogy doesn’t work." But of course it does. Ethnic Germans were the main inhabitants of the Sudetenland. As an ethnic German himself, Schwarzenberg should know that. But the facts of history are ground under as the perfidy of one era melds into the next. Despicable betrayals turn respectable with time. For all of Schwarzenberg's general friendliness to Israel, he does not want Czechoslovakia to be thought of as another Israel. No country does.

That is what the so-called Peace Process has truly accomplished, to turn Israel into a pariah, not for any crimes, but for its weakness. After WW2, no country wanted to be the next Czechoslovakia, today no country wants to be the next Israel or Yugoslavia-- carved up to pacify Muslim demands for "Lebensraum". Israel's own cooperativeness has isolated it. Each generation of compromise, each concession short of annihilation, has only brought it to the international isolation of the impatient, the world waiting for it to be thrown into the volcano of Muslim rage to calm their fury.

The Muslim world's wars against Israel succeeded in making it into an example of resistance to the Jihad. But Western pressure and the weakness of Israeli leaders has turned it into a cautionary example instead. Israel now stands internationally isolated. Its allies in the West and the Muslim world are lining up to turn their backs on it. And in that silence, waits a desperate lesson to be learned. That paradoxically Israel can only have peace, when it refuses it. And that it can only avoid war by being ready and willing to fight it. No romantic notions about its ties to the United States or the goodwill that can come from creating a Palestinian state will save it. They will only destroy it, as they have been destroying it until now. Only by refusing to be Czechoslovakia, but rather Finland, can Israel weather the coming storm. Only by standing tall will it find the room to breathe again. Only by giving up on peace, can it have peace again.


  1. Truly inspired. Thanks for this well articulated article.

  2. Stunning Daniel - I will post a link to this on several other blogs. I live in Israel and fight the fight every day. Thanks for your tireless work.

  3. Anonymous10/3/11

    We don't have the leaders to fight against our eventual elimination.
    Our political system is a dead-end, paralysed.

  4. Excellent post - you hit the nail on the head so frequently you should be called The Best Hammer ;)

    The dynamic of nations is a large version of the social dynamics of people - only the assertive thrive, people only respect those who respect themselves and their own needs.
    This point re Israel crops up up on a lot of blog posts, people practically in anguish at how Israel allows itself to be used, manipulated and bossed by its "allies" especially.

    Generosity is one thing to individuals but a governemt's firswt responsibility is to its OWN people. Anyone who preaches/practices should be thrown out of Israel, especially id they're in the Knesset! Arabs who do support Israel cannot stand up for it (except on the web) because they can see the State wiull not support them, as it does not support Jews and its other citizens against Muslim thugs and foreign correspondent terror groupies.

    The Jewish ethical personality is caught in a terrible tug of war in this instance.
    Jews and women have yet to learn this lesson, but the instant That Israel realises that its defence its its own business, the better it will be and the less crap it will have to invest in defence.

    That Omar Barghouti boycott advocate who is studying at Tel Aviv Uni should be deported for a start...

  5. Yonatan - there are so many people behind Israel and its fight it is amazing!! Whenever you and your friends falter, realise that there ARE friends of the country being exactly what it is, even if you can't immediate see them.
    They post their comments of support and see thru the antiIsrael bullshit on lots of blogs!

    Sultan, you might be interested in a new society that has recently established itself in Melbourne. Google the Q Society and check out www.ideologicaljihad.com, the website of the lady who set up the Q society.

  6. mindRider10/3/11

    A great comparative analysis. An article that should be read by Netanyahu or rather the entire Israeli government.

  7. I find the second picture most disturbing. Are these mannequins, models, or...

    It is disappointing to hear that even a Czech minister won't admit the glaring similarities between Czechoslovakia and Israel. I've written an article about it in high-school, right after I was taught about how that country was sold to appease Hitler.
    Later, Ariel Sharon mentioned the parallels as well.

    But, of course, the opinions of foreigners are of no importance to us. They come from interest, not from truth. Therefore, we should have earned their respect - through fear - rather than plead for their approval on our knees.

    And so, one can only wonder whether in the future, the examples of both Czechoslovakia, and Israel would be taught in schools - only to be ignored when evil has to be confronted again.

  8. Anonymous10/3/11

    Quote: The more Israel has traded land for peace, the more its staying power has diminished.

    Been saying so for years. Here is a comment from days gone by

    It well known that appeasement of dictators and Fascist ideologies never pays. The corollary to this is that, making dictators and Fascist ideologies pay for their aggression, teaches them a lesson, and maybe even sets them on the path to civilisation.

    Therefore, Israel's humanitarian largesse has done its enemies no favour - quite the contrary, it has encouraged them in their barbarity.

    The real tragedy is that Israel, in the process, has lost the opportunity to acquire strategic defensive land.

    If in the eighties, Israel had openly announced, that terrorism against Israel would lead not just to retaliation, but the permanent non-negotiable incorporation of parts Judea and Samaria into Israel, it would have stopped the Jihad immediately. The Jihadis in Hamas would also have discouraged their Marxist allies to stop provoking Israel, for that would lead to loss of territory.

    Such a policy would have earned Israel not just respect, but strategic as well as historic land, that should be in historic Israel. It would make clear to the America and Europe that Israel was not a pushover but had to be treated with respect.

    Frankly, Israel’s present dire predicament lies not with Hamas or Lefty Westerners, but with its past and present leaders, and those who elected them.

  9. No doubt they have to draw the "line in the sand", and the United States needs a leader who is going to stand with them to defend that line.

    I honestly and truly believe Muslims view Israel as "occupied Land" and in keeping with their doctrine of "Sacred Space" no peace will ever be possible.

  10. Awesome article. If only we could get Bibi to read it before we are all pushed into the sea! When you see him speak you think he might be good for Israel--a huge mistake in judgment.

  11. Raymond in DC10/3/11

    The grinding down of Israel's will to stand against their enemies began even before the end of the Yom Kippur War in 1973, as Kissinger wanted the result to be a more "pliable" Israel. Even as Israel was burying some 2,200 dead, it was being pushed to sacrifice part of the Sinai buffer zone. And it was under Begin that, despite protestations that Israel was not a vassal state, the precedent was set that aggression against Israel could be "cost free". Egypt got every bit of the Sinai, and today the Palestinians want every bit of the West Bank, Gaza, and eastern Jerusalem. Back to Square One, only this time the Arabs have missiles and US arms, not to mention worldwide backing.

    Today, the dominant voices among Israel's intelligentsia echo the themes of Oslo, Peres insisting that "Ve vant piss!" which of course Israel must be the one to deliver. There is no parallel reminder that Israel has historic and legal rights - not to mention national interests like any country - which it will both pursue and defend.

    It's reported that Netanyahu phoned Germany's Merkel to express his disappointment with Germany's recent vote to condemn Israel at the UN. In response, Merkel said: “How dare you? You are the one who has disappointed us. You haven’t made a single step to advance peace.” Any self-respecting leader would have put her in her place.

  12. Anonymous10/3/11

    Israel first began to lose the PR war in Europe and America before they gave up land for peace. The land trade was the result not the start. They should have challenged the Arab victim card, and rational for international violence. Israel should have challenged Arab and Muslim narrative in Europe and America that all the terrorism is Israel's fault, and they are not responsible for their violence. Israel should have brought up the fact that Jordan is a Palestinian country created out of 3/4 of Palestine territory. Israel first lost the narrative and allowed Europe and America belief in the Arab/Muslim narrative to go unchallenged.

  13. Anonymous10/3/11

    While there are many in the US (myself included) who have good will towards Israel I'm afraid the US is too mired in the left's Palestinian Pandering to be a true ally.
    Here friend put your fists down so this bully can keep punching you in the face. He really needs to left off some steam because he comes from a broken home so please don't complain. Are you bleeding - don't complain - you know you deserve it. Don't worry I'll jump in before he kills you - maybe.
    I think Israel needs to look to a higher friend than the US government.
    The left will never get it until their the ones being punched and even then they still might not get it - I suppose they are victims of their own common-sense deprived intellectualism.
    You can't make peace with the guy punching you in the face while hes busy busting your jaw - I figured that out by myself without a degree from Harvard - go me!

  14. ""...paradoxically Israel can only have peace, when it refuses it...""

    That goes for ANYONE dealing with Arabs/Muslims/Islamists! By feeding Israel to the crocodile, the appeasers only achieve a very tiny breathing space before it's their turn.

    Sultan Knish! Thank you for your continued work - you are one of the few lights at the end of the tunnel which is sure not to be the headlight of an oncoming train...I wish you were though!

  15. Anonymous10/3/11

    "The left will never get it until their the ones being punched and even then they still might not get it"

    The underlying assumption by the left is that if someone is punching you it because you did something first. So the punching is a symptom that should be disregarding and what hurt the person punching you is the root cause of the problem.

    However, what should be stated is that punching is not an acceptable reaction, and is wrong in it of itself (terrorism). And if there is a reason that person punched, it may not be a legitimate reason (people wanting Israel to cease to exist). Lastly the person punching you may be a thug who loves to threaten and intimidate people and would do so no matter what (Islamist fulfilling jihad).

  16. great article, Daniel....

    Anonymous..."go me!" - YES, you're right!

  17. Anonymous10/3/11

    You confuse correlation with causality. The European's media attitude to Israel is not related to the "concessions'. Israel cannot swallow these territories with all the Arabs in them. Panic is not a solution. In the middle east you have to have stronger nerves and separate as much as you can from these neighbors. The Pal's want you to stay in their areas and sink to your grave.

  18. The US has taken an ugly turn but Israel has lost its will to live anyway.

  19. anonymous,

    there is no separation, only a constant retreat. By your logic the Negev and Yerushalayim have to go too. And what of Haifa?

    There would be no end to it.

  20. Anonymous10/3/11

    DG wrote: There would be no end to it.

    The end will come when Israel is destroyed, or when Israel destroys any hope for Muslims to destroy Israel.

    Israel has to start the process of being a confident nation, and making the enemy pay in land for any war they make. In other words a slightly different interpretation of land for peace.

  21. "The fall of Turkey and Egypt's secular governments marks an end to Western influence in the region. And Israel remains alone, a flickering candle in the growing dark. If it goes out, the hour of the Caliphate comes. But who benefits from this scenario? "

    Agreed, Western influence in the region is at an end. The hour of the Caliphate is coming, we now know "what rough beast slouches toward Jerusalem to be born".

    At the present rate of development, within 5 years we'll be facing a nuclear armed Caliphate that stretches from N. Africa to Pakistan.

    Once Iran gains nuclear capability, a nuclear arms race will erupt across the Middle East. That eventuality is ensured by the undeniable fact that Russia is actively promoting nuclear proliferation, across the world in hostile, unstable third-world nations. First Iran, then Venezuela and now Syria.

    "who benefits from this scenario?" is unquestionably the most important question because without understanding fully what is occurring we cannot hope to formulate a strategy against it..

    Who benefits? Russia, China and the hard-core socialist left.

    Russia's pattern of behavior is now undeniable; Putin will continue to block any effective international sanctions against rogue nations in the UN. As will China.

    These two nations are the 'enabling' nations for Islamic terrorism, the largest suppliers of weapon sales to the rogue nations and thus to the terrorist networks.

    The only explanation that explains Russia and China's behavior is that they are using Islam as a covert arm of aggression against the US.

    The Putin government’s foreign policy is today guided by the so-called ‘Eurasian’ strategy, invented by Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, who proposes that Russia, China, and Islam ally with all the anti-American forces in Western Europe, Africa and Latin America, for the purpose of laying final siege to the United States. This strategy already has strong military support in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a kind of eastern version of NATO, which brings together Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.”

    In a subtle strategy worthy of Sun Tzu and the finest grandmaster of Russian chess... Russia and China are facilitating the emergence of an Islamic Caliphate, one that out of Islam's most basic theology... MUST confront the US. (people's behavior is dictated by their beliefs and premises)

    Predictably, because we're the "great Satan" that Caliphate will provide Al Qaeda with nukes to use in a nuclear terrorist attack upon an American city.

    And because the radiological signatures will identify them as the source, they'll claim that the nukes were stolen by 'parties unknown' in an attempt to escape responsibility.

    But their religious ideology won't allow them to stop, so they'll be more attacks and after a few cities are lost, culpability will no longer be deniable, so we'll retaliate.

    They'll then launch all they have, (Pakistan currently has at least 100 nukes) and so will we.

    When the fallout clears, Islam will be no more but the US will also be greatly damaged and no longer a threat to the new superpowers in the world; Russia and China, who will have stood 'innocently' and 'neutrally' upon the sidelines and watched it happen...

    With no need for a pact with Islam, which shall have been used to destroy the US' military and industrial might. And without Islam ever having realized it, while simultaneously being destroyed as a threat to Russia and China by the US retaliation to the Islamic Caliphate's nuclear aggression.

    It's the simplest explanation that accounts for the behavior and the only explanation that fits the facts.

    Too terrible to contemplate? A few of us, the unlucky, will live through it.

  22. Irwin Ruff10/3/11

    Israel has and is not handling things in the best manner, but I think it really makes little difference. Almost the entire world is united against Israel, and would anything be different if she was more aggressive? Other countries might be more wary in their approaches, but they would still hate her. Would the Muslim states cease trying boycott her and to wipe her out? Would the US under O'bupkes suddenly love her, rather than regarding the Muslims as her best friend?

    The only thing that would make a difference would be if Israel were able to block the west's oil supply, at the same time threatening the surrounding states with atomic bombing. And that is something that I hope (and I believe you do too) Israel would never do.

    Under the present circumstances the only thing that Israel can do is, as much as possible, stand independently, not rely on any other country (especially the US), and stop trying to imitate and be loved by everybody in the world. We are Jews, not pseudo-Americans or pseudo-any thing else.

    I know that this last point is very controversial, but I know of no other people in history that supported their enemies in a case of war. Thus I would suggest as a first move to expel the Israeli Arabs (and take over the government from the leftists). So this is ethnic cleansing? So what? Nobody objects to the Arabs doing the same thing in their own territories! I haven't read much of what he wrote, but I guess this makes me a disciple of R' Kahane.

  23. Given that a Caliphate, an Iranian/Muslim Brotherhood led alliance is emerging...

    What can Israel do?

    First she must face the facts, starting with; The Realities Israel Must Accept

    If Egypt rescinds the treaty, recapture the Sinai.

    Then annex Gaza and the West Bank.

    Followed by the deportation of ALL Muslims from ALL Israeli controlled territory.

    Declare War upon Islam, with Islam's holy sites declared legitimate targets, if nukes are used upon Israel.

    Institute a policy of targeting the ME oilfields, should Israel be attacked with WMD. Confront the West with the realization that they too shall pay a terrible price if they allow Islam to attack Israel with nukes.

  24. This is an incredible article, and should be recited before the Knesset.

    To Orfan--I know what you mean about Bibi. Before the UN general assembly and on US TV he comes across as very pro-Israel. He's familiar in the west and in theory should carry a lot of weight in what he says.

    Somehow for all of his intelligence and oratory talent if he's as pro-Zionist as he tells the west, it doesn't seem to be the case in Israel.

    He's either sincere but misguided or someone is holding something over his head. Why the humbled comments about how Obama hasn't humilated him?


    I honestly don't know what Israel should do. All I do know is that the "Palestinians" are a lot like Hitler. They lie about everything--except when it comes to their desire to kill Jews.

    What is the legal status of Gaza? Still Israeli land? Arab state? A protectorate (sp) of Israel? Or more like a British commonwealth?

    It's so confusing.

    G-d help Israel! I don't know what else to say.

  25. Anonymous11/3/11

    Daniel Greenfield
    Israel 's borders are clear and should stay that way including the groups that are parts of Israel. The strategy should be to protect that by all means without any "bold" maneuvers so that you have the energy to stay ahead in this new world which has changed dramatically in the last years. The dreams of nuclear armed Caliphate are more likely to stay dreams if you don't have food and water for your population, and this is the daily life of our neighbors and I don't see that it is going to change much.
    They cannot eat weapons and they may not know how to operate them with the nothing education that they provide. Yes they have oil and this is the enemy.

  26. Supporter11/3/11

    Israel is not hated by the entire world. In every country there are those that support it. The animosity is coming from the left in every country. It is the left that controls the media and therefore the debate. Misinformation colours people's perception of the Palestinian situation - opinions are based on what they are told, not the reality. The version of facts given through the media usually leads a reasonable person to only one conclusion. It is for this reason that I read the Sultan, for I'm usually given references to sources of completely different information.

    The irony is that even my leftist jewish friends blame anti-jewish feelings on the right. They support the very doctrine that is squeezing them out of existence.

    So please don't draw up the world map with countries that are for and against Israel. There are plenty of us behind you in countries that appear to be hostile, and with the dissemination of a bit more honest information there would be a whole lot more.

  27. Irwin and Geoffrey,

    I agree.

  28. Israel cannot give up one inch of anything. Never.
    It would not end until every last part of the land was gone.
    Israel must stand firm and take a hard line.

  29. DP111,
    You wrote: If in the eighties, Israel had openly announced, that terrorism against Israel would lead not just to retaliation, but the permanent non-negotiable incorporation of parts Judea and Samaria into Israel, it would have stopped the Jihad immediately.

    No it would not as the Saudis would have paid Baker Botts more to push even harder and the Qaddafis would have bought more people in Washington.
    You should pay attention to the Bush administration in the 1980s when it forced Arafat on the Israelis as the only Palestinian they could discuss peace with. Take another look at the Madrid Conference of 1991 and how Shamir was pressured by G H W Bush & co., into participating.

  30. Anonymous12/3/11

    "You should pay attention to the Bush administration in the 1980s when it forced Arafat on the Israelis as the only Palestinian they could discuss peace with. Take another look at the Madrid Conference of 1991 and how Shamir was pressured by G H W Bush & co., into participating."

    Israeli strategy going forward should be to challenge the Arab/Muslim narrative whenever and wherever it happens in every country, and should build alliances based on mutual interests across a broad spectrum and not depend on one country. And think outside of the box. A ME that is predominantly Christian is probably more open to peace with Israel. There is no "waqf" religious ideology in Christianity as in Islam. An Asia that is nearly all Zoroastrian, Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Shinto, Sikh, is a continent much more hospitable to Jews and Israel. Think about it if Iran was all Zoroastrian, it would not be threatening Israel with annihilation. If Pakistan remained unpartition from India and the whole subcontinent was Hindu there you would not have Daniel Pearl incidences, or Mumbai killings of Jews like in 2008, and it would not be the epicenter of Islamic terrorism in the world today. No need for the US to spend billions in jizya. Those Pakistanis went out of their way to kill Jews in Mumbai along with Hindus, and others. They found that Jewish needle in the Mumbai haystack. If Afghanistan remained Hindu and Buddhist like it was before Islam, no Islamic terrorism would have come from there either and the US would not need to be there.The more Jews and Israelis help Gentiles survive in their own indigenous gentile religions, the safer the world is for Jews and Israel.

  31. Anonymous13/3/11

    Speaking of the Arab Muslim narrative:
    "At a time when politicians are stoking the flames of hate, we felt the need to make a film about understanding the Palestinian narrative. Perhaps predictably, our critics are furious.

    Two events taking place within weeks of each other this month illustrate the complex and sometimes difficult history of Arabs and Muslims in America. On Thursday, Congress launched an investigation into the American-Muslim community that many observers have likened to a McCarthyite witch-hunt, and on March 25, Miral, a mainstream American film with a Palestinian protagonist, will have its U.S. theatrical premiere in New York and Los Angeles..." from current The Daily Beast article "Peter King Needs to See Our Movie" by Julian Schnabel and Harvey Weinstein


Post a Comment

You May Also Like