15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Apr, 2007 09:45 pm
Advocate, It's not any surprise you fail to understand the real content of that piece.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Apr, 2007 09:54 pm
The idiotic versus the inane.

In the Blue corner is the Israeli Apologist. Anything and everything Israel does is not only rationalized, it is righteous.

In the Red corner is the Palestinian Apologist. Murderous terrorism is acceptable because the poor sods have, through mismanagement and corruption, rendered themselves pathetic and weak. Israel, as a superior force, is, by nature, evil.

Notwithstanding all of the hand-wringing, the world is ruled by the powerful, AND SO IT SHOULD BE!

Israel's great mistake was to whip Arabian butt. When it was the underdog, the Libs loved it. Now that it has"the power" the Libs, perforce, must denigrate it.

How did a political force predicated upon fundamental weakness rise to power?

It makes one long for the natural enemies of Man.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 08:54 am
It seems to me that most libs are taking the Palestinian side on almost all issues. Libs have a propensity to put reason aside to favor the underdog.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 09:25 am
Advocate, Read and digest your own words. They have a meaning far beyond your own interpretation.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 06:07 pm
No worry as Iran is doing enrichment under IAEA supervision: ElBaradei

RIYADH (Reuters) -- The head of the UN atomic watchdog said on Thursday that Iran was still at the starting stage of creating a uranium enrichment plant and that concerns stemmed more from its motivations than the scale of production.
http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=4/15/2007&Cat=2&Num=016
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 08:14 pm
Advocate wrote:
CI, was your piece commissioned by Hamas? It is pure BS.


It looked rather accurate to me. Could you please be more specific in your critique?

Advocate wrote:
It says, for instance, "in 1967 Israel attacked Egypt, Syria and Jordon in a war which lasted six days and resulted in the Israeli occupation of the West bank, the Gaza strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights."

Those countries attacked Israel, and lost. Israel then took war prizes.


You are really stuck on this point aren't you? Unfotunately the facts are not with you. The Six Day War started with suprise simultaneous Israeli Attacks on Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. This is well documented in history, including the personal accounts of several of the Israeli leaders themselves.

Israel has an unusual and peculiar way of seizing provinces as war prizes -- they take the land and drive out the people - or systematically isolate them in ever smaller compounds. In the modern world this is considered to be a crime against humanity.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Apr, 2007 12:14 pm
georgeob1 wrote:

...
Advocate wrote:
It says, for instance, "in 1967 Israel attacked Egypt, Syria and Jordon in a war which lasted six days and resulted in the Israeli occupation of the West bank, the Gaza strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights."

Those countries attacked Israel, and lost. Israel then took war prizes.


...
The Six Day War started with suprise simultaneous Israeli Attacks on Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. This is well documented in history, including the personal accounts of several of the Israeli leaders themselves.
...


First, in 1947 the UN resolved that Palestine land be divided into specific Palestinian Arab state land and specific Palestinian Jew state land.

Second, in 1948 Israel declared its independence in the specific Palestinian Jew state land.

Third, in 1948 neighboring countries attacked Israel, were ferociously defeated, and Israel added some conquered Palestinian land to the state of Israel.

Fourth, from 1948 to 1967, Israel was repeatedly attacked and repeatedly conquered more land in Palestine.

Fifth, from 1966 to 1967 troops were increasingly being massed on Israel's Syrian, Jordanian, and Egyptian borders.

Sixth, in 1967 there was a plea by a frightened Israeli government to the Syrian, Jordanian, and Egyptian governments to terminate their massing of troops on Israel's borders, but Israel's plea was ignored.

Seventh, in 1967 there were "suprise simultaneous Israeli Attacks on Syria, Jordan, and Egypt" by an Israeli government desperate to terminate that massing of troops on its borders.

Eighth, in 1967 in a six war those simultaneous surprise attacks by Israel terminated that massing of troops on its borders by rapidly defeating those massed troops.

Ninth, Israel in negotiated, mutual non-aggression peace agreements with the Jordanian and Egyptian governments, returned to Jordan and Egypt their lands that Israel had conquered in its six day war.

Tenth, ever since 1967, Israel has been trying to negotiate mutual non-aggression peace agreements with others in exchange for returning lands it conquered in 1967.

Eleventh, Israel subsequently, voluntarily returned some more of the lands it conquered in 1967 in the hope of eventually convincing the others attacking them to also make non-aggression peace treaties with Israel.

Twelfth, Israel has brutally retaliated against those persons it suspected of making war on Israel, as well as against those persons it suspected of supporting those it suspected of making war on Israel.

Thirteenth, in 2007 Israel stopped its attempts to trade land it conquered in 1967 for non-agression peace treaties.



Some argue that Israel should have been less fearful and more tolerant of those troops massed on its borders back in 1967, and waited until an invasion by those troops had actually occurred, before attacking them.

Others argue that Israel should not have attacked in any case, but should have negotiated before, when, or while, or even after being attacked.

Still others argue, that the governments that massed troops on Israel's borders should have been less fearful and more tolerant of Israel, and should have understood that massing their troops on Israel's borders would be interpreted by Israel as precursors of attacks on Israel.

Still others argue that the Israeli government is intolerant and mean because America protects it.

Still others argue Israel is hysterical.

Still others argue that the enemies of Israel are hysterical.

I argue that Israel's enemies ought to negotiate non-aggression peace treaties with Israel, lest they eventually come to be totally annihilated by a future, completely hysterical Israeli government.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Apr, 2007 08:52 pm
There are a number of errors in your enumerated historical summary. Firstly, Israel has signed only one land for peace agreement, and that with Egypt. It has been a great success so far and the countries maintain normal relationships, despite all the strains placed on it by Palestinian resistance and Israeli repression This agreement came only after Anwer Satat's breakthrough gestures and intense pressure by the U.S. Government, then under president Carter. I'm sure both Sadat and Carter hoped that Israel would take the next step in some breakthrough moves in the occupied territories. Unfortunately none ever came -- indeed the pace of construction of Israeli settlements on the West Bank increased markedly.

I think your rambling summary at the end ignores the precariousness of Israel's present position. It is surrounded by hostile nations, each with higher birth rates than Israel, and there seem to be no more sources of large scale external Jewish immigration. In the occupied territories Israel has created the conditions for a conflict that could last for centuries --- it truly has a tiger by the tail and I can see no way for it to escape the contradictions of a continuous need for military intervention, retaliation, and all the bad side effects they bring, including the renewed hostility of other Arab countries, and the contempt of much of the world. The Palestinian resistance shows no signs of exhaustion - on the contrary, it has proven able to survive whatever Israel dishes out and emerge stronger for it.

Israel has very few friends in the world, apart from the United States, and I believe public attitudes here are changing very fast with respect to our relationship. Its last other major ally, South Africa, departed the scene after the fall of the Apartheidt government there. In many way Israel is a friendless, almost pariah state.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Apr, 2007 08:56 pm
And the only reason Israel continues to flex its muscle is their puppets in Washington allows them to.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 09:03 am
Since many of you seem to think Israel is the cause of all the problems in the middle east,would you advocate the total destruction of Israel?
Wouldnt that be the best way to solve the problem?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 10:16 am
I have not observed anyone here expressing anything like the analysis you offered. Perhaps you should read the posts more carefully.

It appears to me that, lacking any sound counter argument, you are merely hiding behind an extreme position that no one here took.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 10:56 am
georgeob1 wrote:
I have not observed anyone here expressing anything like the analysis you offered. Perhaps you should read the posts more carefully.

It appears to me that, lacking any sound counter argument, you are merely hiding behind an extreme position that no one here took.


I didnt say that anyone took that position.
I am asking if that would be a viable way to solve the problems that Israel is supposedly causing in the ME.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 10:58 am
mm doesn't understand the concept of "inference."
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 11:09 am
mysteryman wrote:
Since many of you seem to think Israel is the cause of all the problems in the middle east,would you advocate the total destruction of Israel?
Wouldnt that be the best way to solve the problem?


"...best way to solve the problem?" This guys a total joke.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 11:11 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
mm doesn't understand the concept of "inference."


And you apparently dont understand the concept of a question.

I didnt infer or suggest or state that anyone took that position.
If I thought someone had,I would have said so.

I am simply asking if eliminating Israel would solve the problems in the ME.
After all,many of you seem to think that they are the cause of most if not all of the problems in the ME.

If you dont think so,then you should be able to say so.
If you do think so,you shouldnt be afraid to say so.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 11:21 am
mysteryman wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
mm doesn't understand the concept of "inference."


And you apparently dont understand the concept of a question.

I didnt infer or suggest or state that anyone took that position.
If I thought someone had,I would have said so.

I am simply asking if eliminating Israel would solve the problems in the ME.
After all,many of you seem to think that they are the cause of most if not all of the problems in the ME.

If you dont think so,then you should be able to say so.
If you do think so,you shouldnt be afraid to say so.


Where does the Conservative tendency to suggest that the solution to the problem is in fact to do the exact opposite of whatever is causing a problem, come from, exactly?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 03:38 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
There are a number of errors in your enumerated historical summary. Firstly, Israel has signed only one land for peace agreement, and that with Egypt. ...

Quote:

Israel Jordan 1994 Peace Agreement
What led to the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty in 1994?

On October 26, 1994 Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty at Wadi Araba, only the second such agreement, after the Israel-Egypt treaty of 1978, between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The treaty, followed by more than one dozen subsequent sectoral agreements, established a solid framework for bilateral cooperation in the political, economic, and cultural fields.

The Jordan-Israel peace was the formalization of non-public arrangements between the countries that had been in place for many years. Regional politics was against Israel and prevented Jordan's King Hussein from openly revealing his more moderate policies. In particular, Jordan was dependent on Iraq for oil, had a large Palestinain Arab population hostile to Israel, and faced constant pressure from Syria, objecting to any rapprochement with Israel.

The elements preventing openly peaceful relations with Israel were finally offset by the Gulf War and, most importantly, by the Oslo peace process that made it acceptable for an Arab entity to be in peace negotiations with Israel.

The US made important contributions to Jordan's decision to go ahead with the treaty. Over $700 million of Jordan's debt to the US was written off and modern military hardware, like F-16 aircraft, were supplied.
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein had little difficulty completing the agreement since it was based on existing, relatively amicable relations between the countries and a warm personal regard. In July of 1994 they announced the "Washington Declaration", at an event hosted by President Clinton, essentially an intention to have a treaty. The treaty itself came a few months later.


Quote:

Six-Day War

I INTRODUCTION
Six-Day War, armed conflict in June 1967 between Israel and the Arab states of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. In six days, Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights, which became collectively known as the Occupied Territories.

Israel and its Arab neighbors had been hostile toward each other since 1948, when Israel became a nation in an area that Palestinian Arabs claim as their homeland. After Israel declared its statehood, several Arab states and Palestinian groups immediately attacked Israel, only to be driven back. In 1956 Israel overran Egypt in the Suez-Sinai War. Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser vowed to avenge Arab losses and press the cause of Palestinian nationalism. To this end, he organized an alliance of Arab states surrounding Israel and mobilized for war. Israel preempted the invasion with its own attack on June 5, 1967. In the following days, Israel drove Arab armies from the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights, all of which it then occupied. Israel also reunited Jerusalem, the eastern half of which Jordan had controlled since the 1948-1949 war. The Six-Day War was viewed as an enormous victory for Israel, but the territories it gained did not stop future fighting. The peace process throughout the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s has in large part been an attempt to resolve the land disputes created by Israel's military success.

II CAUSES OF THE WAR
Print this section
In the years before the Six-Day War, the Arab countries continually refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Jewish state, and Arab nationalists led by Nasser called for the destruction of Israel. Egypt and Jordan supported Palestinian fedayeen (guerrillas), who attacked troops and civilians in Israeli territory, then retreated to the Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip or the Jordanian-controlled West Bank. From its Golan Heights region, Syria regularly shelled Israeli farms. For its part, Israel refused to accept Jordan's control of Jewish holy places in East Jerusalem. Israel also kept tensions high by responding to Arab incursions with reprisals on Arab territory.

In April 1967, after Syria heavily shelled Israeli villages from the Golan Heights, Israel and Syria engaged in aerial clashes. Israel shot down six of Syria's MiG fighter planes, which were given by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Israel warned Syria against future attacks, and both the Syrians and Soviets were alarmed by the warning. Syria appealed to Nasser for backing, and in mid-May the Egyptian army moved 100,000 troops and 1000 tanks into the Sinai Peninsula on Israel's southern border. The United Nations (UN) had earlier stationed forces in the area as observers, but on May 17, Nasser called for the removal of UN personnel from several locations. Within days, all of the observers were removed. On May 22 Nasser announced the closure of the Strait of Tiran, a vital shipping corridor for Israel with links to the Red Sea and major sources of petroleum. A similar closure of the strait had been a major cause of the Suez Crisis in 1956; Israel had made clear since then that it would regard another closure as an act of war. Israel was further alarmed when Egypt and Jordan signed a treaty placing the two armies under a joint command. Despite a flurry of diplomatic effort, war seemed inevitable.

III THE BATTLES BEGIN
Print this section
Because Israel feared fighting on three fronts (Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian), and because it preferred that fighting take place in Arab rather than Israeli territory, Israel decided to strike first. On the morning of June 5 the Israeli air force attacked Egypt, the largest force in the region. The timing of the attack, 8:45 AM, was designed to catch the maximum number of Egyptian aircraft on the ground and to come when the Egyptian high command was stuck in traffic between homes and military bases. The Israeli aircraft took evasive measures to elude Egyptian radar and approached from directions that were not anticipated. The surprise was complete. Within hours of the strike, the Israelis, who focused their attacks on military and air bases, had destroyed 309 of the 340 total combat aircraft belonging to the Egyptians. Israeli ground forces then moved into the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip, where they fought Egyptian units. Egyptian casualties were heavy, but Israel suffered only minimal casualties.

War was not far behind on Israel's eastern front. Israel had conveyed a message to King Hussein of Jordan asking him to stay out of the conflict, but on the first morning of the war Nasser called Hussein and encouraged him to fight. Nasser reportedly told Hussein that Egypt had been victorious in the morning's fighting?-an illusion the Egyptian public believed for several days. At 11:00 AM Jordanian troops attacked the Israeli half of Jerusalem with mortars and gunfire and shelled targets in the Israeli interior. Israel's air force, having immobilized the Egyptian air force, turned its attention to Jordan. By evening, the Jordanian air force had been largely destroyed, again with minimal Israeli casualties. At midnight Israeli ground forces attacked Jordanian troops in Jerusalem, and by the morning of June 6, Israeli troops had nearly encircled the city.
On the second day of the war the Israeli air force continued its operations against Arab air bases, raising the total number of destroyed Arab planes to 416, which included more than two-thirds of the Syrian air force. With nearly total control of the skies, Israeli fighter planes and bombers were free to support the tank and infantry forces on the ground. Thus Jordanian reinforcements were prevented from reaching Jerusalem, and by 10:00 AM on June 6 the Israelis had taken the Western Wall, also known as the Wailing Wall, in the Old City, the holiest site in Judaism. It was the first time in nearly 2000 years that Jews had controlled the wall. Ground battles continued in the Sinai, where Egypt's armies fell back in the face of Israeli advances. On the third day of the war, June 7, Jordanian forces were pushed from the West Bank across the Jordan River. The UN arranged a cease-fire between Israel and Jordan that went into effect that evening.

The following day, June 8, Israeli forces reached the Suez Canal. As artillery battles continued along the front, the Israeli air force decimated retreating Egyptians, who were backed up on the few roads through desert mountain passes. As the Sinai shifted to Israeli control, Israel turned its forces toward the Golan Heights. There, on June 9, Israel began a difficult assault up steep terrain against entrenched Syrian forces. Israel sent an armored corps into the front of Syrian lines while infantry forces surrounded the Syrian positions. The balance of power soon shifted to Israel's favor, and at 6:30 PM on June 10, Israel and Syria made a cease-fire agreement. Israel controlled all of the Golan Heights, including parts of Mount Hermon. Fighting between Israel and Egypt did not formally end for many years, although Israel controlled the Sinai Peninsula. Not until the 1979 Camp David Accords did the two countries finally reach peace.

IV AFTERMATH
Print this section
The speed and scope of Israel's victory were devastating to the Arabs, who had expected victory. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria lost almost all of their air forces and much of their armed weaponry. About 10,000 Egyptians were killed in Sinai and Gaza alone, compared with 300 Israeli casualties on that front. In all, Egypt lost about 11,000 troops, Jordan lost about 6000, Syria lost about 1000, and Israel lost 700. As a result, Arab leaders endured unpopularity at home while Israel's government, which had united before and during the war, surged in popularity. Abroad, the USSR, which had strongly supported the Arab powers, was embarrassed because the Arab nations had been defeated by an ally of the United States and Soviet weapons systems had failed to overpower Western weapons.

On November 22 the UN passed Resolution 242, which called for Israel to withdraw from the Occupied Territories; in return Arab states would recognize Israel's independence and guarantee secure borders for Israel. Events, however, did not follow Resolution 242. The Arabs and Palestinians declared their intention to continue fighting Israel, and Israel refused to return the Occupied Territories under such conditions. Terrorist attacks and reprisals persisted, and Israel and Egypt continued to engage in artillery, sniper, and occasional air attacks for several years. As a result, the Six-Day War was followed by what has come to be known as the War of Attrition. Although cease-fire agreements eventually ended this situation, the region remained volatile.

Israel moved to secure its position in the Occupied Territories by extending its lines of defense to the boundaries of the Arab states. The Sinai, West Bank, and Golan Heights were all fortified, and parts of these areas were lightly settled with Jewish Israelis. Israel also announced its intent to secure Jerusalem as its undivided and eternal capital, further antagonizing the Arab states. These disagreements eventually led to the 1973 Arab-Israeli War of 1973. Nonetheless, Resolution 242, which followed the Six-Day War, created the foundation of the peace process that began to yield results in the late 1970s.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 04:00 pm
The Jordan/Israel peace treaty wasn't exactly a 'land for peace' deal, but it was bought and paid for by the USA as was the Egypt/Israel peace treaty according to some historical versions, but I'm not sure that is verifiable.

The Rabin/Arafat agreement later on is also worth looking at.

As for Egypt and Israel relationships, ME expert, Daniel Pipes, is not as impressed as some:

Rethinking the Egypt-Israel "Peace" Treaty
By Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com | November 22, 2006

Ninety-two percent of respondents in a recent poll of one thousand Egyptians over 18 years of age called Israel an enemy state. In contrast, a meager 2% saw Israel as "a friend to Egypt."

These hostile sentiments express themselves in many ways, including a popular song titled "I Hate Israel," venomously antisemitic political cartoons, bizarre conspiracy theories, and terrorist attacks against visiting Israelis. Egypt's leading democracy movement, Kifaya, recently launched an initiative to collect a million signatures on a petition demanding the annulment of the March 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

Also, the Egyptian government has permitted large quantities of weapons to be smuggled into Gaza to use against Israeli border towns. Yuval Steinitz, an Israeli legislator specializing in Egypt-Israel relations, estimates that fully 90% of PLO and Hamas explosives come from Egypt.

Cairo may have no apparent enemies, but the impoverished Egyptian state sinks massive resources into a military buildup. According to the Congressional Research Service, it purchased $6.5 billion worth of foreign weapons in the years 2001-04, more than any other state in the Middle East. In contrast, the Israel government bought only $4.4 billion worth during that period and the Saudi one $3.8 billion.

Egypt ranked as the third largest purchaser of arms in the entire developing world, following only population giants China and India. It has the tenth largest standing army in the world, well over twice the size of Israel's.

This long, ugly record of hostility exists despite a peace treaty with Israel, hailed at the time by both Egypt's president Anwar El-Sadat and Israel's prime minister Menachem Begin as a "historic turning point." U.S. president Jimmy Carter hoped it would begin a new era when "violence no longer dominates the Middle East." I too shared in this enthusiasm.

With the benefit of retrospect, however, we see that the treaty did palpable harm in at least two ways. First, it opened the American arsenal and provided American funding to purchase the latest in weaponry. As a result, for the first time in the Arab-Israeli conflict, an Arab armed force may have reached parity with its Israeli counterpart.

Second, it spurred anti-Zionism. I lived for nearly three years in Egypt in the 1970s, before Sadat's dramatic trip to Jerusalem in late 1977, and I recall the relatively low interest in Israel at that time. Israel was plastered all over the news but it hardly figured in conversations. Egyptians seemed happy to delegate this issue to their government. Only after the treaty, which many Egyptians saw as a betrayal, did they themselves take direct interest. The result was the emergence of a more personal, intense, and bitter form of anti-Zionism.

The same pattern was replicated in Jordan, where the 1994 treaty with Israel soured popular attitudes. To a lesser extent, the 1993 Palestinian accords and even the aborted 1983 Lebanon treaty prompted similar responses. In all four of these cases, diplomatic agreements prompted a surge in hostility toward Israel.

Defenders of the "peace process" answer that, however hostile Egyptians' attitudes and however large their arsenal, the treaty has held; Cairo has in fact not made war on Israel since 1979. However frigid the peace, peace it has been.

To which I reply: if the mere absence of active warfare counts as peace, then peace has also prevailed between Syria and Israel for decades, despite their formal state of war. Damascus lacks a treaty with Jerusalem, but it also lacks modern American weaponry. Does an antique signature on a piece of paper offset Egypt's Abrams tanks, F-16 fighter jets, and Apache attack helicopters?

I think not. In retrospect, it becomes apparent that multiple fallacies and wishful predictions fueled Arab-Israeli diplomacy:

· Once signed, agreements signed by unelected Arab leaders would convince the masses to give up their ambitions to eliminate Israel.

· These agreements would be permanent, with no backsliding, much less duplicity.

· Other Arab states would inevitably follow suit.

· War can be concluded through negotiations rather than by one side giving up.

The time has come to recognize the Egypt-Israel treaty - usually portrayed as the glory and ornament of Arab-Israel diplomacy - as the failure it has been, and to draw the appropriate lessons in order not to repeat its mistakes.

SOURCE
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 06:19 pm
Pipes, like his father, is an historian by trade, though he has become a rather anti Arab & pro Zionist protagonist over the past decade.

His analysis and conclusions here, however, are not those of an historian, but rather of a rather ordinary Israeli apologist. He stops far short of any meaningful analysis of the situation. For example. despite the Egyptian government's rather scrupulous observance of the treaty with Israel, why has no true spirit of friendship arisen between the two peoples? Pipes notes this question, but inexplocably fails to address it in any way. First it should be noted that the failure is reciprocal -- there is no more love lost among Israelis for Egyptians, than among Egyptians for Israelis. In effect Pipes asserts that because Egyptians appear not to like Israelis or their country, the Peace with Egypt is a failure. (Gosh, could there be any other possibilities?)

The unstated central thesis here is obvious. The Moslem peoples of the Middle East are so filled with hate for Israel that no attempt to establish normal living arrangements with them will ever find success. The inevitable next application of this idea is that no attempt to seek an accomodation with the Palestinian people of the occupied West Bank can ever succeed. Therefore Israel might just as well continue building settlements in the West Bank; continue the process of squeezing the non Jewish population into ever smaller and more isolated and economically ineffective cantonments -- and all with no political voice in the governance of their lives whatever.

It is all a very tidy and compact argument for absolving Israel for any responsibility for the disastrous plundering, oppression, and misrule the Israelis have inflicted on the people of the West Bank for the last forty years. Indeed it is a key component to the Zionist illusion we have so readily embraced. In essence that illusion supposes in various forms that (1) there were no previous inhabitants of the land now called Israel; (2) even if one if forced to conceded this is a lie, then they had no real historical rights to the land; (3) even if one is forced to concede that this too is a lie, then they are such fanatic disagreeable people that the norms of modern law and national behavior do not apply to them.

In one form or another the American people have been fed a rather steady diet of this stuff by Israeli apologists in the Media and various political fora for many years. Pipes has provided us yet another dose.

I can think of several reasons to explain Israel's lack of friends - in the Mideast, in Europe, indeed throughout the world. However. the futility of peace treaties with her is not among those that come quickly to mind.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 06:59 pm
Ican, Fox, thanks for he great posts. They back up what I have been saying. George is having a tough time with the truth, and with retracting his false statements.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 03/09/2026 at 07:52:12