Another installment by Michael Totten, with the Iraqi Police in Kirkuk;
“If America pulls out of Iraq, they will fail in Afghanistan,” Mam Rostam said.
Hardly anyone in Congress seems to consider that the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan might become much more severe if similar tactics are proven effective in Iraq.
“And they will fail with Iran,” he continued. “They will fail everywhere with all Eastern countries. The war between America and the terrorists will move from Iraq and Afghanistan to America itself. Do you think America will do that? The terrorists gather their agents in Afghanistan and Iraq and fight the Americans here. If you pull back, the terrorists will follow you there. They will try, at least. Then Iran will be the power in the Middle East. Iran is the biggest supporter of terrorism. They support Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Ansar Al Islam. You know what Iran will do with those elements if America goes away.”
“What nonsense! Any second now, the Taliban will come riding over the horizon on their camels. After swimming across the ocean.”
we said the same thing about global communism in the 60s and all our slack attitudes got us was PET and Jack Layton who continue to trow the nation into a 2nd world socialist kleptocracy …all a bloodless coup mind you, so hey, as long as no one gets hurt turnin’ into a corrupt crypto-commie federation it’s not so bad….nothing really worth fighting over anyway…right?
In the next 20 years you Islamo fascist deniers had better brush up on Shia law and pick out some stunning Burkhas and get to all the local beheadings to show faith 😉
Max Boot’s analysis of the surge in Iraq
The Hugh Hewitt Show
[…]
And in fact, yesterday, a former Republican Congressman, Bob Schaffer, brought me back the paper from this week in Afghanistan, the Daily Outlook, it’s the only English speaking paper in Afghanistan. The headline above the fold was Iraq War Lost in quotes, says Democrat leader. Do the Democrats not understand this war? Or are they putting politics simply ahead of it?
MB: You know, that’s a very good question, and it’s just so incredibly irresponsible for the majority leader of the United States Senate to make a proclamation like that, and it makes you think, you know, if we’ve lost the war, who’s won it? […]
But unfortunately, when the majority leader[Democratic Harry Reid} of the United States Senate says the war is lost, that can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, because if our political leadership has lost faith in the fight, it’s going to be very hard to continue.
HH: Well, I called it a telegram to the Taliban. Does the enemy read this and follow this, in your opinion, Max Boot?
MB: Oh, absolutely, and I think there’s this very naïve attitude that oh, well, we can pull out of Iraq, it won’t be a big deal, and then we can concentrate our resources on the real fight. In Afghanistan, ignoring the fact that Iraq right now is the front line of the struggle against al Qaeda, and if we give up there, it will be a tremendous boost to al Qaeda, similar to defeating the Red Army in Afghanistan. And they’re not going to be content with fighting us in Iraq. They’re going to go fight us in Afghanistan, and the situation there will deteriorate, and they’ll fight us elsewhere around the world, and we would have to grapple with that. So there’s not an easy exit strategy by simply saying oh, this is no big deal, we don’t have to worry about it. We do have to worry about it. The cost of defeat will be very heavy. …-
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1824512/posts
ET, you want the ME to take charge of itself, agreed. You think we’re enabling too much passivity… possibly.
But, the dilemma is that we aren’t dealing with real countries. They are lines in the sand, drawn up in 1919 … as outlined by UofT’s Margaret MacMillan, the heads of nations in Paris 1919 had not even been to the ME. What we are seeing can be argued is simply a continuation of WW1. Unfortunately in the interim, the leadership in the ME got their ideas of governance from Europe .. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Franco. The timing to copy Europe was bad.
The ME needs a psychiatrist. Unfortunately we don’t know how to do that for millions on a couch.
But this is psychological warfare. Your question is a good one. I maintain the answer can’t be withdrawal, because the oceans don’t protect us the way they did from the Viet Cong. With withdrawal we will see another Pol Pot. In addition, we might see killing fields on our soil.
Paradoxically because you say the ME is tribal, therefore we cannot prescribe solutions that we would to a country .. . i e. it’s not easy to stop the enabling ( gosh that sounds like Dion)
The tribes need a leader (s) and not the Mullahs that Jimmy Carter allowed to take over in 1979. I agree with you that this will come down to internal ME strife that should be fought by them not us. I just want to be sure there is more leadership there .. an Ataturk to take on the Mullahs.
Right, nomdenet, the ME needs a leader, its own leader – and a leader for democracy. But, my point is that such leadership might not emerge as long as the ME remains the way it likes to exist, as a ‘kept’ area, protected and nurtured by a superpower.
This has nothing to do with the Iraq War – which I’ve always been in favour of. Indeed, the War is over, it’s won; what is going on now refers to Pre-War, Pre-Saddam Hussein days. The ME is now being forced to face its tribalism. My concern is that it will, as it has for centuries, refuse to do so.
Aghanistan is different; it IS facing its tribalism and it is actively looking after itself. Therefore, the West should remain there, helping them fight the Taliban. The ME is not facing its tribalism – and never has.
The situation in the ME has to do with a deeper malaise in the ME than Al Qaeda’s existence there – because Al Qaeda is a RESULT of that malaise. To defeat Al Qaeda and not deal with the root causes is like getting rid of the fever and ignoring that the disease remains firmly embedded. The disease is two-fold. First, it’s tribalism – and unless the ME deals with this, even though an Al Qaeda may be defeated now, that fascism will re-emerge. Second, is a normative habit of passiveness, of actually desiring and insisting on colonialism.
The fact that Iraq and the ME are not ‘real countries’ is, in my view, irrelevant. They are now and they will have to deal with it. They may deal with it by breaking up into smaller nations; they may set up a governance akin to the UK (Scotland, England, Wales, N. Ireland); they may do the Belgian model (Flemish/French) – but, that’s not the issue.
The issue is their long history of tribalism, their long history of a rejection of science and technology, and their long history of a tribalism kept secure by an external OverLord SuperPower. That’s the problem – and I don’t see anyone dealing with this.
The ME states are passive – incredibly passive. They prefer tribalism, both as small isolate tribes (the original mode) and as collective ‘sets’ of tribes dominated by one tribe (the WWI style). The problem with tribalism is that its membership sets are hereditary (elite and peasants). This is great for stablity. It’s very passive and stable – but, once the economy becomes industrial and the population increases, it can’t be maintained. Industrialism requires a third class, the middle class – a highly flexible non-hereditary group. Tribalism prevents this – and that is the root cause of Islamic fascism.
The ME, with its rejection of ‘action’ – isn’t enabling a middle class to develop. Iraq is in danger of moving out of the dictatorship of Hussein and remaining operationally tribal, kept safe by the US – who will protect this gov’t against Iran’s imperialism – and also, stop the fascism from being expressed within Iraq! That means it could spread externally again!
What the ME needs, is for itself to move out of its preference for being Kept Nations. Move out of requiring western science, technology, engineers. Move out of tribalism and into a genuine civic mode. Move out of relying on the West to protect its tribalism from other imperial ambitions (Iran).
I’m suggesting that as long as the ME continues its easy lifestyle of being Kept by the West, it won’t face its very serious deep problems and won’t change. That’s why the West has to leave. Will the ME explode? Very likely – but it might have to, to change itself.
Above all, that explosion has to be within the ME. We don’t want it to again send its fascists externally into the West, while it remains safe and tribal at home. The bid success of the US over the past years has been to move that fascism back to its origin – the ME tribalism. The ME has to deal with this. As long as we protect it, it won’t.
“The fact that Iraq and the ME are not ‘real countries’ is, in my view, irrelevant”
Well it is relevant because the tribes have no history other than their nomadic circle. With no history, they can’t stand up for their sovereignty. By definition tribes have no sovereignty, they just have Mohammed that taught them to fight when they returned with their camels and found the oasis occupied.
I agree, the ME will explode and that’s fine, but I want some containment contingency strategy. That will depend on at least 2 sides to have leaders willing to do battle over there (not here) … likely Shiite versus Sunni.
Therefore we’ll have to agree to disagree on the timing. But this debate underlines a couple of things for me:
-If the UN was relevant then this debate on the timing would be taking place there. Maybe if Sarko gets elected the Security Council will debate this and the Euroweenies will become engaged because they have a lot at risk on US pullout.
-Our own multiculturalism is dangerous because over decades it will lead us to behaving like the ME tribes .. with no sense of self, no sovereignty worth fighting for.
Right, I agree with you – that the tribes have no history other than their isolate tribe’s ‘mythic’ history, and part of that history is their adversarial opposition to various other tribes.
They have nothing that enables them to collaborate with other tribes, other than a pan-Islamism and that long ago degenerated into different sects. So, they have to develop a ‘notion of the nation’ – and that takes leadership. They lack leaders. Saddam wasn’t a leader; he was a member of one tribe, who set it up as a military dictatorship over other tribes.
Agreed, our multiculturalism is very dangerous because it actually rejects the notion of a national identity and sovereignty and sets us up similar to the ME, a bunch of separate tribes, fighting each other for political power. And we become like the ME, passive and ‘kept’ by a superpower.
In our case, we deliberately moved ourselves into the protection, economically, militarily and technologically, of the US. We live off its labours – we send our exports to them; we use their scientific innovations; we copy their technological advances.
Under Harper, we are finally beginning to move out of this passivity and this reliance on the US, and moving into self-reliance and sovereignty and taking on global responsibilities.
“Agreed, our multiculturalism is very dangerous because it actually rejects the notion of a national identity and sovereignty”
so far We have… in chronological order:
The First Nations
The Quebecois Nation within Canada
The Suzuki Nation
To be announced:
The Danny “Hugo Chevaz” Williams Nation
Notice how all these nations, like the tribes in the ME, need to be supported by outsiders. So I agree, let’s stop the “enabling” but let’s start at home.
Got a Big Al Qaeda Fish
Good news from the Pentagon: Al-Qaida operative captured.
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon announced Friday the capture of one of al-Qaida’s most senior and most experienced operatives, an Iraqi who was trying to return to his native country when he was captured.[…]
Reached for comment, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called for Al-Iraqi’s immediate release. “How can we surrender to him while he’s being tortured in the Guantanamo concentration camp?” Reid asked, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi blinking furiously at his side. …-
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
Great debate.
ET, Although you have good points/concerns about tribalism in the ME, I feel you are jumping to the conclusion that Iraq is becoming more tribal without evidence.
If I look to what is happening in Iraq, with Sunni groups starting to fight against AQ, this might also be evidence that they are starting to believe in democracy and civil society.
That is probably a stretch, the Average Joe is probably just fighting the tribes new enemy, defined now as AQ. However, this could be a step in the right direction and a move towards the realization of the benefits of a non-tribal, western style form of political organization.
I take your point about the ME being dependent and needing to get out of that, however the evidence could just as easily support the points Terry makes, and, to me, that seems to be the more logical conclusion.
I would be interested to hear what evidence you use to support your view when it seems, to me, that things are going the other way.
And while you’re at it ET, how about some evidence to support your notion that the US has driven fascism “back into the ME”. In your reply please site examples of areas formerly containing a islamofascist movement that are now free of it (he asked rhetorically).
Again, think about the inflammation of global jihadism in Indonesia and the southern provinces of Thailand, to name but two. And reflect on the truly frightening situation with the ascendance of the new generation of Paki-Taliban in Pakistan, including in the capital itself.
And please don’t dismiss as mere “multiculturalism: the Trojan horses of CAIR, Muslim Council of Britain, the Muslim Brotherhood, the latter now being considered “moderate” by many western intellectuals.
No ET, you’ve made lots of good points, but you’re way off base here. If anything the American enterprise in Iraq has inflamed global islamofascism not driven it back to the ME.
I watched Gen Petraeus on KCTS 9 last night.
His comment was that he was carrying a “very heavy rucksack”. He described the Iraq situation as even more difficult than Bosnia in the 90s. I believe Terry Gain has got the correct analysis here.
When 15 of 21 Sunni tribes are onside in Anbar/Diyala
it would indicate the tide will turn.
Petraeus suggested by the end of Sept/Oct 2007 they will have a better idea as to the effectiveness of the surge. Of course the political side of Maliki et al has to come onside.
It is after all the Iraqis country, and their institutions that need to come to the fore. The surge will give the Iraqis the confidence, that was lacking before, to say emphatically that the al-Quaeda way it not the way of Iraq.
If the Iraqis fail to come forward during the next 6-8 months, then perhaps they don’t want to rid themselves of tyranny after all.
As Gen Petraeus suggested in the grand poker game the US has put its best foot forward and now they are going to call the Al Quaeda bluff by going “all in”.
Further, Petraeus unequivocally suggested that Iran has an interest in keeping the destabilization going. Unstated, but obvious was that it distracts from the nuclear file.
The US has anted up some serious ‘blood and treasure’ in the cause of the democratic model.
It will be instructive to see whether the Iraqis ‘democratic camel’ being lead to the well will drink. One would hope the Iraqis will have the good sense to see the opportunity that is laid before them.
I would think it beats ceaselessly filling up the cemetery.
Interestingly, in some parts of Iraq Petraeus suggested the American forces are now viewed as the ‘good guys’ after the recent sectarian bloodlettings have inflicted enough scenes of carnage that the survivors are starting to “get it”.
Maybe the Democrats like Pelosi et al should get on their knees and pray that Bush and company succeeds; because by my reckoning there will be hell to pay later if they don’t.
Grand Ayatollah al Sistani [google him], could be enlisted to help get the self governance thing and responsible policing without night death squads established.
These leaders have to be found, enlisted and supported…
Yeah, I know, easy to say.. hard to do. = TG
MB – I haven’t said that Iraq is becoming MORE tribal; I’m saying that its tribalism is not dissipating to permit a civic (non-tribal)society to strengthen. And, as long as this tribalism is ‘cocooned’ by the population not having to, themselves, confront the fighting and insist that it stop, it will become a norm.
Yes, it’s good that Sunni are starting to fight against Al Qaeda, but it has to be more. And it has to be the gov’t openly, constantly, insisting on a civic society rather than a tribal. And it has to be the OTHER Arab states insisting on the same thing – rather than standing by and watching the US deal with the in-fighting in Iraq.
The evidence is that lack of open articulation by the Iraqi leaders and the other Arab states – to stop the tribal fighting and develop a civic society.
As I said, what I see happening is a continuation of the old habit of ‘being colonized’, a very comfortable lifestyle, where the Overseer does all the hard work – and you sit back and squabble between tribes.
me no dhimmi- there is very little that you and I ever agree on, so, this current disagreement just continues that pattern.
I repeat – the US has driven Islamic fascism back into the ME. The evidence is that there have been almost no violent attacks in the West; the violence has shifted to Muslim vs Muslim. Not Muslim bombings of non-Muslims. Your examples in Indonesia and Pakistan are within Muslim countries. That’s my point.
As an ideology (not an action) Islamic fascism is most certainly in the West. So is communism and socialism. That’s not the same as the bombings and terrorist actions of Islamic fascism. The way to deal with the ideology is to not give in to the group demands of political privileges (sharia law, wearing of the veil, etc). And, always, insist on logic and reason. Don’t accept the answer of ‘god says so’.
I completely and totally disagree that the US actions in Iraq have inflamed global islamic fascism. The cause of this movement is the rejection of democracy by the ME states; its movement outside of the ME states was due to the military retention of tribalism. The US has moved the violent actions of fascism back into the ME, and into the Muslim states – where it belongs. As for its emergence – that it because it is now public rather than hidden; it is now open – and therefore, the ME states can’t pretend it doesn’t exist, can’t pretend their populations don’t want political and economic power, can’t pretend that tribalism is ‘the right way’. The ‘inflamation’ of Islamic fascism is the RIGHT thing to happen, as it confronts the ME nations with their problems.
Tribalism and its result, fascism, HAS to come out into the public arena, even though the ME states have tried to pretend it doesn’t exist. It has to come out and be dealt with BY THEM.
Hans and Tony – exactly. The Iraqi AND the other ME states have to, themselves, insist that they don’t want fascism (Al Qaeda); and that therefore, they know that they can’t continue within a tribal political mode and they MUST move to a civic mode and empower a middle class. That’s what has to happen. THEY have to make those moves.
My concern has been that their entire history has been one of ‘being colonized’ (Ottoman, Britain, US) – and they have become very comfortable with leaving the big heavy work to the OverSeers, while they sat back and squabbled between tribes.
That ‘comfortable life’ – has to end, because it has led to fascism. They have do stop being dependent, and take charge themselves.
“Yes, it’s good that Sunni are starting to fight against Al Qaeda, but it has to be more.”
ET, you’re six months out of date. BTW you sound like that bossy woman from New York. One of the things that will cause Iraqis to stand up and do more is the realization that we will be there until they win. When they are told that their allies may soon be leaving they will hedge their bets. If you truly support peace stop echoing Hillary.
“And it has to be the OTHER Arab states insisting on the same thing – rather than standing by and watching the US deal with the in-fighting in Iraq.”
Now you’re sounding like slow Joe Biden. Other Arab states want the democracy project in Iraq to fail. The best we could hope for from them is that they not interfere.
“The evidence is that lack of open articulation by the Iraqi leaders and the other Arab states – to stop the tribal fighting and develop a civic society.”
Huh? Try to openly articulate in coherent sentences. Do you mean civil society. Did ET go on vacation and leave his computer in someone else’s care?
“As I said, what I see happening is a continuation of the old habit of ‘being colonized’, a very comfortable lifestyle, where the Overseer does all the hard work – and you sit back and squabble between tribes.”
ET, if you kept current your vision would be clearer.
“I repeat – the US has driven Islamic fascism back into the ME. The evidence is that there have been almost no violent attacks in the West;”
Nonsense. It’s a world wide phenomenon.
“The violence has shifted to Muslim vs Muslim. Not Muslim bombings of non-Muslims. Your examples in Indonesia and Pakistan are within Muslim countries. That’s my point.”
I thought you said Islamic Fascism was driven back ito the ME. Since when is Indonesia in the ME? How about India?
“The US has moved the violent actions of fascism back into the ME, and into the Muslim states – where it belongs.”
Yesterday you said you wanted the U.S. to leave Iraq. Changed your mind? I don’t think you get that it(Islamic fascism ) doesn’t belong anywhere.
Now we have Iraqis, including Sunni tribes, fighting al Qaeda. Those of us who understand the threat of Islamic Fascism understand this is an opportunity to be taken advantage of not shunned by premature withdrawal from a winnable war.
“My concern has been that their entire history has been one of ‘being colonized’ (Ottoman, Britain, US) – and they have become very comfortable with leaving the big heavy work to the OverSeers, while they sat back and squabbled between tribes.”
The U.S. has colonized Iraq? Oh my. ET, I don’t see any light between you and Jim Laxer.
“That ‘comfortable life’ – has to end, because it has led to fascism. They have do stop being dependent, and take charge themselves.”
Comfortable life? Risking one’s life everyday to go to work or market. How rude of them to intrude upon your peace of mind by not solving this problem in four whole years.
ET, I think those who are fighting in Iraq for a better life could do without your support.
Terry Gain: I agree with a lot of this reply, and frankly today I’m feeling a bit ashamed for my faltering toward appeasement. I think it’s because I’m sick to my stomach with everything Arab. However, it also seems to me that, pace Mark Steyn, America is indeed alone. Europe is with the jihadists, for sure.
The thing I find most fascinating about ET is her total disconnect when it comes to Israel. Her passionate paeans to democracy and civil society BUT apparent anti-Israel pro-Pal [read: Nazi] stance. It has also suggested a lack of historical understanding.
I also noted the shifting sands of her Muslim on Muslim vs. “driving fascism back in the ME”, and completely agree with you that it is sheer nonsense.
OTOH, it IS interesting to learn about the 172 terrorists arrested in SA. All along, bin Laden has avoided attacking SA due to the importance of its vast oil wealth to the ummah.
However, at one point yesterday I was even wondering about how confident we should be of the truth of that story. Could it be a put up job? The Saudis are such double-talking two-timing lying pricks I mistrust everything they say and do.
Terry Gain – again, please don’t move into personal insults. Don’t bother insulting me and calling me names. That’s childish. Just stick to the issues.
I’m aware that the other Arab states want democracy to fail; I’ve said that right from the start. That’s why I’m saying that it ‘HAS to be the other Arab states’. ….They have to move out of tribalism and into democracy.
And I disagree that the Iraqi will feel emboldened to protect themselves if and only if the US stays until….
My point remains – and don’t focus on trivia – when I use the word ‘colonized’ I don’t mean that the US is ‘colonizing’ Iraq. I mean that the Iraqi people are moving into a mode of life where they are protected by the US, rather than taking charge of their political infrastructure themselves.
I meant what I said – the term ‘civic’ is a correct term for a non-tribal political mode. Look it up.
You ought to differentiate between the ideology of Islamic fascism and the terrorist actions of Islamic fascism. The US has driven the latter back into the ME; we now have Muslims attacking Muslims. That’s an important change – and necessary. The root cause of Islamic fascism is internal to the ME – tribalism.
Yes, it is easier and more comfortable to have the US deal with your country’s internal conflicts, rather than confronting them. Iraq is sitting back and allowing internal tribal warfare, rather than rejecting tribalism and insisting on a civic society. It, as a gov’t, doesn’t care about the slaughter; it leaves both the CAUSE of the slaughter and the prevention – in the hands of the US – rather than face the real cause – tribalism and the lack of a civic society with a robust middle class.
me no dhimmi – being in favour of a Palestinian state is not a ‘pro-Nazi’ stance. That’s quite a remarkable perspective you have. I remain opposed to the Israeli occupation, to their illegal settlements of Palestinian land, and their rejection of a Palestinian state. And, I’m quite conversant with the history of the area.
As for the SA arrests – note that this has nothing to do with rejecting terrorism against the SA tribal dictatorship. That is, it is not an action that would enable the SA population to develop an empowered middle class and move from tribalism to civic mode. No, it was to protect the SA tribal elite – and their control of their oil. So- it’s not enough. The ME has to move out of tribalism, develop and empower the majority of its population as middle class. That will end the root cause of Islamic fascism.
“The Saudis are such double-talking two-timing lying pricks I mistrust everything they say and do.”
MND
I think it’s reasonable to mistrust most everything emanating from countries without freedom of speech and freedom of the press. I also mistrust information in free countries emanting from media organizations such as those that preach diversity but refuse to hire conservatives (other than for HNIC).
The task of encouraging Islam to reform without making reformable Muslims feel like we are accusing them of belonging to a death cult is indeed a formidable one. I tend to believe that if a transformation of Islam occurs it will occur over generations rather than mere decades.
I may be wrong and it’s hard to tell what may happen if Iraq and Iran are opened up. I certainly never expected the Soviet Union to fall apart and for the Berlin Wall to come down. Look at how Canada has turned from a Christian- church-attending nation to a non-observant nation in 50 years. Profound change can occur in relatively short periods.
In the meantime we should show respect for Muslims as individuals even as we voice our disagreement over certain tenets and practices of their religion (a tough task to be sure). And we should fight their extremists both at home and abroad and stand up to those who want special accomodations for their religion or before we know it criticizing Islam will not be protected speech (some would say it’s not protected now thanks to Sven and Jean.
ET: Sorry for my carelessness; that was decidedly NOT what I intended. I had meant to link Pal and Nazi not you and Nazi.
But as discussed elsewhere, the “Palestinians” — or at least the Hamas/Fatah/IJ elites — don’t want a side-by-side state but a single state comprising Judea+Samaria (West bank) Gaza Strip, and Israel proper, with at the very best Jews as a minority and severely reduced by attrition over time, which is what Muslims do, and you damn well know this, or should.
How you hold on to that fantasy is a compleat and frustrating mystery to me.
As mentioned more than once, you are a phenomenon for a Canadian university professor, but I’m afraid the liberals got to you on this issue.
remain opposed to the Israeli occupation, to their illegal settlements of Palestinian land, and their rejection of a Palestinian state. And, I’m quite conversant with the history of the area.
Not to be boring, but everything above, ET, is profoundly un-historical. It’s more accurate to say that the lands conquered in a defensive war are in limbo due to the Arab refusal to negotiate. Are you familiar with the Three No’s from the post-67 Arab conference?
And Israel rejectting a Palestinian state? That is gaspworthy. Barak’s offer of 95% of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem?
Observation: ET, it goes without saying that you are a very intelligent and erudite person — more than myself on both accounts.
BUT, you do lack a certain street-smartness I feel. Most Israelis want out of the “occupied territories” but have come to learn that you just can’t negotiate with people who have zero goodwill and who boldly, publicly, unabashedly state their desire to visit a genocide upon you.
How you can still hold that view after Israel’s exit from S Lebanon, Barak’s offer, Arafat’s obvious murderous deceit and intifada, and more recently the fallout from the Gaza withdrawal mystifies me. We’ll leave it at that.
me no dhimmi – ahh, I thought that was a strange accusation (ET=Nazi). However, naturally I disagree with defining either the Jewish or Islamic moderates as ‘nazi’ – with ‘nazi’ understood as a poor synonym for fascism. And fascism understood as an essentialist inherited ‘pure’ identity. But, there are certainly fascists on both sides, in their respective fundamentalist camps.
I repeat – and you don’t deal with this, but I consider Israel’s official refusal to recognize a Palestinian state, its occupation of their lands and its settlement of those lands – a clear indication that they have no intention of enabling the Palestinian peoples to live, within a Palestinian state. Therefore they should not be surprised if the Palestinians reject this perspective.
Equally, the rejection of Israel as a state is a Hamas view; the moderates in Palestine do openly the Israeli state. They do, however, want compensation for the lost homes and lands, which were legally owned by Palestinians. They are aware that there can be no return, for Israel is quite adamant on having Judaism as a majority religion.
But, until Israel stops its building of more and more settlements in that Palestinian land, and acknowledges the viability of a Palestinian state – the stand off will continue. What else should one expect?
The unrestrained use of the Nazi tag in contemporary discourse distresses me, to be sure. In this case, I was referring to the clear nazi-like hate mongering going on in the PA, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc (see MEMRI). Vis a vis the Palestinians, this is “illegal” too, ET. I believe they had agreed to eliminate this institutional hatred in the agreements, none of which they kept (I think that’s right).
Compensation for the 750,000 Jews who left or were exiled from Arab lands?
“Moderates” relatively speaking of course. Many people, myself included, refer to them as slow jihadists and Hamas as fast jihadists.
Israel did of course offer a Palestinian state (Barak). Arafat, even against Saudi advice, walked away from the table, and called up the pre-planned intifada.
In my current reading (Bernard Harrison: The Resurgence of Anti-Semitism: Jews, Israel, and Liberal Opinion) I’m trying to get a better handle on anti-semitism. Harrison points out that the criticism of the settlements is fair as is criticism of Israel’s tendency to give more support to Jewish villages than to Arab. Alan Dershowitz himself is personally against the settlements as are most Israelis I think. But you have to look at the mitigating circumstances: being surrounded by all those Arab countries who want you dead and say so, and also realize that they are held as bargaining chips. Sharon himself said that as a Jew he’d hate to give them up but that he would! And he did, as you know, with Gaza, a move I thought utterly heroic at the time, but one I now consider to be a drastic blunder.
ET: Street smart is insisting on quid pro quo. The Arabs, caught in their honour/shame culture, just can’t compromise. Arab rejectionism has been the problem all the way back to 1948 in my view. The Arabs essentially say, “Give us 100% of what we want, and then we’ll see what we’ll do in return”.
I would consider it a great life achievement to move you on this. But I’m doubtful. Sigh.