Never attribute to stupidity what can be adequately explained by malice;
Democrats are loath to admit the president doesn’t know what he is doing, so they are left trying to convince themselves and others that this is a fuss about nothing. The most honest defense I heard from a pro-Israel Democratic staffer was to acknowledge that Obama had made mincemeat out of the “peace process” but to remind me that talks aren’t going anywhere anyway. In essence, “no harm, no foul” and look at all the hardware and military support we’ve given Israel!
just out of curiosity, did the guy actually *consult* with anyone before making the rash statement?
jeezuz murphy.
Jonathan Kay wrote an interesting article today where he notes that negotiation on the basis of the 1967 borders was a policy of the Bush administration too. Basically, all the hyperventilating by conservatives over this announcement is much ado over nothing much.
I don’t think the Palestinians will ever give up on their goal of destroying Israel. Israel basically gave in to almost every demand made by the palestinians and their response was more terrorism. Their current strategy is probably the only way to achieve peace : build the wall.
that’s what you get when he turns the prompter off and wings it…all he can do is read what someone else wrote for him and whenever he ‘wings it’ the dems are running for weeks to try and put out the fires…he’s merely a presidential press release for the real power behind the democratic party…we had demaris, they have soros…dictators in disguise.
Speaking of Obama, Lorrie gives Kate a shout-out:
http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/05/25/goldstein-obamas-just-as-big-a-doofus-as-bush
and look at all the hardware and military support we’ve given Israel!
They never mention the 70% more they give to the Arabs do they? Plus petro dollars & MSM lapdoggery.
I think that’s an interesting article by Jonathan Kay but I think he misses the point.
My own view – and people here know that I am extremely critical of Israel’s actions..not its position…but its actions is:
I think that the two peoples and the world should, as Kay suggests, face reality. The reality is: Israel exists and the Palestinian people exist. Neither is going to vanish in a puff of dragon smoke. So- how does one deal with these realities?
Israel’s position is that it exists as a sovereign nation, it wants a majority Jewish population.
The Palestinian position is – they exist as themselves, they are not just clones of ‘all arabs’ and can’t be swallowed by some/any other Arab state – and, they too have claims to the land, since they’ve lived there as long as the Jews did (post Exodus). So, they want to have a sovereign nation in that area as well.
I accept both positions. i can’t evaluate which is ‘better’ since such evaluation has no place in this reality.
To declare, as do so many, that ALL Israeli desires and actions are good, noble..is false.
Equally, to declare that ALL Palestinian desires and actions are evil..is false.
So- get these emotive and false views out of the way and focus on the economic and material and societal realities.
1)Israel is not, ever, going to give up the W Bank. So – say it. Be open. Stop beating about the bush, stop pretending it’s all about defense. It isn’t.
The W Bank- and I’m going to ignore the orthodox Jewish claim that ‘it was ours 1,000 years ago’ mantra as irrational..is vital to Israel for its agrarian land and above all, its water. These are valid reasons to lay claim to it.
2) Israel will not annex the W Bank which it could legally do (as a result of the 1967 war) because to do so would mean making its Palestinian inhabitants citizens of Israel. But, they are the ‘wrong religion’. No-one will say this aloud. No-one will discuss this; instead, all we hear is – ‘they are hostile to us and so we must occupy the land’. Piffle.
Say it; stop hiding reality. Israel acknowledges it wants a Jewish religious state, so..say it. “We can’t annex the W Bank because we can’t allow citizenship to the Palestinians who live there’. Say it.
3)There can be no ‘right of return’ for that basic non-negotiable citizenship reason. Heck, the majority of those with any right to return (eg, having owned land/homes before 1948 in Israel) wouldn’t want to return anyway.
So- admit it. Stop asking for it.
And ask for financial compensation instead.
4)The above are frankly, non-negotiable points. So, where I think that Kay, Obama and others – are playing games – is that they refuse to recognize these non-negotiable realities. To focus instead on the 1967 borders as the ‘start of negotiations’ and to ignore the real axioms which are non-negotiable…doesn’t make any sense to me.
5)My own view, acknowledging the non-negotiable realities is that the only way to get around them is to set up a unique one-state federated nation, made up of two distinct and separate federated provinces/states..with a shared economic and defense infrastructure. This requires trust on both sides!
There would be a distinct geographic zone for each people – exactly like a state or province. One would be Palestinian; the other Israeli. Each state/province has complete authority over citizenship in that state, health, education, etc. But, there would be a federal government made up of representatives from both states that would oversee resources, roads and communication, currency, defense.
I can see no other solution. I reject any comments that declare, a priori, that ‘all arabs are incapable of such collaboration’.
I think that a basic reason for the lack of exploring options: one state, two state, federated state…has been the hostility of the Islamic dictatorships in the Middle East. They certainly did not want a democratic Palestine in their midst – to function as an example of democracy that their own entrapped citizens could see! That’s over.
As for Obama and his ignorance – my own view is that he, as a pathological individual who likes to control others, is malicious. He likes to ‘divide and conquer’. Obama likes to stir up controversy and trouble and then sit back and watch people hate each other. He’s done it in the US, creating constant divisions by class, by ethnicity, by race, by urban/rural, by religion. So Obama’s speech this time was no different..he is malicious.
But, I think the important thing is to acknowledge, not the 1967 borders but the real non-negotiable items..and so far, they are spoken only in whispers.
and if Israel does have to use 1967 borders, let them be the ones of 10 Jun 1967…no earlier…or bettert yet, the 1973 borders…including the big chunks of egypt and syria that Israel gave back after capturing…if you go out to conquer as the arabs did in ’73 and lose then you don’t get the land you lost back..Israel was far too magnanimous in that respect and the arabs should consider themselves lucky and be quiet, but they won’t.
I reject any comments that declare, a priori, that ‘all arabs are incapable of such collaboration’.
Okay, how about “these arabs are incapable of such collaboration”.
I frankly find your whole solution to be even more unrealistic than the things you claim are “non-negotiable”. To paraphrase Owen Wilson, “what in their long history makes you think the Palestinians are capable of that?”
I won’t speak to Obama’s foreign policy prowess; but I will say he is a “genius” when it comes to “Wagging the Dog”. I think.
I find myself wondering often if he’s a political genius or is simply protected from his gaffes. Either way, I get just as much enjoyment watching conservatives get tied in a knot as I do watching liberals regarding Sarah Palin. I am one of those conservatives, but I no longer get frustrated with the moves of the ONE. I expect the unexpected. I expect him not to show pics, when I think he should(for his own good). Like I said, I can’t figure if Barak Obama is a genius, or just nutty-lucky; but, I can assure you he’ll pull another bone-headed stunt before I finish typing this comment.
I’m just glad he lives on my TV; and not my home.
daniel ream- your ‘these arabs’ is logically the same as ‘all arabs’. Invalid because it is a generality rather than an actuality.
As for your suggestion that my points, which I claim are basic non-negotiable axioms, are ‘unrealistic’ – I’d like to know why.
Why is it unrealistic to conclude that Israel will not give up control over the W Bank? There is no reason to settle land that it has no intention of controlling – for to settle and then abandon it, and insist that all its settlers (about a quarter million) leave (and many of them are extremely militant and would refuse)…well, how does that make sense? Why is Israel settling the W Bank?
Is it unrealistic to expect Israel to abandon control over the vital aquifers? How does that make sense? Water is, if not the most vital, it is a basic resource in the ME.
And why is it unrealistic to expect the Palestinians to give up the ‘right of return’ and instead settle for financial compensation?
Indiana homez – I consider Obama to be not merely someone who likes to control, but he is malicious; he likes to create dissension and trouble. And he has no interest in the well-being of peoples in the ME ..or anywhere else for that matter..if they are not part of his adulatory audience.
We occasionally come across one of the new catch phrases that accepting poorer performance as acceptable in schooling; teen activities etc. is a “form of soft bigotry”.
However I do see some posts, including on this blog of greater expectations for Israelites. This can only be described as a form of “hard bigotry” of Israel. Why do the Israeli settlers have to stop building? They own the land they are building on.
Are Israeli Arabs impeded more the Israeli Jews in receiving building permits within any of the many border discussions? If you KNOW of such discrimination bring it forward.
Are there Israeli Arabs holding political office in Israel? Are there Israeli Arabs employed as civil servants?
Back off on your understanding of the situation. Uninformed discussion from the President of the United States and all the paid and unpaid pundits are going to set up situations for wilful ignorance as well as use of the ignorant to kill people in Israel and elsewhere. No cheers today;
Any compromise by Israel is one step closer to annihilation. Netanyahu is well aware that the Palestinian representation and their supporters are disingenuous to start; therefore, all of this ‘talk’ of “compromise” is just that, ‘talk’.
It doesn’t take a history major, or a middle east expert to see the truth of this. Only the misguided Palestinian population fails to see they are pawns in a much larger political game. Rhetoric aside, the so called “Palestinians” would have been much better served had they been absorbed into the greater Muslim societies. This desire for their own version of a “distinct society” is a ‘pipe dream’ foisted on their unwitting minds by those with political goals. What exactly is Palestinian culture anyways? And how does it differ from that of the people of Jordan and Egypt? Has anyone bothered to ask this?
I would suggest that ET’s core assertion that the Palestinians can bargain in “good faith” is flawed, as they are not truly negotiating anything. Sure “biologically” any human can bargain in good faith; but, ET will not opine on the ‘willingness’ (or lack thereof) of the Palestinians. It is very easy to ‘assume’ “good faith” when commenting on SDA.
After that, the rest of ET’s solution caves on an insufficient foundation. I don’t see how anyone can criticize Netanyahu for ‘playing the game’. That’s akin to griping PMSH for appointing Senators. Very weak.
The likely outcome, so long as Israel continues to exist, is “stalemate”. I will argue that all parties involved are well aware of this; thus everyone from Barak Obama to Ahmadinejad are free to say whatever the hell they want. It’s all meaningless talk IMO.
I suspect that financial compensation would need to go both ways, as I seem to recall that Palestinians and Jews were displaced those many years ago!
I don’t see the two province approach working. The Palestinians have been so indoctrinated with hatred against Israel for the past couple of generations that I doubt they could work together.
In essence, “no harm, no foul”
Saddam invaded Kuwait because he thought that the U.S. was going to simply allow it.
He got the notion because of the lack of U.S. support for Kuwait.
In this case, the Arabs surrounding Israel are getting a similar message.
When they attack Israel now they can simply declare that they are returning Israel to it’s 1967 borders.
The U.S. is involved in 3 wars right now, depends on Pakistan to continue supplying the Afghanistan war, and has to keep a close watch on the Norks over South Korea and the PRC over Taiwan.
Will the U.S. allow such a thing as an Arab attack on Israel?
Maybe.
I think that there is one too many maybes on the table.
steve- the settlers have an equal proportion of hatred towards arabs; don’t be naive; the Jewish settlers are, in large proportion, fundamentalists.
But there are people, on both sides, who are amenable to a ‘two-state’ solution. They are the ones to focus on – not the fundamentalists on both sides.
I don’t get your point about ‘both ways’ of financial compensation. You can only go back so many centuries! My suggestion is financial compensation for homes/land lost during the 1948 establishment of Israel. That’s it.
MikeSr – you can google ‘israeli arabs discrimination’ for examples of unequal ‘rights’ and discrimination. Plenty of examples.
Indiana homez – I disagree with your view that only a ‘distinct ethnic group’ or ‘distinct culture’ is ‘entitled’ to their own nation. Since when is that a criterion for nationalism? That certainly wasn’t the case with the formation of the US. Or Canada. Or Australia..etc.
The Palestinians are not identical to Jordanians or Egyptians – the peoples in those countries are quite aware of this and have refused to merge with the Palestinians.
My point is that they exist as a people, whose most recent origins were their centuries of living within the land base that is now Israel. They cannot simply be flung out of that land base and other nations told to ‘absorb’ them.
Certainly, such actions have been done before in the long history of the world and in other countries (expelling the Jews, expelling minorities from other countries) but that precedence doesn’t make it a moral act. Never.
I certainly critique Netanyahu! He’s on the record, often, for saying that Israel will never give up the W Bank. So- say it now and stop talking about it as ‘for defense purposes’. Again, those settlements are not ‘for defense purposes’. So, stop the pretense. Admit that Israel needs the land for its agrarian value and its aquifers. Then..proceed from there.
ET
Perhaps it’s that I perceive your opinion as seeing things in the very long-term. Whereas the Israeli concerns are short, middle and long. Israel doesn’t have a “long” or “middle” if they cease to exist in the present. I’d argue that it’s in Israel’s’ best interest to “error on the side of caution”.
I don’t believe a “distinct society” is necessary for a nation to exist, but I will debate Palestine’s right to exist at the expense of Israel today.
I’ll rephrase my criticism of your post by saying, I don’t believe the variables exist today for your suggested solution to be workable; but, I will concede that such a solution might be suitable if the conditions are correct. But I won’t hold my breath.
Also, you said “So, stop the pretense.”; but I wonder if you’d have told PMSH the same thing regarding AGW? Surely you can see that what I called in 2009 “Harper’s Gambit”(Harper paying lip service to the AGW crowd while carrying-on with his AGW denial) was a successful political strategy as the Carbon Tax and CapnTrade now appear to be dead. Coming clean (pardon the pun) is political folly for Netanyahu, as it would have been for PMSH on the AGW file.
ET
You can take the professor out of the university, but you can’t take the university (all things are gray) out of the professor.
I do not see how you can even consider for one minute that Muslims and Jews can coexist. Especially these Arabs and these Jews.
The mistrust and hatred run as deep as the Marianas Trench. It’s never going to happen. This is nothing short of the two Lazarus’s locked in eternal combat between the two universes in that old original Star Trek episode called “What of Lazarus”. The premise was that one of them could not tolerate that the other existed.
One thing that will last longer than even a socialist government welfare entitlement and that is that Jews and Arabs will never find peace with each other. …. some might try, but enough will not and that will make it impossible.
Admit it and move on.
Send the Palis back to where they came from in the first place. They have but one objective and that is to annihilate the Jews and the Jewish State. All the rest is nothing but idle rhetoric.
”Why, can’t you see, Captain? I’m black on the left side and he’s black on the right side. …”
brilliant!
In essence, there cannot be a “peace process” because neither side can really say what their real objective is, and these two real objectives are essentially conquest of the other side and expulsion of their people.
Obama is totally wasting his time if he thinks he can change this. He already has one worthless Nobel peace prize and may vainly want another one, and could even get one if he can stage a big enough photo-op phoney peace “talks” where nobody says anything. But nobody should be fooled by any of that, both sides are committed to holding on to what they have. There are almost no available “land swaps” within the 1967 framework.
The only “land swap” that each side really wants is to get all the land.
I don’t seem to recall the Israelis calling for the ‘utter destruction’ or the killing of all egyptians, syrians, lebanese, iranians, jordanians, or any other country… yet daily we hear and see the ‘citizens’ of all of those countries and others calling for the total elimination of all Jews and the removal of Israel from the map…and people wonder why Israelis are just a tad nervous…shake your heads, moonbats, Israel can never afford to lower her guard for even an instant or your poster children will alluah akbar all over them..and the slaughter will be complete….of course, since that’s what you seem to want, then you should be very happy that ‘bama’s set it up so there will be another attempt by the combined arab world a la 1973 and with hopefully the same results, except this time Israel can’t turn back 15 km from damascus, they can’t afford to, and if iran or pakistan threatens to use a nuclear weapon then all bets are off.
ET I meant that Jews were ejected from Egypt and such around that time, so they are entitled to comp too, are they not? I doubt they were paid before they were sent packing.
and lost in the ‘1967 borders’ speech..this little overlooked line…where imam ‘bama pretty much tells Israel “you’re on your own, have fun”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Riu7EA6VqGw
For people who want to know about what is the future of Israel.
Look at this graph:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population_of_Israel.svg
At the end of the day, land doesn’t belong to a religion. land belong to the people who live on it.
Vive le NDP. Vive le Quebec. Vive Jack Layton
all one has to do is walk on one of OUR Indian reserves to see how easy the “entitled” can snatch failure out of the jaws of sucess
palistinians araba will be nothing but the equivilant of trailer trash losers until they, and only they, chose other wise
As a follow up to what ET said @3:30 about Middle Eastern countries not wanting an example of a functioning Arab democracy – it seems to me that even if some form of statehood for the Palestinians were possible (and I am with the pessimists on this) the Arab league and so forth would prevent it from happening. The Palestinians are far more useful to them as perpetual refugees and “victims of Israel”.
Mark Steyn once pointed out the (to me) astonishing fact that that the West Bank, captured in 1967, cannot be returned to Jordan (which is probably the least worst Arab country) according to an Arab League resolution. The idea is that there has to be an Official Palestinian State; i.e., the last thing these guys want is a practical solution to this problem.
Exactly, black mamba.
I’d say that the key factor that has prevented a Palestinian state over the years has not been the Palestinian people – but – the other Islamic nations. There is no way that they wanted their own repressed citizens to see other Muslims, nearby, within a democracy. That would ‘give them the wrong idea’. So they used the Palestinians as a red herring; the real agenda was to prevent any hint of democracy within their own nations.
And most other Arab nations consider the Palestinian Arabs as ‘the lowest of the low’. We in the west make the error of assuming ‘all Arabs are alike’. No- they have their own hierachies.
I think in the very early days, Israel would have been amenable to a two-state reality. Arafat, for his own greed and power, blew that. But it’s too late now.
It isn’t simply the settlers that are the current problem. They are, in the majority, hardline fundamentalists who will never give up an inch of the W Bank and their ancient hatred of any and all who are Islamic goes back thousands of years.
It’s the economic reality of the current situation, where Israel’s population has increased massively, and, since it uses an industrial irrigation technology for its agriculture – and – since its immigrants are heavily from western nations and used to an industrial life-style, the need for water is of paramount importance.
Israel needs the W Bank land for settlements and above all, for those vital aquifers. There is no way that they will return it.
But the other problem is the Palestinians. As I said, no amount of wishing, or Harry Potter spells is going to make them disappear. Their numbers have increased as well; they are almost the same size population as Israel. What can you do? They aren’t going to disappear or be absorbed by some other Arab nation!
So, the only solution I can think of is that federation that acknowledges the distinction between the two peoples, gives them each power to maintain those distinctions but, moves them into a shared economic infrastructure. The common economic decisions would be made in a federal parliament; the unique distinctive decisions would be made in each state. That’s the only solution I can think of.
And, with the ‘Arab Spring’ – the need for the Islamic states to maintain Palestine as a zone of hatred and as anti-democratic, is going to disappear – and the Arab Nations will become increasingly disinterested in the Palestinians. And even, yes, in Israel. Except as a trading partner.
Of course there are enormous problems in the ME, ideologically. There’s Iran and its imperialism; there’s the old dictators and monarchs who are trying to hold on to power. There’s the old statist economies based around govt control of one resource. But these have all gone beyond their ‘best before’ date; they can no longer support the population base and must move into capitalism and private enterprise. It will change; it’s messy, it takes time..but..it will change.
In the meantime, malicious intruders like Obama, who likes to see people and nations fighting each other…should stay out of it and confine himself to his vapid empty rhetoric about nothingness.
Admit it and move on.
Posted by: Abe Froman at ”
well abe, move on to *where*?
ET said: “5)My own view, acknowledging the non-negotiable realities is that the only way to get around them is to set up a unique one-state federated nation, made up of two distinct and separate federated provinces/states..with a shared economic and defense infrastructure. This requires trust on both sides!”
ET, I generally agree with you. But this time, I’m going to have to pass. The reason is… you just described Canada.
Our war with the French happened well over two hundred years ago. We have no religious animosities or shared hatred from recent bombings/shootings/stabbings/crushing of people with large rocks. And we are RICH. All of us are. Quebec is rich, the ROC is rich, everybody is filthy disgusting rich. And educated!
And we rich@ss, educated, oh-so-tolerant Canadians can -barely- keep this “unique one-state federated nation, made up of two distinct and separate federated provinces/states” from splitting up under acrimonious circumstances, over -nothing-.
As to the Palestinians and their probable behavior. Do you remember when Arafat died? There was a huge mob scene when his body was delivered to the burial site by helicopter. Thousands mobbed the landing pad, crushed onto the pad, guards tried to get them to back up by firing their guns into the air… while the helicopter was hovering overhead. To repeat, firing their guns, while the chopper hovered, above them all. The very large, very enormous, very full of fuel, helicopter with the giant spinning blades. It eventually landed ON the people crowding the pad. Then they REALLY crushed in.
This was a state funeral for a hero of the Palestinian People(tm). Those guys couldn’t organize a two man rush on a three hole out house. Israel is going to give, freely, control over a whole province to the imbeciles who arranged that funeral?
I don’t think I’m going out on a limb here when I say I don’t think that would end well. Bibi Netanyahu ain’t going to go for that.
OTOH, what’s going to happen if the UN and the Euros get their way won’t end well either. The UN will vote Palestine statehood as is. The Euro idiots and Barry will recognize the new state, run by Hamas. Hamas will then attack Israel, along with Egypt and Syria backed by Iran. Probably before November 2012, just to let Barry know how they really feel.
Then a whole bunch of people will die.
Possibly Israel will nuke somebody, hopefully not. Either way, they will win and get a bunch of new territory.
And then a truce will be called, and it will be back to corners for a breather while the Euros tut tut, Israel gives back the land it captured in war, and the Americans run around fixing everything that got blown up and feeding the poor starving b@st@rds in “Palestine”.
If we’re lucky that’s all that’ll happen.
On balance I like your way better, but my little nightmare there is much more likely.
I don’t mean this as sarcasm, but I am beginning to think Obama is not the genius his supporters make him out to be.I hate to sound trite but he is starting to look like an affirmative action baby whose left wing politics and race substituted for real accomplishment in college. And after college there is little evidence of any real achievement. I am not trying to be mean, just looking at the facts. He did graduate in the top ten percent of his law school at Harvard but was that because he deserved it or because of racial politics. He has also kept secret his SAT and LSAT scores and one has to wonder how someone who did not graduate with honors from his undergraduate school got accepted to Harvard Law School.
phantom – yes, I know my scenario describes, superficially, our own Canadian situation re Quebec.
And Quebec unlike the other provinces even has control over its own immigration! I’m suggesting even more; I suggest a kind of hyphenated citizenship, where the Palestinians would have control over their own citizenship. This would be necessary as Israel refuses to allow more than a minimum number of non-Jews as citizens.
As for your conclusion that IF/Because they botched a funeral organization, THEN they can’t organize anything..well, you’re smart enough to know that’s not much evidence. We’ve botched things up here – including, for example, our Indian Affairs Dept…and so on.
The ME is changing. The old need of the Islamic nations to prevent Palestine from becoming a democracy (bad example for their own citizens!) and the need to keep the I-P antagonism going as a diversion for their own people’s anger at their internal govts..well, that’s going to disappear as the people gain control over the dictators.
And, the rise in population of Palestinians is also going to mean that Israel can’t keep controlling them. I’m not saying they will start a war; I’m talking about basic economic needs – they can’t be kept down. They need energy sources, water, land. And jobs. Both sides need these.
Israel has maintained control over them and the W Bank using the mantra of ‘it’s all for our own defense’. This is becoming a weaker and weaker argument. The settlers are as violent as the Palestinians and both peoples, the orthodox, have ancient grudges against each other and ‘rules of behaviour’ that reject any and all collaboration. No selling of land to an arab, no selling of goods, no intermarriage…and so on. Ancient rules.
But economics always trumps ideology and these ancient rules will remain but only within a more and more peripheral set of the population.
The only solution I can think of, acknowledging the basic realities, is that federation. It’s very similar to our own but with some key differences: one is citizenship- that’s a major difference. I don’t think a real two-state solution will work because Israel won’t give up the W Bank. Notice that I’m not evaluating whether it is ‘just’ or ‘moral’ for such; I’m acknowledging reality.
Will it work? Who knows. But the status quo can’t last. And to give the old ‘well, those Palestinians should just go and join their arab brothers in other lands’..betrays a naive view of ‘arab’. They aren’t homogeneous; they are as distinct as the UK peoples…and try telling someone from Glasgow that he should go join his brothers in London..or even Manchester. Or a Sicilian or Venetian that he should join with those in Milan.
ET; respectfully your response points to the problem Israelis’ face everyday, “just google” and you have your support of equivocation for comparable atrocities by the Jewish Israelies.
No attribution; nothing required to set aside the misrepresentation. Please move beyond your mind set. Thank you! Cheers;
mikesr- are you seriously trying to claim that Israeli settlers commit no violence against Palestinians??? That all such reports are mere ‘misrepresentations’?? Whew – that’s quite the claim.
I see no need for me to repeat here the sites found on google about such actions. Because they are found on the internet does not make them invalid; surely you are not going to make such a claim – so – what’s your point?
I am not suggesting that “Jews good, Arabs bad” but there is no equivalence between some hothead Jews and the ideology of jihad.
Jews in Israel that commit crimes against Arabs are prosecuted by the courts.
Nowhere in Judaism is there any ideology of converting the world to Judaism.
Would you sign a peace treaty with your neighbour who does not recognize your right to exist?
ex-liberal – I wouldn’t compare the orthodox Jews and their ideology (I’m sure you’ve read the halakhah and various orthodox rabbis)..to a few ‘hot-head’ individuals which removes the religious overtone to their actions. Both religions have long traditions of openly stated hostility to others and to each other in specific.
No, the ratio of prosecutions of settlers who, eg, burn down the farms of Palestinians is very low.
I completely agree; Judaism is not a religion of conversions. Indeed, it is an isolationist religion. It does not seek converts and has little interest in other religions – unlike Christianity which is focused on individuals getting along with others.
Islamism is a militant and colonizing ‘religion’; I consider it less a religion than it is a societal and political creed, intent on an imperial control of..everyone. Defining it as a religion makes it difficult to demand change for it turns its axioms into dogma. But change it must.
As for signing a peace treaty – both sides oppose each other. I’m sure you realize that the settlers consider the W Bank ‘theirs’ and totally reject not merely the Palestinians as having any right to the land..but reject the Palestinians as human beings. They are not interested in any peace treaty.
As for the Palestinians, my view is that they’ve been used by the other Islamic nations as ‘fall guys’ to sideline problems in their own dictatorships…and thus, the other nations actively worked to incite them and to prevent any hint of collaboration, prevent any peace, and above all, any democratic system among the Palestinians.
That’s gradually changing..and the realities have to be faced. The facts: the W Bank aquifers; the population size of the Palestinians; the fact that Israel cannot continue to police the W Bank and, as democracy grows in the other Islamic nations, the ‘occupation’ of the W Bank has to be dealt with.
ET, actually I meant the Arafat funeral to be more an illustration than the sum total of my evidence. The Palestinian Authority isn’t famous for their acumen and effectiveness, I’m sure you’ll agree. Examples abound.
My favorite is the number of people drowned every year when the walls of sewage lagoons collapse and flood homes built -downhill- from them. But the best part is that the lagoons collapse because people take soil from the walls for garden fertilizer. Sometimes a lot of it, all from the same spot. With a back hoe.
This is not awesome planning or enforcement by the PA. Again, just an example.
But, I must agree with you that the current situation won’t last. Decisions are going to be made in Saudi, Egypt, Syria and Iran. As always.