Re: Has anyone seen this ad?

On Tue, 23 May 2006 20:08:24 +0000 (UTC), "YM"
<bar_kochba132@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



The insanity is thinking the Israel can remain a Jewish state while holding
onto the West Bank and its Arab population.


I posted the following in the OMERT BUILDS THE FENCE thread, but
it did not draw any comments so I am reposting it here. It is my
belief of what Israel should do:


I do not believe "contractual" peace is possible. However, that
does not mean that the only possible future is endless wars.
I believe (and I realize that you (Andy) and others don't agree at the
moment) that IF Israel says clearly to the Arabs that we
have returned home, we will not relinquish our historic
homeland, we are building Jewish communities throughout
Judea/Samaria and GAZA, while at the same time we are guarateeing
their property and their autonomous culture and some sort
of political autonomy, they will EVENTUALLY give up the immediate
desire to eradicate us.

Actually I do agree ... with most of that.

But I'm not sure if I understand the scenario, you're referring to
settling Gaza & West Bank, etc., along with the Palestinian
population?

Wasn't that the situation prior to the Al Asqa Intifada?

This would include quiet, unofficial trade
and joint projects, without us requiring them to say that they
are "making peace" or "recognizing us" which they will never do.

Now here are some good points. I couldn't agree with you more, Yaakov.
Peace is a process, not a ceremony. Was there ever a better ceremony
than Versailles? And it brought us, what?

Peace definitely accrues over time, in growing shared interests,
travel, trade, futures intertwined.

I remember talking to another scjm reader, one who didn't believe in
the possibility of peace. To bolster her point she spoke of Egyptian
businessmen going to Israel on business trips and concealing that fact
from their communities ....

Wait, I said, they're going to Israel, on business?

Talk about seeing the glass half-empty vs. half-full.

I will give you an example...in much of the world, there is a
perception
that "might makes right"...at the time Japan surrendered in 1945
the government had been brainwashing their population with
the slogan "100 million die together" and it was every Japanese
citizens duty to kill at least one American "invader". When the
Emperor made the broadcast calling for surrender, there was
an attempt to make a coup by extremist elements. Yet, when
the Americans dispatched General MacArthur to implement
the occupation regime, he landed at Atsugi airfield with a
handful of soldiers, a short time after the coup attempt.
The Japanese who had just a few days before willing to die
for the Emperor, could have cut MacArthur and the soldiers
accompanying him to pieces...but they didn't because
they were in awe of the Americans who were so powerful.

Sorry, but I don't agree. I think Japan's willingness to lay down arms
derived from their unity of cause and loyalty to the Emperor. His
broadcast on 15 August was the first time many Japanese had even heard
his voice. The psychological effect must have been devastating.
Furthermore, although the surrender was unconditional, I don't think
there was any ever doubt that the Home Islands's sancity would be
respected. It's even been argued, persuasively, that the USSR's
declaration of war, invasion of Manchuria and possible threat to
Honshu was more of an incentive to surrender than the A bomb. Once
Stalin had a toehold on Honshu, the Japanese realized, it would be
lost to them.

So while they were overcome by US (and British) military power and
technology, it was the guarantee of the Home Islands that allowed them
to surrender ... and to mean it.

Let's face it, however you feel about Stalin and Bolshevism, in terms
of conventional military prowess no country matched the Soviet Union
in WWII ... and I honestly believe Japan would have fought Russia to
the death.

After the 6-Day War, the Arabs felt the same way, but what
is the first thing the gov't does, it gives the keys to the Temple
Mount back to the Muslim Waqf leaders who offered the
keys to the conquerers. In a "cosmic" sense, it was this
act of self-humiliation that has caused all our subsequent
problems. We told the Arabs that we don't even want
our own holiest place. All the withdrawals and concessions
in the years since have only increased the Arabs contempt for
us.

You're not the first to make this argument. But I'm not sure how to
respond: since the Six Day War Jews do have access to the Western
Wall. Isn't that more sacred than the Temple Mount, simply because the
Temple no longer exists and no one knows exactly where the alter and
other important sites are?

Note how international anti-Semitism INCREASED after
the Oslo agreements which the post-Zionist Left told us
would make everybody love us.

I'll try to find it again, but I had posted links to an article
compiled from interviews with Shin Bet and IDF intelligence stating
that Oslo wasn't a genuine offer that Arafat could accept. I realize
many here would disagree with that, and I'm honestly not prepared to
go too in depth on it because it opens up whole new fields of research
that I dont' have time for, but suffice to say that the lack of
contiguity between the areas ceded to the Palestinians alone was cited
as deal-killer.

The fact is that many people at the very top of the establishment
including "tough warriors" like Sharon, Ehud Barak, Rabin, etc.
deep down agree with the Arabs that Zionism is an abberation,
it would have been better if the Jews had gone to America
and not come to Eretz Israel, etc (Don't forget that it was
Sharon who paraphrased the Nazis saying "NOT ONE SINGLE
JEW WILL REMAIN IN GAZA AFTER I CLEAR THEM OUT".)

If that is what they believed, then why did they spend most of their
lives fighting first to establish then protect Israel?

I again realize you don't accept his analysis, and I realize most
Jews don't agree with it either...however, some progress has
been made. Now, unlike 10 years ago, most Israelis realize
that there isn't going to be a contractual peace. At least
we agree on that. The question now is what are we going
to do about it? Olmert and his fellow post-Zionist just want
to capitulate. I say we have to be strong and build more settlements

Well, sometimes contractual peace works, the treaty of Paris failed,
but the Treaty of Ghent's held up so far. Egypt and Jordan maintain
their peace treaties.

But wrt the Palestinians, I agree one-hundred per cent, Yaakov. Peace
will come in increments, in periods lacking hostilities that grow
gradually longer and longer until both sides are like major league
pitchers who suddenly realize that it's the seventh inning and there
hasn't been a single runner on base so far and maybe, just maybe this
time....

Andy Katz
.

Relevant Pages

  • Cant Rely On Convicting Terrorists
    ... CAN'T RELY ON CONVICTING TERRORISTS 15374 - Shulman ... The Arabs did not make peace but war (Flame, Commentary, 11/2007, p. ... "Israel also relies on international agreements, ...
    (soc.culture.israel)
  • Re: OLMERT BUILDS THE FENCE
    ... I do not believe "contractual" peace is possible. ... they were in awe of the Americans who were so powerful. ... After the 6-Day War, the Arabs felt the same way, but what ... and not come to Eretz Israel, etc (Don't forget that it was ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • 11 Mearsheimer-Walt Errors on Israel: Part 3. Israel Not Serious About Arab State
    ... 11 MEARSHEIMER-WALT ERRORS ON ISRAEL LOBBY: ... Israel not serious about making an Arab state; ... Why concessions should be made to Palestinian Arabs ... Israel lobby caused Iraq war, ...
    (soc.culture.israel)
  • Problems With Saudi Princes NY Op.-Ed.
    ... and law.” Saudi Arabia does? ... Israel has an “illegal occupation of the W. Bank, ... the Arabs sacrifice? ... not a peace ...
    (soc.culture.israel)
  • Re: New "Times" Hatchet Job On Israel
    ... perfected a new type of hatchet job on Israel. ... Authority Arabs as a cloak for editorializing by a combination ... Palestine" belongs to Muslims. ... almost all of the Palestinian Arabs ...
    (soc.culture.israel)