Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

36 Comments / 36 Comments

  1. @ yamit82:

    they are more into Boycotts and aiding the Arabs against Israel.

    Uncle, the big question is WHY???

    What threat does Israel pose to the world???

    The only threat is to those who terrorize and want to destroy her and her people.

    A nation and it’s people dedicated to improve the world we live in and are one of the first responders to disasters throughout the world.

    Israel nor her people, the Jews pose no threat to the world, to the contrary they are a blessing.

    Anti-Semitism cannot be taken lightly, it is a disease that must be eradicated now.

  2. @ rongrand:

    Most mainstream Protestant denominations and The catholic Church are not into proselytizing Jews these days they are more into Boycotts and aiding the Arabs against Israel. I can live with that but hate missionaries and would gut them if I thought I could get away with it. Who are the missionaries it’s those I Looove you fundamentalists who claim they support Israel.

    They may for their own theological reasons love Israel or the idea of Israel but do not love or respect Jews and they are the enemies of Judaism.

  3. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Send out the women first. Young women.

    Women are less violent.

    Send them out with money, and SA will accept them.

    What are you looking for a Harem for every missionary?

    Arab women are a protected species in Arab societies and unmarried women usually up to 16-17 yrs of age would be murdered as in honor killing if they pulled such a stunt.

    You knowledge of Arabs and Muslims seem to belong more in fantasy than in understanding.

  4. @ bernard ross:
    Sources not named in the report you cited.

    I have seen ex IDF Intel officers give the exact opposite opinion as well as ME Arabic oriented journalists.

    We are being hammered on all sides with disinformation so I’m not sure yet how to filter them. I have my own ideas and I have to remind you that our intel in Syria has shown to be very good and accurate. Getting inside these rebel organizations is another matter.

    If the rebels win they will decimate Hezbollah which might be a consideration but then Hezbollah might just let loose with all they have against the Syrians and Israel. Assad is so weak even if he survives he may never recover and will be considerably weakened. Any attack against Israel would result in ending his regime… If Israel wanted to stop arms transfers to Hezbollah why didn’t she stop them by attacking Lebanon? I know the official reasons but to complain now is stupid-we allowed it to happen. Iran can still supply Hezbollah by bypassing Syria by sea through Syria bypassing the regime by the use of bribes from Turkey by air or by sea. He is going to pay for Syrian reconstruction when it all ends no matter who comes out on top?

    Who is more likely to attack Israel Assad or Al-Qaeda? Last report I read last weak was rebel groups were attacking each other and Assad was making several tactical moves regaining some strategic lost territory. Most of his army is still holding together as well.

  5. Ted, the presentation by Dr. Sherman was masterful. The issues he explored were critical to an understanding of the status quo. I have no problem with his “Pay-to-Play”scheme.

    I used the word “bribery” in an earlier reply to the thread, thinking that is what an observer could have thought of the predicament of the Palestinians, in effect, all along. But even to hold that idea I see is contrary to the conclusion of my own argument, which is solving the “Palestinian problem” is nowhere close to solving Israel’s major problem, no matter how enthusiastic the audience may have been or impressed with the presentation. Let me explain.

    When I say “They just don’t get it!” The “They” is the Israeli leadership – or any Israeli who thinks Dr. Sherman has discovered how to turn base metals into gold. I would like Dr. Sherman to present an “Elementary, Dr. Watson” solution to the Israeli problem.

    The Israeli problem is this: The Arabs will continue with no recognition and no acceptance of the State of Israel, even if Israel annexes all of the land from Jordon to the sea, even if it transfers all Arabs with or without compensation, even if it establishes a limited form of citizenship without the franchise, or undertakes any other conceivably feasible tactic, what remains is only a difference of degree, not kind.

    Why is that so difficult to understand? A party has moved into an area and all the neighbors are up in arms seeking to have the party vacate the premises and the authorities who legally permitted and encouraged and facilitated the relocation have no intention of coming to its defense, and perversely, some are now siding with the irate neighbors. What’s a party to do?

    What would Soloman do?

  6. CuriousAmerican Said:

    As the women leave, the men will get desperate to get out. At any rate, they can’t reproduce.

    just the opposite, send out the men first, the violent ones and reduce internal security problems. Muslim men do not need women, they are happy with each other and feed each others pathologies, they need to be the first to go but there is no reason why they cannot go together if they want. the choice must be based on israels interests, not theirs. when done over time the most violent and criminal must be the first to go and they are the easiest to justify. the important focus is that they LEAVE and anything along those lines is positive. there is no evidence that SA will accept them and it would be long term negotiations. better to transfer them across borders first as this would encourage the others to resettle them.

  7. @ bernard ross:
    the key word is LEAVE as this establishes goals and suggests sstrategies and tactics. the prolblem is the acceptance of the goal. Once there is acceptance of the goal then various tactics and strategies suggest themselves. you and I happily agree on the goal, we are differing on the details of strategies and tactics. strategies and tactics should be decided by the likelihood of their projected success or failure. In my view a unilateral Israeli incentive payment policy would not be successful on a major scale because it would require cooperaton of the arabs, and in your proposal the SA nations also.

    Send out the women first. Young women.

    Women are less violent.

    Send them out with money, and SA will accept them.

    As the women leave, the men will get desperate to get out. At any rate, they can’t reproduce.

    Women control reproduction, not men. If you get rid of the men, the few remaining men will just get multiple wives. If you get rid of the women, men will NOT share wives.

    Get rid of the women. Young women. As the young women leave, the men will panic. They will go with less money.

    The young landless women. These have no land. Land owners are old, and will die off.

  8. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Whether the Palestinian narrative is a lie or not, they are in the land. They have to be dealt with. Either enfranchise them or pay them to leave.

    the key word is LEAVE as this establishes goals and suggests strategies and tactics. the problem is the acceptance of the goal. Once there is acceptance of the goal then various tactics and strategies suggest themselves. you and I happily agree on the goal, we are differing on the details of strategies and tactics. strategies and tactics should be decided by the likelihood of their projected success or failure. In my view a unilateral Israeli incentive payment policy would not be successful on a major scale because it would require cooperation of the arabs, and in your proposal the SA nations also. The arabs will not cooperate without their usual demands. Therefore, a policy and goal of transfer that can be accomplished unilaterally on a major scale requires at least some aspects of forced transfer similar to that experienced by the jews of Gaza and sinai. However, this can be done in a humanitarian fashion by first offering some monetary incentive (based on savings resulting to Israel). Unlike the forced transfer of jews from arab countries, which resulted from this same continuing conflict, the arabs can be provided transport to buffer zones across hostile borders, secured temporarily by Idf, to temporary reception tent camps set up by IDF. Tent camps are an option but may be too large and therefore a continuing stream may be a better tactic. the UNRWA can deal with it. The existence of the UNRWA in 3 hostile entities allows for an easier provision of humanitarian refugee aid to the Transfers after Israeli withdrawal. this will be a long-term sustainable solution as Israel can redirect internal security resources to external threats. the pal problem will finally be solved on a permanent basis by the UN, EU, Arab states, etc. because they will no longer have an option to solve it in Israel and they are forced to deal with the immediate problem deposited in their laps. the incentive will be great for the new host countries to integrate or resettle the new guests. Need will determine solutions and none of those solutions will include Israel. This new state of affairs will guarantee a long-term solution. At that point then your proposal becomes a very definite strategy which can achieve major success because all the new hosts and international players will have a vested interest in real solutions. International sanctions and arab war threats may be real possibilities but these exist now and could also provide opportunities for a NEW refocused Israel to seize more land and resources from the belligerents and financiers for reparations. Sanctions can be mitigated by an intelligent use of lawfare to aver precedent in law for every action taken. The reason for this tactic primarily being to provide and excuse for those who wish to remain with Israel to do so. Diplomats and politicians always seek excuses to justify their self-interest, therefore provide them with the excuses as a fig leaf.

  9. Ted Belman Said:

    Now we just got to convince the Israelis to go for it.

    How is that to be accomplished of a population who does not even want full C? I contend that each segment of the Israeli population is governed by different motivating factors and that these must be strategically addressed in multiple campaigns which involve primarily education and lawfare. Political activism can activate those who are already convinced, for varying reasons, but Many Israelis appear ignorant of the legal background and the unethical, illegal swindling of the Jews. Jewish settlement of YS needs to be presented to a large segment on the basis of historical and legal rights as those who are moved by religious motives are already convinced. this is an area that can achieve great success in courts which is totally ignored(perhaps shurat Ha Din). There is also a segment which only wants workable solutions regardless of politics and they can be shown how practical the supposedly unworkable solutions are by coming up with detailed specific plans for transfer in phases starting with undesirables and for the legal jewish settlement of YS. The one thing that must be realized is that existing MO’s have been unsuccessful in convincing a majority of Israelis. The best way to solve a problem is to first define the problem, and or goals clearly. Prior proposed solutions do not work under any set of criteria of security, realization of jewish rights and self-determination in Israel, international acceptance, arab rights, etc. None of the solutions are long-term sustainable.

    Sherman has demonstrated an acceptance of transfer by proposing the incentives to leave. However, the elephant in the room is the unstated desire for the arabs to leave as a goal to accomplish. The key word is LEAVE as an acceptable goal and strategy whereas the Sherman incentive is a tactic to accomplish the broader strategy and goal. Once this desire is accepted by Israelis as positive, moral, legal and equitable then there are many solutions which are even humanitarian. The international community has demonstrated its acceptance of transfer many times and even under the reign of the touted Geneva conventions. For these avenues to be considered unacceptable to Israel there must be an acceptance of double standards applying to Israel and the Jews.

  10. martin Said:

    Should Israel pay the ransom, as Dr. Sherman outlines? Or what?

    Israel may have an incentive program as part of a much broader strategy. without the cooperation of the arabs the strategy will have limited success. the arabs will not cooperate without the usual capitulations. therefore, it is not a strategy, unlike transfer and/or annexation, which can be executed unilaterally. Israel has only considered unilateral solutions which involve withdrawal and not considered unilateral solutions involving annexation and transfer. It is very doable,practical, security enhancing, long-term sustainable, etc. However, it has one very practical problem as all the other problems can be tactically mitigated including potential warfare and sanctions. the problem lies in this question:
    martin Said:

    However, I come back to the question: What does Israel want? …what is Israel prepared to do to get what they want.

    the problem is that the majority of the Israeli people do not only consider unworkable “solutions”. the majority do not even wish to fully annex area C. for a minority to achieve success they must employ methods of persuasion and methods of confrontation. Civil disobedience, lawfare , PR, education, etc. In the absence of positive progress ot maintain israeli sovereignty until annexation then variations in the status quo which do not grant sovereignty over land are optimum. Simultaneously with this should be jewish settlement in YS and transfers of hostile PLO elements to gaza under breaches of Oslo.

  11. Joseph Rapaport Said:

    Eventually the whole of J & S must become part of sovereign Israel. However this must be accomplished in STAGES.

    Agreed, and the first stage is to transfer the political and military infrastructure of the PLO, and other hostile felons, to Gaza. Israel already has logistical and military experience in such operations gleaned from transferring jews.

  12. CuriousAmerican Said:

    The money spent on conversion, $250 Million, would only move 2,500 Arabs; less than the rate of reproduction. I did the math.

    I did not do the math but i wager it will be a lot cheaper for mass transport across any of the 3 hostile borders including the cost of the IDF to secure temporary buffer zones across those borders until transfers are complete and withdrawal commences. after that, the existing UNRWA infrastructure in those nations may expand their operations with the funds no longer needed in israel. No MAJOR transfer $$ incentive program will be successful without the cooperation of the arabs. the only unilateral solution that promises the greatest internal stability and and long term sustainability is transfer. Facts are not governed by PC.

  13. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Can a Palestinian from Ramallah run for PM of Israel. Can he move to Tel Aviv at will and vote in Israel elections.

    whatever citizenships commonwealth residents have is not completely equal to a citizen of the US living in Massachusetts. It is an unequal citizenship. also, there are citizenship in many nations which do not include all the basic rights. what is demonstrated is that there is no obligation to follow prior models of citizenship or residency, sovereignty etc. There is a potpourri of scenarios around the world and Israel may pick parts of one and parts of the other or devise its own scenario. whatever Israel seeks to deny can be found existing somewhere in the world and if not then it makes a new advance as it has in other areas. All of these arguments are red herrings because there is no obligation to mirror other countries: e.g. Israel has freedom of religion and saudi does not. This proves that even the denial of basic freedoms is on the menu of acceptability. You cherry pick those freedoms which support your case, Israel need grant no citizenship of the state of Israel, it may deem the arabian residents as jordanian, gazan or stateless. It may grant them temporary or permanent residency without citizenship or expel them or move them to gaza as the deemed nation of the pals. All of these things have been done to the jews while the Geneva conventions were in effect and have not been corrected therefore they cannot be deemed binding unless one accepts the principle of double standards. There is no set of suicidal rules which can only apply to Jews. Israel has many choices and cannot be bound by the dictates of the perennial jew swindlers who seek every opportunity to interpret “law” to the Jews disadvantage and to the delight of those seeking to confound the jews.
    CuriousAmerican Said:

    I have no problem with that. But the Arabs on it will have to either: A) be paid to leave-or-B) be enfranchised
    The present arrangement is not stable

    Utter and repetitive rubbish, these are obviously not the only alternative no matter how many times you and goebbels repeat them. Regarding stability: no present arrangement OR future arrangement will be stable. As one of the strategies for incentives for arabs leaving, paying them will only be successful as a major component, if it is subscribed to and executed by the arab nations, the UN, EU as these are both the creators AND the maintainers of the current unstable situation AND their dictate will be adhered to by the pals.

  14. @ Joseph Rapaport:
    Eventually the whole of J & S must become part of sovereign Israel. However this must be accomplished in STAGES.

    I have no problem with that. But the Arabs on it will have to either:

    A) be paid to leave
    -or-
    B) be enfranchised

    The present arrangement is not stable

  15. @ yamit82:
    How about we give them 1-2 years to leave voluntarily and offer them visas for South America, and will pay them a market price ONLY for legitimate provable property ownership. Stipulations are that it’s voluntary. If they resist and engage in any violence they get nothing and we will if possible drop them over the nearest or most convenient border or kill them. No third option. Leave or fight.

    The ones who own property are older. You can let those stay. They will die off soon enough.

    The ones you want to get rid of are the young, landless youth. These are the ones who reproduce; not the ones with property. Those are the ones you will have to pay.

    You are the one not thinking.

  16. @ yamit82:
    Christian churches and organizations earmark about a quarter of a billion dollars a year for converting Jews. You can put that money to more constructive positive purposes by buying or bribing the Arabs to leave. It take a decade or two but isn’t that for you preferable than we having to butcher them in the future? You can’t get potential converts if we kill them. True it’s not the same as converting the Jews for you guys but spending all that dough on the Jews seems to be a classic example of the Laws of diminishing returns. Add all or part of what donor nations already pay them and you come up with over 2 $ billion a year. Do the Math!!!

    I independently arrived at a figure of $100,000-125,000 person. Sherman Martin arrived at $100,000.

    The money spent on conversion, $250 Million, would only move 2,500 Arabs; less than the rate of reproduction.

    I did the math.

  17. martin Said:

    I am so sorry to say: “They just don’t get it!”

    I’m glad you read it carefully. What puzzles me is what you got out of it.. Sherman says why we can’t created a Palestinian state and how we can get the Arabs to leave. You say they don’t get it. Who doesn’t get it? Sherman has the solution. Now we just got to convince the Israelis to go for it.

  18. @ yamit82:

    Christian churches and organizations earmark about a quarter of a billion dollars a year for converting Jews. You can put that money to more constructive positive purposes by buying or bribing the Arabs to leave.

    Uncle you got that right.

    It doesn’t make sense. The good nuns who taught us many moons ago said you don’t go around converting Jews or other Christians, they have faith in G-d, they don’t need us to tell them how to practice their faith.

  19. @ CuriousAmerican:

    My purpose for listing American territories without getting into the nuances of rights and citizenship was only to make the point that it is not necessarily as black and white as you paint it and that there are examples of other options that can be tweaked for our own purposes without giving Arabs full citizenship and full citizenship rights. Remember; that with full rights comes the demand and obligation to full obligations. If there is good will on both sides some creative solutions can be worked out. This is not my first choce for a solution as you know but as an intermediary step it could work if their is a will.

    Since I don’t believe there is a will from either side especially from the Arabs then they must be forced to leave and there are many ways to force them to leave most non lethal but I don’t take lethal means off the table of options if the other methods fail.

    Christian churches and organizations earmark about a quarter of a billion dollars a year for converting Jews. You can put that money to more constructive positive purposes by buying or bribing the Arabs to leave. It take a decade or two but isn’t that for you preferable than we having to butcher them in the future? You can’t get potential converts if we kill them. True it’s not the same as converting the Jews for you guys but spending all that dough on the Jews seems to be a classic example of the Laws of diminishing returns. Add all or part of what donor nations already pay them and you come up with over 2 $ billion a year. Do the Math!!!

    How about we give them 1-2 years to leave voluntarily and offer them visas for South America, and will pay them a market price ONLY for legitimate provable property ownership. Stipulations are that it’s voluntary. If they resist and engage in any violence they get nothing and we will if possible drop them over the nearest or most convenient border or kill them. No third option. Leave or fight.

    Note: Paying them to leave does not foreclose a future demand to return and a replay of the last 60 years or so. Then if only some leave and rest stay we haven’t accomplished anything.

    Try it your way but on your dime, if it seems to be working then we can discuss our own participation for funding. You need to demonstrate PROOF OF CONCEPT ON A LARGE ENOUGH SCALE FOR US TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS IN YOUR DIRECTION.

    Joseph Rapaport Said:

    All Arabs in these areas would be given the choice to participate fully as Israeli citizens

    Are you nuts? Send them to Arizona and give them citizenship. You got so many Mexicans there a few million worthless Arabs won’t be noticed or felt. 🙂

  20. @ Joseph Rapaport:
    All Arabs in these areas would be given the choice to participate fully as Israeli citizens or alternatively they could be financially assisted to relocate. After sometime Area B might be looked at but there doesn’t seem to be much hope for Area A. This realization and commensurate action would go a long way to setting a new order to the situation.

    Close! Why just C? Why not A& B as well?

    This is what I have been suggesting all along.

    Whether the Palestinian narrative is a lie or not, they are in the land.

    They have to be dealt with.

    Either enfranchise them or pay them to leave.

    But the Bantustan option for area A will not work.

  21. The only explanation for why the Palis have gotten away with the “Big Lie” for so long can be found within the Israeli people and their
    leadership. Both segments are afraid of asserting the simple fact that tiny Israel belongs to the Jewish people. There is an abnormal
    fixation with the goyim and what they will think. This desire to placate and tender a pc image works exactly in the opposite direction
    of the entitlement approach. The world has been antisemitic for so long they are not going to change in the face of insecure and uncertain
    attitudes on the part of the Israelis. It is time for Israel to act decisively and take her future into her own hands. Firstly they must
    state the TSS is dead. Second they must annex Area C in J & S and state unequivocally that Israeli sovereignty exists over all of Jerusalem.
    All Arabs in these areas would be given the choice to participate fully as Israeli citizens or alternatively they could be financially
    assisted to relocate. After sometime Area B might be looked at but there doesn’t seem to be much hope for Area A. This realization and
    commensurate action would go a long way to setting a new order to the situation.

  22. @ martin:
    As obita dicta, permit me to clarify an item concerning citizenship of Puerto Ricans. Puerto Ricans, as other residents of territories of the United States, are not residents of States, and so do not have the right to vote for President.

    The United States has two classes of citizenship, constitutional and statutory. Puerto Ricans on the Island are not constitutional citizens; they are only statutory citizens under the Jones Act of 1917. Unlike a constitutional citizen their citizenship can be revoked by a simple act of Congress. It’s that simple.

    It’s a long story why in 1917 the Unites States decided to grant “citizenship” to Puerto Rico. Briefly, it has something to do with the fact that the Puerto Ricans were seeking independence. They engaged in violent acts. It was thought if they were made citizens, how can one seek independence of a country in which he was already a citizen? Doesn’t make sense, does it? And presently there is the need to show the powers at the United Nations the United States is not an occupying colonial power.

    Notwithstanding the benefits of statutory citizenship, many Puerto Ricans are still interested in independence.

    They can run for the Presidency. They can vote in Federal Elections if they move to the 50 states. They free to move to the 50 states.

    Puerto Ricans regularly have plebescites where they can vote for independence. Independence parties are small. The real battle is between Commonwealth and Statehood.

    Can a Palestinian from Ramallah run for PM of Israel. Can he move to Tel Aviv at will and vote in Israel elections.

    Yamit’s comparison was flawed on so many levels.

    It is ONE pretty Island
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usMVsNzXK8I

  23. As obita dicta, permit me to clarify an item concerning citizenship of Puerto Ricans. Puerto Ricans, as other residents of territories of the United States, are not residents of States, and so do not have the right to vote for President.

    The United States has two classes of citizenship, constitutional and statutory. Puerto Ricans on the Island are not constitutional citizens; they are only statutory citizens under the Jones Act of 1917. Unlike a constitutional citizen their citizenship can be revoked by a simple act of Congress. It’s that simple.

    It’s a long story why in 1917 the Unites States decided to grant “citizenship” to Puerto Rico. Briefly, it has something to do with the fact that the Puerto Ricans were seeking independence. They engaged in violent acts. It was thought if they were made citizens, how can one seek independence of a country in which he was already a citizen? Doesn’t make sense, does it? And presently there is the need to show the powers at the United Nations the United States is not an occupying colonial power.

    Notwithstanding the benefits of statutory citizenship, many Puerto Ricans are still interested in independence.

  24. @ yamit82:
    Of course we can. How many reservations are there in America?

    All American Indians are citizens. They can leave the reservatons at will. They can run for president. They can vote in Federal Elections while in the reservation, as they are part of the states they are in.

    American administered territories:
    Guam (since 1898): also the home of Naval Base Guam and Andersen Air Force Base.

    All Guamians are citizens. They can fly into the USA at will. They can run for president. After establishing residence in a state, they can vote. They can establish residence at will.

    Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands: formerly a United Nations Trust Territory under the administration of the United States, it established itself as a U.S. Commonwealth in 1978.

    All Northern Marianans are citizens. They can fly into the USA at will. They can run for president. After establishing residence in a state, they can vote. They can establish residence at will.

    Puerto Rico (since 1898): established as a U.S. Commonwealth in 1952. In November 2008 a district court judge ruled that a sequence of prior Congressional actions had had the cumulative effect of changing Puerto Rico’s status to incorporated. However, as of April 2011 the issue had not yet made its way through the courts, and as of January 2013 the U.S. government still referred to Puerto Rico as unincorporated.

    All Puerto Ricans are citizens. They can fly into the USA at will. They can run for president. After establishing residence, they can vote in Federal Elections. They are full US citizens, even if they remain in Puerto RIco.

    United States Virgin Islands (since 1917): these were purchased by the U.S. from Denmark.

    All Virgin Islanders are citizens. They can fly into the USA at will. They can run for president. After establishing residence in a state, they can vote. They can establish residence at will.

    Yamit you flunked civics. Check them out. They are ALL US citizens FULLY.

    I had this email discussion with Dr. Steven Plaut of Tel Aviv University. He conceded the points.

    If you do not want the J&S Arabs, pay them to leave. It is that simple.

    Who should pay? Well the World Jewish Community benefits, not the Hindus. So the WJC should pay.

  25. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Israel cannot lock them in Bantustans with no citizenship

    Of course we can. How many reservations are there in America?

    American administered territories:
    Guam (since 1898): also the home of Naval Base Guam and Andersen Air Force Base.
    Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands: formerly a United Nations Trust Territory under the administration of the United States, it established itself as a U.S. Commonwealth in 1978.
    Puerto Rico (since 1898): established as a U.S. Commonwealth in 1952. In November 2008 a district court judge ruled that a sequence of prior Congressional actions had had the cumulative effect of changing Puerto Rico’s status to incorporated. However, as of April 2011 the issue had not yet made its way through the courts, and as of January 2013 the U.S. government still referred to Puerto Rico as unincorporated.
    United States Virgin Islands (since 1917): these were purchased by the U.S. from Denmark.

    Populations have certain rights but lack American citizenship

  26. I appreciate Yamit82’s reply and the parable of the fish.

    However, I come back to the question: What does Israel want?

    What I’m really asking is what is Israel prepared to do to get what they want. That’s the question!

    Should Israel pay the ransom, as Dr. Sherman outlines? Or what?

  27. martin Said:

    What does Israel want?!

    Depends on who you ask? Everybody’s got an opinion.

    If you asked that question to Americans what would you get?

    Talmudic parable of the king, his servant, and the fish. Never was it more apt.

    Once there was a king who sent his servant to buy a fish. The servant returned with a fish that stank. In fury the king gave the servant a choice of three punishments: “Eat the fish, get whipped for the fish, or pay for the fish.” In common with most people, the servant chose not to reach into his pocket and he decided to eat the stinking fish but after two bites the stench made him give up and he decided to get whipped for it. The pain of the lashes, however, made him stop that, too, and he cried out, “I will pay for the fish!”

    And so the fool ate the fish, got whipped for the fish and, in the end, had to pay for it, anyhow. Those in Israel and without, who refuse to understand that nothing will deter America from demanding that Israel make the maximum concessions, play the same fool. Those who do not understand that there is nothing that Israel can possible do, that there are no compromises it can make, that there is nothing short of full retreat to the 1967 borders that will satisfy the United States-are the same fools as the servant who ate, got whipped and in the end had to pay anyhow,

    Their refusal to make the difficult choice of telling the Americans “no”, now, at this moment, will see them making the retreats they hope will avert American anger; it will see this effort fail even as the frontier moves from its present lines within the Arab heartland to new ones close to the Jewish cities; and most important, the Americans will make the same demands they always have envisioned since the days of the Roger Plan-total Israeli withdrawal.

    This is what happens when foolish and confused Israelis, by refusing to pay the price of saying “no” to the stinking fish of pressure, attempt to eat it, submit to getting beaten over it and then learn to their dismay that there is no escape from the difficult decision that they should have made in the first place.

  28. Ted, I watched carefully. I listened carefully.

    I am so sorry to say: “They just don’t get it!”

    Let me address the Israelis:It does not matter that Israel is so small and the world is so large. It does not matter that political and security of the population requires a military and geographic superiority. It doesn’t matter that the Palestinians do not deserve or desire a state. It does not matter that the cost is feasible to “buy your way out” by transfer. It does not matter that a political conflict is replaced by a humanitarian program. And so you think you have deduced the solution by elementary logic,Dear Watson. But you forgot one thing: What do the Arabs want?

    What is it that blinds the Israelis–and everyone else, no matter how sympathetic –to get it in their gut that the problem is clear: The Arabs just don’t want you there! Period!

    How many times do you need to get hit on the head before you understand the Arabs will take as much time and as spend as much as it costs to eliminate the state of Israel. The Arabs have told you as much over 60 years. Listen to them. They are not stupid. They’re not running out of money. They’re doing just fine. The world supports them. The longer the conflict persist the greater their chance of winning that’s why they have no interest in a solution. Let me rephrase that: They know the solution they want.

    What does Israel want?!

  29. Correction, that was 10 million times magnification in those pictures, not 10,000. Whatever, they are really AWESOME!

  30. Logic must supersede emotions. The creation of the “Palestinian hoax” was an emotional reaction from the West to the recreation of the land of the Jews. This was fundamentally an antisemitic act of the worst kind. Sadly, many Jews in the diaspora are part of the problem rather than the solution. The Jews must assert themselves in spite of the antisemitic Jews and show to the world that they fear no one and annex J & S. Let the so called democracies of the world show if they are for democracy or for genocidal and supremacist Islamists. I do not believe that Russia, India or China will try to destroy IL. It is not in their interest, on the contrary. What about the West and the rest of the world!!! Muslims living in IL will have one of 2 options: relocate with financial or stay in IL with all the rights if they apply for citizenship.
    A “full size” IL will attract more Jews. So the claim of Muslim majority in two or three decades is another international (West) hoax.

  31. Yes, to Israeli sovereignty, but then Israel has to enfranchise the Palestinians in J&S.

    Or pay them with money and papers to leave.

    Israel cannot lock them in Bantustans with no citizenship in the Israel which rules over them.

  32. One subject neglected by columnists is the Israeli mindset. The consequences of partition are well known. Neither the “peace” treaty (a truce, actually) nor disengagement brought them the peace, security, and international respect they expected. But their hopes to achieve those ends with yet another partition remain. This is not rational. ~~~ Another bewildering aspect is their faith in their politicians – serial betrayers of public trust.

    During the 1930s German Jews convinced themselves that they could ride the political storm. They held on even as they were gradually deprived of dignity, property, and lives. That word “gradually” is key in the Israeli context because Jews have been gradually deprived of much of their land, police protection, and other rights.~~~ So I plead with columnists to address the major issue of public self-deception. People need to wake up to the way they have been disempowered, and confront politicians with their lies and anti-Jewish policies. Politicians have used outside threats to create the false impression that they – the politicians – and Israelis are all on the same side. Facts speak otherwise.