By Ted Belman
Talk is cheap. The right accuses the left of pursuing a fantasy, namely, that peace is possible. At the same time it suffers from what others consider, a fantasy of its own, namely, that Israel can defy the World. While many on the right believe it is no fantasy and can be done, they represent a minority of Israelis only.
You can count the instances where Israeli prime ministers defied the US on the fingers of one hand. Ben Gurion’s declaration of Statehood is one such example as was his refusal to withdraw in the ’48 war to the Partition line. He insisted instead on the Armistice lines. In part for his intransigence, he was punished with the creation of UNRWA. Eshkol’s decision to pre-empt the Six Day War and Begin’s courageous decisions to bomb Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak, and to push on to Beirut in the first Lebanese War, were perhaps, others.
Begin, uncharacteristically gave up every inch of the Sinai, after much pressure and prodding. He even came to the conclusion that doing it was a good thing. The most important reason was that, Egypt, then Israel’s biggest Arab enemy, was prepared to break the Arab rejectionist front by making peace with Israel. This was considered a very big deal at the time.
Shamir was forced to participate in the Madrid Conference in 1991 and to negotiate indirectly with the PLO. He was also forced to put Jerusalem on the table. He may have given in as he desperately needed a US loan guarantee on a $10 billion line of credit in order to finance the aliya of close to one million Jews, or nearly Jews, from Russia. There may have been pressures applied to him as well, as he was dealing with James Baker who had no love for Jews.
It was due to the pressure and threats that he and therefore Israel was subject to, that Rabin, when he became Prime Minister, opted to by-pass the pressure and to secretly negotiate a deal directly with Arafat, the head of the PLO. What resulted was the Declaration of Principles in 1993 and the Interim Agreement in 1995, together known as the Oslo Accords. These agreements were favourable to Israel as US was not in a position to support the Palestinian position. That is not to say that it wasn’t a huge mistake to invite Arafat back into Judea and Samaria. It was.
After Rabin’s assassination, Benjamin Netanyahu, in 1996, narrowly defeated Shimon Peres for the job of Prime Minister. He based his campaign on his rejection of the Oslo Accords or on his demand for reciprocity before Israel acts on them. Within two years he betrayed his long standing positions and signed the Wye Agreement in which he turned over to the PA, control 40% of the territories as required by Oslo without demanding reciprocity. Douglas Feith wrote on Wye and the Road to War, in Commentary which explains the significance of the agreement.
It was a known fact that Pres Clinton had promised to release Jonathan Pollard but I doubt that this was why Netanyahu signed the agreement. He may have thought he had no choice but to continue the Oslo process even in the face of Arafat’s non-compliance. In any event, it contributed to his defeat at the hands of Ehud Barak in the elections one year later.
Because of a wave of devastating suicide bombings, Barak resigned in 2001 and Ariel Sharon, the noted war hero, replaced him as Prime Minister. For all his toughness and his defense of the settlement enterprise, expectations were that he would not succumb to pressure. His first task was to put an end to the killings and accordingly he announced:
-
“All of our efforts to attain a cease-fire have been torpedoed by the Palestinians. The fire did not cease, even for one day. The Cabinet has therefore instructed our security forces to take all necessary measures to bring full security to the citizens of Israel. We can rely only on ourselves. [The following sentence, significantly, was said in Hebrew only] And from this day forward, we will rely only on ourselves.”
But the thrust of Sharon’s remarks [here translated from Hebrew] were directed westward:
“We are currently in the midst of a complex and difficult diplomatic campaign. I turn to the western democracies, first and foremost the leader of the free world, the United States. Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when the enlightened democracies of Europe decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for the sake of a temporary, convenient solution. Don’t try to appease the Arabs at our expense. We will not accept this. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia. “
Some in Israel though Sharon’s remarks were over the top, but I for one, and I was not alone, was thrilled to read them. Reuven Koret wrote about the statement and what may have caused it:
-
“Israeli officials were uncharacteristically reticent to comment on Sharon’s remarks. Army Radio reported in the morning that they were unable to extract any quote from any government minister with whom they spoke.
“Part of the reason for the barely-veiled hostility the Prime Minister expressed with regard to the United States is evidently a less than understanding response of the Bush Administration to his request to include Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah to the “A-list” of terror groups, especially after each of the groups launched attacks on Israel in recent days, with little or no action by the Palestinian Authority.
“Another explanation is believed to be the new Middle East “initiative” reportedly being introduced by the Bush Administration to gain support from reluctant Arab would-be coalition partners [for the invasion of Iraq.]
“The U.S. initiative reportedly calls for an independent Palestinian state, division of Jerusalem (Jewish areas to Israel and Arab areas to Palestine, including the Temple Mount), and the halt of all Israeli construction in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.”
Sharon never once reiterated these sentiments and a year and a half later grudgingly was forced to accept this American initiative, then called the Roadmap. He did so with 14 reservations which were never heard from again even though the US agreed to “seriously consider them”.
This Roadmap, by including the Saudi Plan, drastically changed the terms of the Oslo Accords and put Israel into a strait-jacket. Oslo had made no mention of Res 194 which is the basis for the “right of return”, nor did it put a limitation on Israeli settlement construction. Thus the US was back in the game. The US forced Israel to agree because that was the price Saudi Arabia was demanding in exchange for her agreeing to the invasion of Iraq by the US.
Once again, as with Rabin, the pressure that Sharon was subject to resulted in him proposing to unilaterally disengage from Gaza on his terms. Such a proposal stood in the face of everything Sharon had stood for. To make the disengagement more palatable to Israelis, he negotiated with the George Bush administration for a letter which ostensibly allowed Israel the right to keep the settlement blocks and to reject the so-called right of return. (Pres Obama made short shrift of that letter declaring the US not bound by it.) Sharon originally intended to remain in control of the border between Gaza and Egypt in order to prevent smuggling. Condi Rice forced Sharon to accept the Rafah Agreement which provided for the monitoring to be done by the EU with Israel video access, albeit a day later. In time, the EU abandoned its post leaving no monitors in place. We all know with what results.
Similarly Rice spearheaded the formulation of UN Res 1701 to end the second Lebanon war in 2006 at the request of FM Livni. That too proved worthless. Thank you Condi.
In fact, every time Israel went to war she was on a very tight leash. The UNSC always passed a Chapter VII cease fire resolution sooner or later depending on the US position and Israel never violated such resolutions except perhaps for a few hours. This was so even when it was in Israel’s best interest to finish the job.
In 2009 Netanyahu once again became Prime Minister. Within a few months of taking office, he gave a speech at BESA in which he accepted the two-state solution contrary to the Likud platform and his own previous pronouncements. In the fall of that year he announced a ten month settlement freeze in Judea and Samaria seemingly as a gesture. No reason was given. No reciprocity demanded. Netanyahu proudly made the point that it didn’t apply to Jerusalem. Nevertheless for all intents and purposes he imposed a de-facto freeze, when the freeze expired, which applied to both the territories and Jerusalem. He merely allows the odd building project to go ahead in order to pacify his right wing. How can anyone have any confidence in his declarations that Jerusalem will remain the undivided capital of Israel.
Don’t ever underestimate the ruthless pressure Israel is subjected to. Last September, MK Aryeh Eldad said he had reliable information that Obama put a “gun” to Bibi’s head to prevent Israel from annexing Area C in response to the unilateral move by the PA for recognition at the UN. The “gun” was Obama’s threat not to veto the UNSC resolution recognizing Palestine.
When Netanyahu was invited to form the government based on the support he received from Parties on the right he began immediately to water down the influence of the right by forming a coalition with Labor headed by Barak. He also appointed establishment lawyer Yehuda Weinstein as Attorney General. In this position he is the legal advisor to the Government and is responsible for protecting the rule of law. Prior to the elections he also engineered that Moshe Feiglin would be low on the list so as to exclude him from the Knesset and he inviting Dan Meridor to join Likud. Meridor was subsequently given a senior cabinet post. And now he has added Kadima to the coalition. He is no longer threatened by the right as he was first time around. With Kadima, Labor and Likud in the coalition, he can comfortably rule from the centre.
A series of laws have been proposed by his colleagues on the right in order to make Israel more democratic and to handcuff the radical NGO’s supported by the EU and the NIF. In almost all cases he has opposed the legislation either because he didn’t want to alienate the left or because he didn’t want to alienate the EU.
Besides that he has followed the dictate of the international community not to do anything that would imperil the two-state solution. Obviously the freeze and the opposition to the legislation is part of that but something else is going on. In the last three years the EU has encouraged and financed the Palestinian’s efforts to take over “Area C” by planting or building. According to Regavim this program has resulted in the loss of thousands of acres and the rate of loss is growing exponentially. Not only is Netanyahu’s government not doing anything to stop them but it is aiding and abetting them. A recent example of that is Barak’s decision to uproot olive trees planted by Jews while permitting the Arabs to plant. The Arabs acquire title to the lands by doing so. The GOI required the Jews to waive their right to acquire title by planting which they did.. They said their sole purpose was and is, to stop the Arabs from acquiring title. Still Barak wants to uproot the trees which the Jews have planted.
Another example is the government’s policy to demolish homes built by Jews on “private Palestinian land”, though no one is claiming ownership to such lands and though well accepted law in the west and even in Israel, allows for compensation when the homes have been built in good faith. The government policy is to direct the Court to issue demolition orders rather than to allow the residents the right to argue they built them in good faith.
Furthermore Netanyahu has opposed recent bills that would legalize houses built on “private Palestinian Land”. He threatened to fire any Minister that voted in favour of the bills resulting in their defeat. He didn’t even wait for the report of the Levy Commission appointed by him to recommend solutions. My guess is that Netanyahu was aware that the report would support the settlers.
Pres. Obama has taken position that a solution to the conflict can only be arrived at through direct negotiations. He uttered such a position to prevent the PA from circumventing negotiations by going to the UNGA or to the UNSC for recognition. He also uttered this position recently when Barak threatened to unilaterally withdraw. But the problem with negotiations is that the UN, US and EU meddle in them on the side of the PA. And now the PA, with the support of the EU and US, is putting facts on the ground which essentially pre-determine the outcome. At the same time they prevent Israel from putting facts on the ground. Inherent in the idea that one can negotiate, is the right to say “no”, to not offer what one doesn’t want to offer or to reject what one wishes not to accept. Thus negotiations, whether to buy a house of arrive at a peace agreement, don’t necessarily result in a deal. So negotiations are not the answer and Obama knows it. Putting facts on the ground is.
Israel must find the resolve to end the peace process and take the heat. Otherwise she is doomed to subservience. She must put the right’s “fantasy” to the test.
@ Ilana Sharon bat Avraham v’ bat yisrael:
It is useless to interpret the English translation.
The Torah is not interpreted by laymen by quoting chapter and verse in translation (often bad or wrong, especially when done by Christians).
Instead of giving into world opinion (which is idol worship as bad or worse than the golden calf), Israel should demand that the world surrender UNCONDITIONALLY!
Enough of this bull sugar.
“There’s no need to fear. Underzog is here!”
The Official Underzog website
@ Ilana Sharon bat Avraham v’ bat yisrael:
At this moment in time our greatest threat is internal animosities and rivalries rather than external destruction.
Theology. Feh!
@ Reader:
I respect the famed and legendary Rashi, learned Rabbi, father of the commentaries of the Talmud; but first and foremost I will undertake to understand
G-d’s Word through the context of the passage. It is clear that the citing of Judah in Zech. 14:14 is in the same context as Zech. 14:21.
Zech. 14:1 begins with “Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.” As you read down through the verses, it becomes clear that Zechariah is an END-OF-DAYS battle – NOT any part of the battles of Isaiah 17, Psalm 83, Obadiah, or even Ezekiel. In the day of the Zechariah 14 battle verse three shows “Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations..” And it continues with an earthquake, and “living waters shall go out of Jerusalem”, and (verse 10) the topography of the Holy City will be changed and the Temple Mount will lifted up, and (verse 11) in that day men will dwell there (in God’s sight) and “there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.”
And at verse 12, God pronounces what will happen to those who have fought against Jerusalem > “And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.”
THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN TO JUDAH for Judah is not going to fight AGAINST Jerusalem. On the contrary! We know this for certain because verse 14 says “And Judah also shall fight AT Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.” And verse 21 seals it with ” Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the Lord of hosts.” Judah is HOLY unto
G-d! Judah will not suffer the wrath of G-d as Zech. 14:12 clearly shows is upon those nations who fought against Jerusalem and who will not come up unto Tabernacles in the Kingdom of David’s eternal reign.
The context of Zechariah 14 renders the marginal English translation of “against” Jerusalem in error. It is clear (Zech. 12:2) that G-d is making Jerusalem “a cup of trembling to the nations of the world” and “And also upon Judah will it be in the siege against Jerusalem..”……that is, these verses allude to an attack on the part of the nations upon Jerusalem and Judah, which will result in injury and destruction to those who attack it. Judah will not be against Jerusalem, Judah will be included in the seige of the nations against Jerusalem AND Judah!
Zechariah Chapter 14 in Hebrew and English.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2314.htm
agrees with Rashi.
All these new “Bible” translations do not negate Rashi.
Isaiah wrote that, “Damascus is about to be removed from being a city.” Although Damascus has been conquered at least 17 times during recorded history, it has never been destroyed and abandoned as Isaiah foretold would one day take place.
Israeli leaders have long made clear that they will not be the first to introduce weapons of mass destruction onto the regional stage. However they then make equally clear that they will be the second to do so if such weapons are used in any significant way against the tiny state of Israel, just 280 miles from north to south and less than 30 miles across in most places. I am confident that Israel will not sit idly by while their determined enemies attempt to “complete what Hitler began.”
So whatever political manuever or event sparks it, it appears that we are on the verge of the fulfillment of Isaiah 17, with Psalm 83 following closely (which may be the Arab world’s ultimate response to an Israeli destruction of Damascus, one of Islam’s holiest cities.)
Isaiah goes on to speak of Israel suffering greatly during the same time frame. It mentions that while Damascus will be “removed from being a city” and “sovereignty” will disappear from it as well (17:1,3), the “glory of Jacob will fade, and the fatness of his flesh will become lean” (17:5). As bad as that sounds, Isaiah is foretelling that Israel will NOT be destroyed as Damascus will be, but instead “gleanings will be left in it like the shaking of an olive tree” (6). So many “olives” will be shaken off the Tree of Israel, but by no means all of them.
G-D’S PROMISE TO NATIONAL ISRAEL is found in Ezekiel 36:22 “Therefore, say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God, It is not for your sakes, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but FOR MY HOLY NAME, which you have profaned among the nations where you went.”
Ezekiel 36::23 “And I WILL VINDICATE THE HOLINESS OF MY GREAT NAME which /has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. That the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord God, when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight.”
And that is G-d’s Plan – to restore Israel for His Name’s Sake! He has torn and He will bind us up.
What has this to do with politics? EVERYTHING!
Yea, even Judah: against their will shall fight against Jerusalem. RASHI
There is no contrary idiom in Judah shall fight AT (not against) Jerusalem; for, although when used of people, it always means “fight against,” yet, of place, it as often means “fight in”. In this case, then, the prophet means, that not only should God fight for His people, but that “Judah also” should do its part. So then, Judah will fight at Jerusalem – namely, against the foe: not against Jerusalem.
Only 2 out of 15 Bible translations have rendered “against” rather than “at.”
New International Version (©1984)
Judah too will fight at Jerusalem.
New Living Translation (©2007)
Judah, too, will be fighting at Jerusalem.
English Standard Version (©2001)
Even Judah will fight at Jerusalem.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Judah also will fight at Jerusalem; .
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Judah will also fight in Jerusalem.
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
American King James Version
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
American Standard Version
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
Douay-Rheims Bible
And even Juda shall fight against Jerusalem:
Darby Bible Translation
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
English Revised Version
And Judah also shall fight against Jerusalem;
Webster’s Bible Translation
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem;
World English Bible
Judah also will fight at Jerusalem;
Young’s Literal Translation
And also Judah is fought with in Jerusalem
One more thing please > When Hosea 6:2 says “He will quicken us after two days; on the third He will raise us up, that we may live before Him.” we must realize that the key to understanding this is “One day with the Lord is as a thousand days.” Therefore, 2 days/2,000 years had gone by until Israel was once again a nation in her own homeland. Two days are past. We are IN THE THIRD DAY!…..when He will raise us up! Hosea’s 3 days compare to the SAME AS Creations’ 7 days…..therefore, Hosea’s two days are past and the Third Day is THE seventh day – THE SABBATH DAY! It is on the SABBATH DAY Israel will finally REST and have her Sabbath/peace….IN HIS SIGHT! For those who might not like this “religious” take on what is happening and what will happen to Israel and the rest of the world, sorry, but it is what it is. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. When we know what G-d says, we can have faith He will perform it – worldly politics aside. But if the political leaders (whom G-d sets up according to His plan) are aware of G-d’s direction, then maybe they could work WITH G-d instead of ignoring Him to their own peril. Just sayin~
@ Ilana Sharon bat Avraham v’ bat yisrael:
Yea, even Judah: against their will shall fight against Jerusalem. RASHI
Oh, and by the way, in Hosea 6:2 > “He will quicken us after two days; on the third He will raise us up, that we may live before Him.” According to the Hebrew calendar and the pronouncement of Israel’s Chief Rabbis, the year 2000/5760 was the “ending of 6,000 years” or by Creation’s account, the 6th day (a year with the Lord is as a thousand days. This is THE SAME AS Hosea’s 3 days. Therefore, it has been 2 days already, ending in 5760…..we are NOW IN THE THIRD DAY! Is G-d in sync with His own Word or what? This is the THIRD DAY WHEN HE WILL RAISE US UP! We’d better get our act together and be prepared to see and understand where this is taking us – namely back to the fulfillment of as-yet-unfulfilled- prophecies that must take place on the political, military, and spiritual battlefields in order to take our place in the world that G-d has waiting for us – HEAD OF ALL NATIONS! It might not seem so now with tiny Israel, but it IS G-d’s Plan and so it will be.
It isn’t so much that Israel worships world opinion as it is they just don’t trust G-d yet. Look at Hosea 6:1. “Come, and LET US RETURN to Jehovah: for He has torn in pieces, and will heal us; He has smitten, and will bind us up. Hosea 6:2. He will quicken us after two days; on the third He will raise us up, that we may live before Him.” ISRAEL HAS A GLORIOUS FUTURE! Israel will be raised up to be THE HEAD OF ALL NATIONS! But first G-d will put the “hooks in the jaw” to draw Israel’s enemies onto the hills of Jerusalem AND THERE HE HIMSELF will fight for His people and supernaturally destroy them. THIS is when Israel will recognize that the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob has been and is with them and Israel will RETURN to Him. They will finally be HIS PEOPLE once again! It is imperative that we are aware of G-d’s role in these times and what He has said will happen. It is why I am praying for Netanyahu’s weekly Bible studies – so that he may become aware of G-d’s role first and foremost, for it is HE Who will enable Israel’s victory! With G-d, all things are possible! Those without Faith or Knowledge only see “politics.”
The war of the West and Muslims against the Jews continues with the assistance of many Jews in the US. Many Jews in the EU and US are comfortable with their dhimmi’s status.
@ Underzog:
They seem to forget WHO led them back to the Holy Land, WHO stood with them in defending the Holy Land and they won’t let HIS people pray at HIS Temple.
Trust me WHO AND HIS isn’t world opinion.
Israel can defy the world. The problem isn’t so-called pressure, but Israel’s worship of world opinion instead of G-d. It is idol worship and should not be done!
F… the antisemitic world (read without the ellipses). World opinion be damned because it is cravenly and antisemtically evil!
@ Ilana Sharon bat Avraham v’ bat Yisrael
And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem – This is more probable than “against.” For Judah is united with Jerusalem as one, in the same context Zechariah 14:21. It is Judah itself, not “a remnant of Judah,” as it is “every one that is left of all the nations” Zechariah 14:16, which is thus united to Jerusalem: it is that same Judah, as a whole, of which it is said, “it shall fight.”
yamit82 Said:
@ Ilana Sharon bat Avraham v’ bat yisrael:
Some few might but Judah will fight against Jerusalem as well.
Zach 14:14 And Judah also shall fight against Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the nations round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.
@ yamit82:
Yes, Israel WILL defy the world — when it is backed into a corner and there is no other option. And guess what? HaShem will fulfill the prophecies of Isaiah/Jeremiah/Psalm/and Obadiah through Israel’s “exceedingly great army!” Only then will there be peace – albeit temporary – i.e. until the Ezekiel 38 war which brings Russia and Iran upon the hills of Jerusalem to plunder the nation of the riches gained in the previous war. THAT is when HaShem will fight for Israel and they will acknowledge it and turn back to Him!
The idea that Israel can go it alone is not a fantasy nor is it a choice. Israel’s existence is itself defiance and when it forgets that it exists in defiance of its neighbors and its persecutors in Europe and the US, then it will have no future. Jewish existence is itself defiance. Israel’s enemies basic hopes are to either wipe it out with war, or erode its national integrity by reducing its diplomatic efforts to those of a struggling Jewish quarter, a ghetto.
Israel has no choice but to go it alone, its friends lack power and its enemies are liars and murderers. There is nothing to negotiate for and nobody to negotiate with. It’s hope for the future is a future with a bootheel on the neck of antisemitism and this hope is a hope for the world as well. The promise of Israel is what it has always been, a principled argument for freedom and free peoples everywhere. This is worth fighting for. Alone if necessary.
First of all the people of Israel need to get involved and elect leaders who will represent them and will not be influenced by leaders of other nations.
The leaders need to concentrate on securing the land G-d provided for them, the Holy Land. They do have G-d given rights to this land contrary to what others may think or say.
Friends of Israel, the US for instance need to stand by Israel in full support, that’s what friends are for, you don’t interfere, you support.
There are some here who believe Israel survival as been the result of American gracious help.
Not entirely true, yes the US does provide financial aid to Israel having said that Israel has responded by purchasing goods from the US and in addition has worked side by side providing important intelligence and technical expertise to our military. That’s a partnership.
The US has and does provide financial and military aid to the Arab world and they purchase goods elsewhere and they hate us.
If you haven’t notice, it’s because you are either blind or an anti-Semite but Israel is our only true friend and ally in the ME.
Excellent, short and to the point. Israeli “leadership” is totally devoid of a sense of Biblical responsibility. They may parrot here and there Bible tunes but there is simply no commitment since at decision time Torah Law is simply ignored. That of course include the outwardly “religious”.
The rest is just what one observes. We are exposed to foreign formed “legal” experts or bought out political generals and other such.
Not a chance in H to find the yellow brick road. Unless if the flotsam is skimmed off and a new government system and people is FREELY elected.
That will require a degree of personal sacrifice that I simply do not see around.
@ ken:
@ BlandOatmeal:
You got that right. Well done.
In the Bible I read of Israel defying Pharaoh, the Canaanite kings, the giants of the land, the Red Sea, and the world empires. What didn’t work for them was defying their God.
Israel has been sabotaged for decades from within and out.
And my conclusion is that the 1948 “UN” vote was nothing more than a cover up by the West of their complicity with the Holocaust. Further, the cover up was designed to run for one generation and at that time, 40 years or so later, VOILA! Oslo and the “piece process” came into the fore.
It would take a totally obtuse mind to believe that the Oslo conspirators did not know what Arafat and the SD plans were. Or that the present set of imbeciles do not know either. Yet they armed the islamic monsters, trained many of them, fed and cured them and allocated telecom, water. electricity as well and periodically release well fed islamic murderers to help the “plan” advance.
Conclusively,
The dog in buried right under our noses. The Israeli unJewish “elites” and useful idiots have effectively neutralized the purported “idf”. That is at best an accumulation depot of weapons that will never be again used to defend the State.
The only attacks by that garbage will be against JEWS and in particular, civilians.
The “command” staff is laughable and not better example can be given than generals sabotaging each other as it is now amply exposed. Added to that the element is being led by morons such a “minister of defense” Peretz, (famous for his binocular escapade), and Barak, an outright coward that abandoned a multitude of fighters wounded in the field and willingly facilitated Hezbollah advance to South Lebanon.
That aggregate cannot confront the Girl Scout music band, let alone anyone armed.
I doubt that we Jews have what it takes but if anyone young enough does, they better shred all of the charlatans, accommodating blabbers, political generals, self elected “judges” and the rest of the garbage passing as leadership.
Otherwise… curtains.
Yamit
My starting point is different from yours in relation to Israeli and Jewish leadership. To me there is NO Israeli or Jewish leadership which can meet the demand of the present situation, which is as bad and maybe worse (certainly more deceptive and complicated) than that in 1939.
And when I look at Israeli and Jewish leadership today I see them actually ON THE SIDE OF THE US EMPIRE WHICH IS IN ALLIANCE WITH SHARIA ISLAM.
Hence there is the issue of Israeli Jewish leaders in relation to Ben Ali, Gaghbo, Mubarak and Muammar Gadhafi.
Not one, NOT ONE, Jewish leader defended any of those Arab or African leaders against the Empire.
This is a mere reflection of the similar role all of these Jewish leaders played in the total destruction by the EMPIRE SHARIA ALLIANCE of the sovereign state of Yugoslavia
You Yamit are clearly and demonstrably part of this Jewish Israel CABAL which behind sometimes deceptive words is on the side of the EMPIRE SHARIA ALLIANCE.
If a Jewish leader cannot defend Muammar Gadhafi as he is being MURDERED by the forces of extreme reaction today then I say most definitely such Jewish leaders are the enemies of the Jews.
I am not talking about the 90 per cent of the Jewish leaders Yamit I am talking about the 100 per cent of the Jewish leaders and I include you as well as Belman in that 100 per cent.
This may seem pessimistic but it is far from pessimistic, because these Jewish leaders, and you and Belman, do not represent the real Jewish people, who are revolutionary in this period because if they are to survive have got to be revolutionary.
This issue of leadership can be resolved only by starting from the bottom and building 4international, and especially making a great force and rallying point of the new Facebook page which 4international is going to create.
@ the phoenix:
Those are odd statements to me, Phoenix. I am an American non-Jew. Like most Americans, I know what I stand for and what my country OUGHT to stand for. My ancestors have been in this land since its inception, and I know what THEY stood for: They wanted freedom to worship God according to the dictates of their consciences, WITHOUT the INTERFERENCE of leaders like the King and the English Parliament. Americans, by and large, do not depend on their LEADERS to tell them what’s right and wrong; they figure they already know what’s right and wrong, and they want their LEADERS to implement THEIR policies and wishes.
In Israel, the cart seems to be before the horse, even though the Jews of Israel have arguably an OLDER tradition than Americans. Why do the Israelis and Jews look for leaders to lead them? Why don’t they have the sense to do it themselves?
My favorite TV show is on. Bye.
@ larry lunchpail:
Larry, you seem to be new here, though your handle makes me think otherwise. Stick around, and you’ll get the drift; this topic has been covered over and over again. I will simply present a synopsis of Israel’s times of greatest need, and the US “help” they received.
1. The 1948-51 War of Independence. The US imposed an arms embargo against Israel; they relied largely on Soviet and Czech arms to push back a Western-led Arab assault (The Arab Legion was officered by British officers).
2. The nationalization of the Suez Canal by Nassar, and concurrent closure of the Straits of Tiran, cutting off Israel from world trade. Britain and France conspired with Israel to put the canal back under Anglo-French control and give Israel Sinai. Israel quickly overran Sinai; but the US intrervened and sided with the Russians against America’s allies. Israel withdrew a year later, leaving Tiran open and Sinai occupied by UN troops. The Suez Canal was henceforth closed to all Israeli shipping, with US consent.
3. In 1967, Egypt’s Nassar, who had formed an anti-Israel union with Syria, ordered the UN troops to leave Sinai and again blocked the Straits of Tiran. US President Johnson was competely engrossed in the Vietnam War, and offered no help. Israel staged a pre-emptive strike against Egypt and Syria, defeating them in six days and annexing Golan and Sinai. Jordan also entered the war against Israel, and lost East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria to them. The Americans and Russians again conspired against Israel, forcing her into an unfavorable cease-fire. From that day forward, the US has been pressuring Israel to surrender all of its winnings.
4. The Yom Kippur War in 1973. Just as in 1967, Israeli PM Golda Meir knew Egypt was planning to attack, and discussed possibilities with the Americans. The Americans pressured Meir not to preemptively attack Egypt (and therefore deny them air superiority in the early stages of the war), resulting in many Israeli casualties when they did attack. US Secretary of State Kissinger wanted to withold promised US aid to Israel when they were in greatest danger, insisting that by making Israel suffer severe setbacks, they would be forced to the negotiating table and cede concessions to the Americans and their Arab allies. Nixon overrode Kissinger’s advice and OKed flying in military support, but it got to the Israelis after they had already driven the Egyptians back into Egypt. The Egyptian 2nd Army was encircled ans starving in the Sinai Desert and Israeli forces had crossed the Suez Canal and were advancing on Cairo, when the US AGAIN conspired with the Soviets to force Israel to accept an unfavorable ceasefire.
The history of US-Israeli relations since that time has been one instance after another, of the US pressuring Israel to concede rights and territory to the Arabs, culminating to pressuring them to accept the terrorist Yassir Arafat into the heart of Israel, to set up terrorist bases.
If that doesn’t set the record straight, I don’t know what will.
@ rongrand:
Wihout America’s unstinting support in every possible way, I doubt if Israel would have survived all these years. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I don’t think anyone in Israel, be he on the left or right would want to lose the advantage of having America on their side.
yamit82 Said:
agreed on all accounts.
however.
W H O could fit the blessed title of ‘leader’?????
and with the incredibly great divide and almost visceral hatered between jews,whether they live in herzlyiah, bnei-brak, ariel, or dimona,
H O W could there be a unified movement?
i see what is happening and it is killing me to see a slow destruction in front of my very eyes.
@ Felix Quigley:
America may be diminished but they are still MIGHTY by any standard.
More like 90%
Ted will deny it but that’s the way it looks. Someday he might get it right from the outset. 😉
@ Bill Narvey:
There is no such thing as a political center only those who have either no opinions and certainly don’t have strong opinions.
That whole concept is fallacious and mythical.
Everything else after this first sentence is thus rendered irrelevant
@ the phoenix:
Yes if we are resolute and have the leadership equipped to be resolute. I want lions with wisdom to reflect our leaders not rats and rabbits as we have today. Today we have no leadership but traitors at worst and at best leaders who follow and obey but don’t lead. Tail wagging the dog comes to mind.
@ larry lunchpail:
Larry your lunch pail is empty. Please explain.
@ NormanF:
FIFY
@ larry lunchpail:
Clever name, almost like Joe the Plumber?
BUT:
You are full of crap!
Have we met before?
I totally reject the notion of unbearable American pressure
I always ask the question what pressure? And what could or would America do to us if we said no in open defiance to their demands on Israel, causing our leaders past and present to make decisions and enact policies that are most inimical to Israels interests and survival.
Most Westerners including most Jewish Israelis due to lack of knowledge and understanding of Islam do not credit the over 100 year war between Zionism and Islam with being the core or root cause of our conflict but it is just that: It’s Islam.
Islam, is not like Christianity but a creed that permeates the thinking and behavior of Islamic cultures and societies even if the leadership like that of Mubarak, Assad or Saddam Hussein seemed to be secular; the culture of those societies and way of thinking is based on Islam and thousands of years of acculturation that even preceded Islam.
Islam is about perpetual conflict and war buy different means and the west is blind to it’s nature and it’s methods of conquest.
Political Correctness and Fear of the Gentiles mostly America has brought Israel to the Point where we no longer have deterrence. Our enemies have lost their fear and respect for our Power and too many Israelis subscribe to our enemies view of us. The moment Israel accepted and implemented the stupid concept of proportional response we have Lost and will continue to lose because we are playing by our enemies (American and the EU) RULES.
BB should remember that history will judge him not only for what he does, but also for what he didn’t do. Restraint and appeasement has become the hallmark of Israeli policy since the 1993 Oslo Accords. Concepts like deterrence and Victory have been erased from our political thinking and military doctrines.
The only way to defeat the forces of Islam is to defeat them in every sphere Military, politically and economically and with every defeat they must be told in no uncertain terms that it’s Islam who has suffered the defeat. Islam must be seen to be defeated by the Muslims, Islam must be discredited with every defeat.
We are not embroiled in a conflict between civilizations, but a religious holy war waged by Islam against everyone else and Especially against the Jews and the Christian West.
“The strategic wisdom encapsulated in these excerpts, straddling almost two-and-a-half millennia of human history, seems to have escaped both Israeli policy-makers and opinion makers alike.” Martin Sherman, ‘PLAYING BY THEIR RULES’ JP, 2011
Ted, I’m not sure what you are disagreeing with in that I raised a number of points.
You stated:
Are you suggesting that if Netanyahu’s Hasbara effort was directed to mainstream Jewish and other pro-Israel organizations, it would not be successful? Are you saying that even if it was successful in convincing them to see the impossibility of the 2 state solution is due to intractable Jew-Israel hatred, rejection of Israel and genocidal dreams and with that, induced mainstream Jewish and pro-Israel Christian organizations to advocate so openly, that it will not make any difference given the U.S. is working with the Saudis and Qatar and the U.S. no matter what, will never back off trying to force Israel back to the 67 borders?
Israel can defy the world but not without paying a heavy price. Not only does it require the good graces of America, but also must maintain its close ties with Eu(associate member), Nato (working alliance), and numerous trading partners who are likewise friendly with both the Arab and Muslim world.
Israel’s dependence on America is completely unhealthy. The point of the alliance is to secure Israel’s vital interests not to sacrifice them for American goodwill.
Not that is from me. Its from BB. I don’t know that he still believes Israel’s interests are more important than pleasing Barak Obama.
That’s said, its a valid concern.
Oy veh! I’m being “moderated” again! TED, WHEN WILL THE SPAM AND MODERATION PROCESS STOP TREATING ME LIKE AN ARCH-ENEMY? My stuff all gets through eventually anyway, because it really isn’t offensive. I spew out more profanity at you because of your spam-tripper and “moderattion”, than over anything else; and the process makes it IMPOSSIBLE to try to carry on an intelligent conversation here.
@ yamit82:
The joke’s on Israel, as is usual nowadays. Arafat came out of this smelling like a rose, and Israel was villainized as never before in its history. So much for Israel “demonstrating, unmistakably, that it wants peace.”
The US, under Obama, is like a drunk rubbing its face in its own vomit in the Middle East. Israel needs to stop destroying itself with building demolitions, stop apologizing, and TELL Obama what to do in Iran. If he doesn’t want to play along, they should bomb Iran and let Obama pick up the chips where they fly.
@ yamit82:
many threads have followed since i have addressed a question/post to you (“the alternative to jewish power” last comment on that thread)and it may have just gotten to the bottom of the pile…
i would really appreciate your answer, and it actually, ties in very well with this thread.
CAN israel defy the world?
THAT is the $64,000 question.
Absolutely.
Civil Fights: The face of delusion
By EVELYN GORDON
Another Tack: Culture of kvetch
By SARAH HONIG
Dennis Ross on Fox News Sunday
Sunday, April 21, 2002
Following is a transcripted excerpt from Fox News Sunday, April 21, 2002.
BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS: Former Middle East envoy Dennis Ross has worked to achieve Middle East peace throughout President Clinton’s final days in office. In the months following Clinton’s failed peace summit at Camp David, U.S. negotiators continued behind-the-scenes peace talks with the Palestinians and Israelis up until January 2001, and that followed Clinton’s presentation of ideas at the end of December 2000.
Dennis Ross joins us now with more details on all that, and Fred Barnes joins the questioning.
So, Dennis, talk to us a little bit, if you can — I might note that we’re proud to able to say that you’re a Fox News contributing analyst.
DENNIS ROSS: Thank you.
HUME: Talk to us about the sequence of events. The Camp David talks, there was an offer. That was rejected. Talks continued. You come now to December, and the president has a new set of ideas. What unfolded?
ROSS: Let me give you the sequence, because I think it puts all this in perspective.
Number one, at Camp David we did not put a comprehensive set of ideas on the table. We put ideas on the table that would have affected the borders and would have affected Jerusalem.
Arafat could not accept any of that. In fact, during the 15 days there, he never himself raised a single idea. His negotiators did, to be fair to them, but he didn’t. The only new idea he raised at Camp David was that the Temple didn’t exist in Jerusalem, it existed in Nablus.
HUME: This is the Temple where Ariel Sharon paid a visit, which was used as a kind of a pretext for the beginning of the new intifada, correct?
ROSS: This is the core of the Jewish faith.
HUME: Right.
ROSS: So he was denying the core of the Jewish faith there.
After the summit, he immediately came back to us and he said, “We need to have another summit,” to which we said, “We just shot our wad. We got a ‘no’ from you. You’re prepared actually do a deal before we go back to something like that?”
He agreed to set up a private channel between his people and the Israelis, which I joined at the end of August. And there were serious discussions that went on, and we were poised to present our ideas the end of September, which is when the intifada erupted. He knew we were poised to present the ideas. His own people were telling him they looked good. And we asked him to intervene to ensure there wouldn’t be violence after the Sharon visit, the day after. He said he would. He didn’t lift a finger.
Now, eventually we were able to get back to a point where private channels between the two sides led each of them to again ask us to present the ideas. This was in early December. We brought the negotiators here.
HUME: Now, this was a request to the Clinton administration…
ROSS: Yes.
HUME: … to formulate a plan. Both sides wanted this?
ROSS: Absolutely.
HUME: All right.
ROSS: Both sides asked us to present these ideas.
HUME: All right. And they were?
ROSS: The ideas were presented on December 23 by the president, and they basically said the following: On borders, there would be about a 5 percent annexation in the West Bank for the Israelis and a 2 percent swap. So there would be a net 97 percent of the territory that would go to the Palestinians.
On Jerusalem, the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the Palestinian state.
On the issue of refugees, there would be a right of return for the refugees to their own state — not to Israel. But there would also be a fund of $30 billion internationally that would be put together for either compensation or to cover repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation costs.
And when it came to security, there would be a international presence, in place of the Israelis, in the Jordan Valley.
These were ideas that were comprehensive, unprecedented, stretched very far, represented a culmination of an effort in our best judgment as to what each side could accept after thousands of hours of debate, discussion with each side.
FRED BARNES, WEEKLY STANDARD: Now, Palestinian officials say to this day that Arafat said: “yes”.
ROSS: Arafat came to the White House on January 2. Met with the president, and I was there in the Oval Office. He said yes, and then he added reservations that basically meant he rejected every single one of the things he was supposed to give.
HUME: What was he supposed to give?
ROSS: He supposed to give, on Jerusalem, the idea that there would be for the Israelis sovereignty over the Western Wall, which would cover the areas that are of religious significance to Israel. He rejected that.
HUME: He rejected their being able to have that?
ROSS: He rejected that.
He rejected the idea on the refugees. He said we need a whole new formula, as if what we had presented was non-existent.
He rejected the basic ideas on security. He wouldn’t even countenance the idea that the Israelis would be able to operate in Palestinian airspace.
You know when you fly into Israel today you go to Ben Gurion [airport]. You fly in over the West Bank because you can’t — there’s no space through otherwise. He rejected that.
So every single one of the ideas that was asked of him he rejected.
HUME: Now, let’s take a look at the map. Now, this is what — how the Israelis had created a map based on the president’s ideas. And…
ROSS: Right.
HUME: … what can we — that situation shows that the territory, at least, is contiguous. What about Gaza on that map?
ROSS: The Israelis would have gotten completely out of Gaza.
ROSS: And what you see also in this line, they show an area of temporary Israeli control along the border.
HUME: Right.
ROSS: Now, that was an Israeli desire. That was not what we presented. But we presented something that did point out that it would take six years before the Israelis would be totally out of the Jordan Valley.
So that map there that you see, which shows a very narrow green space along the border, would become part of the orange. So the Palestinians would have in the West Bank an area that was contiguous. Those who say there were cantons, completely untrue. It was contiguous.
HUME: Cantons being ghettos, in effect…
ROSS: Right.
HUME: … that would be cut off from other parts of the Palestinian state.
ROSS: Completely untrue.
And to connect Gaza with the West Bank, there would have been an elevated highway, an elevated railroad, to ensure that there would be not just safe passage for the Palestinians, but free passage.
BARNES: I have two other questions. One, the Palestinians point out that this was never put on paper, this offer. Why not?
ROSS: We presented this to them so that they could record it. When the President presented it, he went over it at dictation speed. He then left the cabinet room. I stayed behind. I sat with them to be sure, and checked to be sure that every single word.
The reason we did it this way was to be sure they had it and they could record it. But we told the Palestinians and Israelis, if you cannot accept these ideas, this is the culmination of the effort, we withdraw them. We did not want to formalize it. We wanted them to understand we meant what we said. You don’t accept it, it’s not for negotiation, this is the end of it, we withdraw it.
So that’s why they have it themselves recorded. And to this day, the Palestinians have not presented to their own people what was available.
BARNES: In other words, Arafat might use it as a basis for further negotiations so he’d get more?
ROSS: Well, exactly.
HUME: Which is what, in fact, he tried to do, according to your account.
ROSS: We treated it as not only a culmination. We wanted to be sure it couldn’t be a floor for negotiations.
HUME: Right.
ROSS: It couldn’t be a ceiling. It was the roof.
HUME: This was a final offer?
ROSS: Exactly. Exactly right.
HUME: This was the solution.
BARNES: Was Arafat alone in rejecting it? I mean, what about his negotiators?
ROSS: It’s very clear to me that his negotiators understood this was the best they were ever going to get. They wanted him to accept it. He was not prepared to accept it.
HUME: Now, it is often said that this whole sequence of talks here sort of fell apart or ended or broke down or whatever because of the intervention of the Israeli elections. What about that?
ROSS: The real issue you have to understand was not the Israeli elections. It was the end of the Clinton administration. The reason we would come with what was a culminating offer was because we were out of time.
They asked us to present the ideas, both sides. We were governed by the fact that the Clinton administration was going to end, and both sides said: “We understand this is the point of decision”.
HUME: What, in your view, was the reason that Arafat, in effect, said: “no”?
ROSS: Because fundamentally I do not believe he can end the conflict. We had one critical clause in this agreement, and that clause was: “This is the end of the conflict”.
Arafat’s whole life has been governed by struggle and a cause. Everything he has done as leader of the Palestinians is to always leave his options open, never close a door. He was being asked here: “You’ve got to close the door”. For him to end the conflict is to end himself.
HUME: Might it not also have been true, though, Dennis, that, because the intifada had already begun — so you had the Camp David offer rejected, the violence begins anew, a new offer from the Clinton administration comes along, the Israelis agree to it, Barak agrees to it…
ROSS: Yes.
HUME: … might he not have concluded that the violence was working?
ROSS: It is possible he concluded that. It is possible he thought he could do and get more with the violence. There’s no doubt in my mind that he thought the violence would create pressure on the Israelis and on us and maybe the rest of the world.
And I think there’s one other factor. You have to understand that Barak was able to reposition Israel internationally. Israel was seen as having demonstrated unmistakably it wanted peace, and the reason it wasn’t available, achievable was because Arafat wouldn’t accept it.
Arafat needed to re-establish the Palestinians as a victim, and unfortunately they are a victim, and we see it now in a terrible way.
HUME: Dennis Ross, thank you so much.
@ Bill Narvey:
Sorry to disagree with you bill but the US position is a joint position with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. They are all working together to force Israel back to the ’67 borders and then who knows.
Here’s the background. Jihad’s Willing Executioners
Well done Ted. Some thoughts:
1. If Netanyahu has chosen to govern from the centre, it seems that centre is closer to the left than the right. Has Netanyahu changed his views or has he come to believe that his views won’t fly in the world of public opinion and realpolitik and thus he must do the best he can with the views he has by compromising them to more accord with world opinion and especially that of the U.S.?
2. Israel sets herself up for failure if she seeks to defy the world. Starkly taking a position that thumbs her nose at the world, would only reinforce the growing view that Israel is acting like a rogue state when it comes to Palestinians.
3. Is it really necessary however, to defy the world? The most immediate pressure Israel has felt and is forced to contend with is from the U.S. and 2ndly the EU.
Would it not be more practical for Israel to focus on testing the waters of defiance vis a vis the U.S.?
4. Under Olmert, Israel began to see value in Hasbara in the sense of public diplomacy. Netanyahu appears to be more strongly pushing that.
Since Israel is tied most closely to the U.S. and it is U.S. pressure on Israel that appears to have the greatest impact, it seems Israel’s hasbara efforts, not to defy U.S. pressure, but to find ways to soften that pressure would be the better course.
Past and present U.S. administrations have to know that it is the Arabs/Palestinians that are the major impediment to realizing the 2 state solution for obvious reasons we are familiar with.
Notwithstanding that, the American led West won’t publically admit it and instead continue to push the 2 state solution, meaning pushing Israel who they know they can push, but not the Palestinians whom they know they can’t. The reasons for singling out Israel for pressure are well known.
The focus should thus be trying to ameliorate the pressure from the U.S., which if successful, would have a beneficial effect across the West.
One of the hurdles Israel faces in trying to move the U.S. to see the situation from Israel’s point of view, is mainstream Jewish organizations, be they conservative, liberal or left. All continue to speak of the need for realizing the 2 state solution. Where they differ is in degree in terms of what Israel and Palestinians must do to make it happen. The more left the Jewish advocacy organization is, the more is demanded of Israel and the less of the Palestinians.
Few if any mainstream Jewish organizations however, come out and say that the 2 state solution is impossible because the Palestinians/Arabs don’t really want it and why they don’t want it is their intractable Jew-Israel hatred which fuels their intransigent rejection of Israel and their constant genocidal dreams for Israel’s destruction.
American administrations have consistently turned to mainstream Jewish organizations to gain their support in pushing the 2 state solution.
Netanyahu should direct his Hasbara efforts at mainstream U.S. Jewish organizations and the 50 million plus Christians who openly declare their support of Israel.
Provided those Hasbara efforts do not flinch from saying that while the 2 state solution is the best and most sensible, practical and logical Western made solution to bring peace, the fact is it has not, cannot and will not fly because and only because of the Palestinians, maybe then Jewish organizations and Christians who continue to claim to support the 2 state solution will be more inclined to shape their message according to the reality that Israeli Hasbara reveals. That means that a different peace paradigm must be found that does accord with reality.
If Israel can succeed in that regard with American Jews and Christians, they in turn might better influence U.S. administrations and indeed the American public to see things as they are and not as they want to see them.
Bland
You talk absolute s…e and I cannot understand you.
But this offering by Ted Belman is full of genuflecting before the power of the US and before the obvious treachery of Jewish leaders, that is treachery towards the Jews.
Don’t make me laugh Ted! I spit on your conclusions that the US is MIGHTY.
the problem is 100 per cent Israeli leaders.
Ted is getting ready to provide a cover for Netanyahu.
Ted concludes “Israel must find the resolve to end the peace process and take the heat. Otherwise she is doomed to subservience. She must put the right’s “fantasy” to the test.”
And this advice comes from Ted who threw a headline across Israpundit that the NATO Empire should bomb Libya, whci they did of course.
And for months has been refusing to provide any defence of Assad against the NATO Empire.
Then somehow he expects to start OPPOSING the Empire.
Ted and ALL present Jewish leaders but not ALL Jews are at bottom really for the US Empire
The times cited, when Israel successfully defied American pressure, were times of wars of territorial expansion, to wit,
1. The War of Independence
2. The 1956 Sinai War
3. The 1967 War
4. The 1973 Yom Kippur War (in part — Golda Meir deferred to Nixon and Kissinger, and thus suffered losses in the initial days)
5. The 1982 Invasion of Lebanon
The operations in Entebbe, Osirik and Syria were exceptions, in that they had limited objectives. The other operations were largely exercises in futility, where in some cases, such as Gaza, Israel “caved in” without even being prompted.
This is an election year, and Israel’s enemy in America stands a good chance — say, a 48:49% chance at the moment — of getting defeated. Many armies have gone into battle against much stiffer odds, and come out victorious. A little faith in God here might go a long way. This year is probably an opportune time to defy Israel’s enemies in a big way, with a pre-emptive war against Iran and Hizbullah. Instead, Israel is kowtowing to America and Europe in local matters, such as housing laws, that those foreigners have no business getting involved in. It’s all backwards: Israel’s moment has come to be bold, as it hasn’t in years, and it is becoming more and more subservient.
Tanakh has a curse for the ungodly: “They will flee, when no one pursues them.” The ungodly one is Israel.