By Ted Belman
If I had been the President of the US for the last four years:
1. I would have forced the PA to negotiate a deal with Israel, i.e., to make the necessary concessions. I would clearly support the settlements and take the position that Israel should include most settlements so that less that 5% of the settlers would have to be moved. This could be done by reducing the PA’s economic and diplomatic support. I would have moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem to indicate my belief that at least the west part of Jerusalem would remain in Israel in any settlement.
2. I would have insisted on UNRWA being unwound. This could be done by economic pressure. I would have insisted that all Palestinians be given citizenship in their host countries or would have arranged for their re-settlement elsewhere but not in Judea and Samaria.
3. I would have left Gadaffi in power. He was no longer a threat to the west and had been rehabilitated.
4. I would have supported Mubarak because he was a trusted ally and a stabilizing force for 30 years.
5. I would have been more committed to the removal of Assad but not on behalf of Turkey and the MB but on behalf of the various minorities who wanted a federated Syria to replace Assad’s Syria rather than a MB dominated Syria. I would have seen this as a weakening of Iran and of Hezbollah. I would have negotiated with Russia to see if the conflict could be resolved through an agreement between the US and Russia like splitting Syria into two spheres of influence if not two countries. Part of this deal would be the denial of any influence by Iran.
6. I would have condemned Turkey’s role in the Mavi Marmara and stood with Israel. If anyone was entitled to an apology, it was Israel.
7. I would have sought energy independence to give the US more independence from Saudi Arabia. That would have enable me to force Saudi Arabia to desist in spreading Wahabbism.
8. I would have left a significant US military presence, up to 50,000, in Iraq, and preferably in Kurdistan. I would have moved the US troops from Germany to control costs. There is no need for them to be there any more.
9. I would have retreated from Afghanistan as quickly as safety would permit. There is no victory for the US in Afghanistan, only death.
10. I would have taken on the HRC at the UN. The only members who would be eligible to sit on it would be members who support human ?rights in their own countries. Until that happened, I would have withheld financial support from the UN.
@ dweller:
“May you get to heaven a half hour before the devil knows you’re dead” I really don’t mean it. 😉
@ dweller:
“Before a man speaks it is always safe to assume that he is a fool. After he speaks, it is seldom necessary to assume it”.
@ dweller:
“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”
Nobody ever accused you of being normal or male.
@ dweller:
“Man is not a rational animal. He is only truly good or great when he acts from passion.”
Guess that excludes you.
“It destroys one’s nerves to be amiable every day to the same, sub-human being.”
“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”
@ dweller:
“…Tact teaches you when to be silent. Inquirers who are always inquiring never learn anything.”
@ dweller:
“May you have the hindsight to know where you’ve been, The foresight to know where you are going, And the insight to know when you have gone too far”
@ Michael Devolin:
If you regard me as trying to appear “noetically superior to all others,” that’s your problem, nudnik — not mine; you need to get over it. I pull my pants on one leg at at a time, first the left leg & then the right; except when I pull the right one on first & then the left. (Ah, now you know my secret.)
For the record:
‘Noetic superiority’ NOT an “obsession” with me; if it were, I’d probably be tempted from time-to-time to limit myself to monosyllables, fractured syntax & dull-witted affirmations (for their own sakes) in support of other posters’ comments — purely to fend off suspicions that I wasn’t a regular guy.
But I DON’T resort to those silly gambits because I don’t give a rusty screw what you (or anybody else) thinks about me personally; my ego doesn’t need it (nor should yours), it simply doesn’t matter.
I’m here to share ideas on a shared matter of major significance.
Regrettably, however, there ARE those on this site who most certainly DO get-off on playing skull-games & other intellectual pastimes of “one-up” — and if I am attacked by one or another of same, I may be obliged to defend myself at greater or lesser length, but I never let myself forget or overlook the reality that this forum is intended to address.
NEVER.
“Unctuous”? — after all that, I’M “unctuous”? (I think I’m flattered.)
“[P]revent” it? — how, pray tell, do we “unctuous asses… prevent” it?
If it’s strictly a matter of ‘provocation’ — then how come PresentCompany is unable to ‘provoke’ YoursTruly to profanity?
(again, if it’s purely ‘provocation’ that drives you to vulgarities?)
The truth is that while you may have a ‘nice’ exterior, Michael, you are inwardly SEETHING with bitterness, hatred & resentment. I daresay if you didn’t have boxing as an outlet, the toxins would virtually seep from your pores.
Your idea of emotional discipline amounts to sheer suppression, at best.
You refuse to come to grips with your hatred, so you lash out at me for calling you on it. THAT’S how I “provoke” you. Most people (even those who KNOW they are full of hostility) are absolutely clueless as to the breadth & depth of the hatred they harbor.
Actually, the demonstrable reality, Michael, is that you have no patience. Period.
— Full stop.
You understand NEITHER what patience is about NOR how it works (let alone, how to acquire it).
No doubt, he’s provocative; makes me think. But that doesn’t scare me. I welcome it; dealing with it makes me STRONGER.
As I’ve said, Isee no reason to conclude he is an ‘antisemite.’
Then too, my defense of what CURIO, in turn, regards as ‘toadies’ — like PresentCompany — doubtless disgusts him no end too.
Ah, the kvetching & the krechtzing — such a burden.
Yet I live with it.
And he (apparently) lives with it.
And you can live with it too.
Welcome back.
@ Michael Devolin:
It’s not ‘denigrating’ anybody to soberly observe the warped ego-reality that specified persons cling to
— and ‘prudence’ in this instance has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
They GET OFF on their paranoia; it gives them a back-handed species of pleasure.
Once again, you’ve got it utterly ass-backwards, Michael. It’s not ‘hatred’ (let alone, groundless hatred) to call a spade a “spade.”
— I say what I think about what I read. I make no apology for it. None.
Do I go for sarcasm? — Sometimes, absolutely.
Derision? — Count on it, when it seems warranted.
Ridicule? — Sure as God made little green apples.
Invective? — Bet the friggin’ mortgage on it.
But that’s about what I think about what people write.
I have no hostility toward any individual poster on this forum, Jewish or gentile. What’s more, I am usually the last person to try to get ANYBODY banned from posting on the site.
— If anyone is truly guilty of lashon hara, it is not (and has never been) YoursEverTruly. I submit that, once again, your finger is pointing in the wrong direction.
Oh, is he? — “really,” indeed?
and you know this for a fact because. . . . uh. . . WHY, exactly?
— and HOW, precisely, do you know that he “really is Jewish”?
Ah, yes, of course, because he told you
— and because nobody challenged him.
Suppose YoursTruly were to challenge him? — THEN how would you decide who was & who wasn’t ‘Jewish’?
— majority vote?
More challenges vs. Few[er] challenges?
You know, something on the order of how the Inquisition explained the interior relations of the Solar System to Galileo?
— with a little incentive (thrown in on the side) to see the ‘wisdom’ of majority vote in such matters as truth?
@ Michael Devolin:
Why should you ‘defer’ to ANYBODY merely for the fact of their being Jewish? You seem to take us for some kind of “lodestone to Reality.” That’s not quite the intended meaning to Zech 8:23.
Neither Jews nor anybody else have anything on you.
If you believe they do, I’m afraid you will be sadly disappointed — I hope that when it happens it will not be shockingly so. (When it does happen, DO remember at least that it was by a JEW that you were FIRST warned.)
Depends strictly on the caviler.
SOME cavilers will indeed “enter at any hole”
— just as there are some men who will opt for any port in a storm
(some of them thus, even when there is NO storm)
— and SOME are quite particular about the holes at which they will enter.
But you’ve missed your target with this one, Michael. Again, you’ve confused me with somebody else.
Look around to see who it is that’s always opportunistically ready to pile-on. . . .
You do nothing of the sort with me, and we both know it. But there are others with whom you do indeed PLAY ‘submissive’ — you stoop to conquer, it would appear (and with them, I venture to say, you do seem to succeed). You’re using each other.
It’s pointless to debate with somebody who sees thru you.
Ever try ‘debating’ the guy in the mirror when you shave?
Look, Michael, I make no claim to clairvoyance or anything like that.
But we all play the same games, mate; in different orders, TBS, and in different admixtures. But the games themselves are all the same ones.
So when you’ve seen thru your own, you can see thru ANYBODY’s. I see thru yours.
Quite candidly, there’s not a stitch of evidence to suggest you’re the least bit interested in any “denouement,” Michael; you’re WAY too bitter to allow for that, except temporarily — for tactical reasons.
I suspect that in an odd way (in a compulsive way, really), you’re incapable of seeing a “denouement” to your resentments. But that’s the nature of resentment: it creates a fixation on itself, so denouement for the time being is flat-out impossible. And will continue to be impossible till you’re willing to DENY yourself the perverse satisfaction of hate & the judgment it carries.
@ Michael Devolin:
It’s known as calling a spade a “spade,” Michael. You got a problem with that?
If you find that “caustic,” you’d better get used to it. This board has been known, on occasion, to get rather heavy into the rough-&-tumble.
“Loves to”?
Does a peach tree “love to” give peaches?
It does what it does, whether you appreciate it or not.
— That is its nature.
I say what I think.
I don’t pull my punches
— but I don’t go looking for openings to throw punches either.
You’re way too sensitive, Michael; over-reactive out the wazoo.
That expression [“Old Boy”] has never been used as a putdown in any circle I’ve ever encountered in damned-near 7 decades of speaking, reading & writing.
More often than not, it was offered (and taken) in a spirit of mild-to-moderate affection.
Why you REACTED to it in that thread last month tells more about YOU than about ME.
Evidently you haven’t “studied” them enough then.
You wouldn’t be the first (or doubtless, the last) — here or anywhere else — to try to fit me into some preset pigeonhole.
In any event, it’s regrettable that you’ve let yourself get the idea that Jews are either
— A. weaklings, or B. assholes.
GOD rejects both, and ALWAYS provides for a “C” option.
Demonstrably silly nonsense. (Did you actually bother to READ OVER what you wrote before you hit “Post,” Michael?)
?????
You’re confusing me with some of the other posters on this site (those with whom you seek perhaps to ingratiate yourself).
I don’t ‘forbid’ anybody to oppose my perspective.
I ‘consent’ to anybody being my ‘neighbor’
— notwithstanding the fact that there is nobody on the planet who’s going to agree with me about everything. (Nor do I expect them to.)
“Noetic flexing”? — Hunh?! You need to tag up at 2nd Base, fella, before the pitcher spots you way off the bag there.
Wouldn’t want this to come as a shock, Michael, but unlike some of our associates on this blogsite, I’m NOT “into” the intellect.
I find it a useful aid to horizontal communication (especially online) — but as a means of acquiring understanding, it’s useless. Worse than useless.
I threatened nothing of the sort (you’re paranoid, my man). You had brought up Muggeridge’s name in connection with me, and then left the matter hanging. So, hoping there might be something to learn, I asked you to elaborate. Whereupon you demurred.
— You raise the gale, then refuse to come out of the harbor.
Don’t take this wrong, Michael (hell, you probably will anyway), but in high school we used to have name for girls who did what amounted to just that kind of thing. . . .
@ yamit82:
Cheap shot, Yamit.
— Best you could do?
Actually I’ve defended LOTS of people on this site when it seemed warranted — and SEVERAL of them were NOT soi-disant “Christians.”
YOURSELF, for example.
Also, among many others, Michael (who, I note, is back, and welcome; having it seems grown a callous on his erstwhile tender tushy).
But frankly, Yamit, the truth is that Curio & I have rarely discussed ‘christian belief’ — and never yet at length.
If his ‘christian belief’ is to any degree “traditional,” then in that respect he has LESS in common with me than even YOU have in common with me.
But all that is strictly beside the point, because your moronic approach to this whole matter is clearly shown in the fact that you never characterize MUSLIMS who purport appreciate Jesus, as “Christians”
— nor BUDDHISTs who purport to appreciate Jesus, as “Christians”
— nor HINDUs who purport to appreciate Jesus, as “Christians”
— nor BAHA’Is who purport to appreciate Jesus, as “Christians”
— nor ATHEISTS who purport to appreciate Jesus, as “Christians.”
Just goes to show that, at bottom, your notion of a Jew is actually not a positive one at all, but ultimately a NEGATIVE one — based on NON-belief:
— on the most cursory examination, your (operative) definition of a ‘Jew’ amounts to nothing more than “somebody who doesn’t dig Jesus.” Mazal Tov!
Shallow. Stupid. Imbecilic.
Show me some.
No, not so; I truly did not know that.
I have seen 1 or 2 posts of his where he says Ted “doesn’t like” theological discussions on this forum, but I haven’t actually seen direct warnings to him in that regard. [Then too, as of course, you know, I NEVER have the time available to to me to read all the articles; let alone, all posts to all the articles.]
In any case, Curio certainly does seem to take any such admonitions a lot more seriously — and in a much more consistently disciplined manner — than a lot of other proselytizing types who’ve been known to frequent this board. As you ALSO know.
So if indeed he is a ‘christian missionary,’ then I repeat what I said earlier: “he doesn’t seem to be doing much of his ‘christian missionizing’ here” — certainly not of late anyway
— and in which case, you have no beef against him in THAT regard.
@ yamit82:
SOME Jewish paranoiacs get it right more than not “as to who is a brother Jew and who is not.” FIFY.
But you, Yahnkele, are NOT one of the ones who do.
I don’t gather from what I read that Curio hates Jews.
I do suspect, however, that he finds it frustrating — not to say, illogical (or even implicitly insulting) — that SOME Jews seem to think that the sheer fact of their being Jewish makes them somehow ‘better’ than anybody else
— and I would guess, further, that he has to fight to keep himself from believing that turkeys (like yourself) who write that way represent — khas v’khalila! — the majority (or even a critical non-majoritarian mass) of militant believing Jews. No fear for that, of course. They don’t; not by a country mile.
Your problem, Yamit, is rarely that you’re “all” wrong — but rather, that you’re often partly right & partly wrong; and that consequently, the right part gives you a spurious credibility to spout what’s actually quite wrong. (That’s one of the things you have in common with those other demagogues you’re so fond of, Ovadya Shoher & Francisco Gil-White, ad naus.)
In this [above] instance, however, you are indeed all wrong; not ‘part’ wrong but 100 percent wrong:
— YoursTruly does NOT “qualify as a paranoid” (not even a little tiny bit — not a scrap, not a smidgen, not a soupçon),
but he most certainly IS Jewish — all Jewish, all the day long.
And if you don’t like it
— good.
Glad to hear it!
“As a matter of fact“? — R.O.F.L.M.A.O.
Since when have you — or any other power tripper since Nimrod — EVER let facts interfere with a good bout of demagoguerie?
Actually, though, I have lots of disagreements with Curious, some quite significant — OTOH, my guess is that he’s more prepared to listen to my objections to his narrative than he is to yours, which often reflects more of your bigotry than of your rationality — let alone, any open-hearted desire on your part to learn something new.
It would appear that Curious & I both DO agree on the value of sanity, and we both reject rudeness.
However, while that sets us both apart from you, Yamit, I daresay there are others here as well (both among those who actually comment, AND among those who only read the comments) who find themselves in accord with us in that respect
— though they may find your manner too intimidating — and frankly distasteful — to warrant entering the fray.
@ Michael Devolin:
“Cavil will enter at any hole”,
“and if it find none it will make one”
Great proverb and so apropos characterizing dweller.
“pretentious blather”, Another diamond. 🙂
@ Bernard Ross:
Corporate welfare.
America needs her Israeli barking dog well enough armed to frighten the Arabs so they purchase vast amounts of recycled petodollars back to America. By controlling her Barking dog vassal America gains influence in the Arab ME. The amt America gives to Israel nominally is the same as the 1983 aid package but adjusted for inflation in 1983 dollars Israel receives only 1.3 billion. That’s getting America a lot at distressed fire-sale prices. Dollar wise if the aid were cut off Israel could easily make up the shortfall through increased sales of Israeli bonds and budgetary efficiencies. That does not mean that we wold not purchase from America if the price and utility is right, but there is no reason why Israel should be receiving aid from anyone. We are neither that poor or desperate to be asking for aid.
Our politicians and military are corrupted by the aid: like junkies and it binds Israel too closely to America fore-fitting our independence and national sovereignty. It also creates dysfunctional military and economic planning and delays long overdue reforms.
yamit82 Said:
Lets not forget sale of arms, planes,defense systems, etc. Israel is valuable to those merchants because it helps arms sales. ON the other hand Israel is a fast rising competitor to the US in arms sales. Furthermore,I believe, a good portion of US arms sales are still required to be manufactured in the US which influences the profits of the corps and US balance of payments.
@ dweller:
What better deal? American oil independence should not effect the price of oil as the price is market driven and set based on supply and demand. With the prospect of EU disintegrating and America following Europe world demand should plummet. Asia without a growing Western economic engine will decline as well including their demand for fossil energy.
The only real benefit to America and I don’t belittle it is bal of payments. Domestic oil replacing imports keep those billions at home.
Your analysis does not take into consideration the Global interests of American and Western oil companies that supply ME oil not just to America and Europe but to much of the rest of the world.
Your analysis does not take into account the interests of the oil companies themselves as opposed to more narrow National interests. They are not the same.
Saudi oil production is state-owned and foreign corporations there receive moderate service contracts but not windfall concessions.
American Oil companies want in on Iranian oil and want the Iranians to develop Nukes. That would empower Shia Saudis who are sitting on the Saudi oil fields and are the real owners of Saudi oil. That’s the great fear of the Saudis Rulers of a Nuclear Iran. This is similar to Kurdistan. Instability in the Middle East generally, and particularly in Saudi Arabia, would send oil prices through the roof, contributing handsomely to corporate profits. Therefore US oil corporations prefer a nuclear Iran, even if it means war.
An Israeli-American operation against nuclear Iran would close it to Western oil corporations, and accordingly, secure oil concessions for the Russians and Chinese. That explains the American policy re: Attacking or preventing Israel in attacking Iran.
“the inveterately paranoid”
Now there you go denigrating your “neighbor” again, Dweller. “Inveterately paranoid”? Very caustic language for someone who loves to sound off as exceptionally learned AND charitable. Tsk, tsk, Old Boy! This “love your neighbor” theme you’ve used long ago (I’ve studied your posts, trying to convince myself that you really are Jewish), but it seems the only people you consent to being your neighbor (whether anti-semite or not) are those who are not of opposing views, everyone else had better beware your noetic flexing (your threatening to wax eloquent on Muggeridge with me, that was ultimate, and here I was deferring to you because of your proclaimed Jewishness!). “Cavil will enter at any hole.”
So I’ll play submissive, Dweller. You have the floor. It’s pointless to debate with you as you refuse to acknowledge any measure of denouement, regardless of proofs (as I mentioned, I’ve studied your posts). As for denigrating others for their prudence as being “inveterately paranoid”, that is , as I mentioned before (since you are also addressing Yamit, who really is Jewish) bordering on lashon hara. I will continue to judge as my conscience and experience dictate (I’ve been fighting anti-Semitism since my early twenties, I’m now 58; I’ve been a bodyguard for an Orthodox Jew). If anyone’s inveterate, it would be your obsession with sounding off as noetically superior to all others, no matter how sensible and rational they may be. Unctuous asses like you prevent salubrious educational discussion and provoke people like me to profanity (which is why I’m “moderated”!). After my experiences, I have no patience for your pretentious blather, and your defence of anti-Semitic provocateurs like Curious American disgusts me to no end.
@ dweller:
To the Jewish inveterately paranoid, everybody amounts to “anti-Semite and christian missionary.” FIFY
Even Jewish paranoids get it right more than not as to who is a brother Jew and who is not. He Knows a Jew hater when he hears, sees and reads what they write. Then to be a Jewish Paranoid one must be Jewish first and last. You dweller may qualify as a paranoid but not a Jewish one.
As a matter of fact, You and Curious have more in common than anyone else commenting on this forum. Two Peeees in a Pod?
As one christian believer defending another I expect you to defend your brother in belief. Curious has admitted that he is a missionary and much of his earliest posts reflect directly just that, Ted has warned him off of directly expressing his evangelical views on this site. You know that, so your comment is disingenuous, spurious and meretricious.
@ yamit82:
To the inveterately paranoid, everybody amounts to “anti-Semite and christian missionary.”
He’s not an antisemite.
If he’s a Christian missionary, he doesn’t seem to be doing much of his ‘christian missionizing’ here.
@ CuriousAmerican:
Trained at what
— besides ophthalmology?
@ CuriousAmerican:
Not if we offer them a better deal than the Saudis do.
Actually we presently get more of our oil from Canada than we do from the Saudis.
In any case, however, MOST of the world’s marketed oil — like the rest of the commodities market — has been pooled worldwide (viz, not separately marketed between buyer & seller) since the 1950’s.
That could change if the USA does become energy independent
— it could well become a whole new ballgame.
Statement is meaningless, absent a stated objective.
“Victory” presumes the success of something.
Without clarity as to what the “something” is to consist of, there’s no sense in saying there’s no succeeding at it
— “succeeding” at what?
@ rongrand:
Thank you ron.
@ Michael Devolin:
He serves a useful function. He amounts to a two fer: anti-Semite and christian missionary. I don’t necessarily mind some ant-Semites, there are some very bright and stimulating ones like writers, actors and even journalists. Problem is in defining red lines.
“Any friend of my enemy is my enemy as well.”
Exactly, Yamit. Curious American has a strange obsession with the Paly Muslims. I actually think he loves your enemies, Yamit. Sounds like it to me. As Mr. Ross points out, you’d think Curious American would spend more time debating the Muslims that are killing his Coptic Christian brothers. But Curious American’s type are unconcerned with his fellow Christians, hell, he’s even unconcerned with the Jewish victims of Islamic terrorism: he wants the Muslim terrorists to be “paid off” by the Jews, as though the Jews owe anything, whether money or blood, to these murdering bastards. This guy is like a barnacle on a boat or a stone in the shoe.
Great column, Ted, with quite reasonable positions. One might call them “sane”(too bad no one can think that sanity is a factor at all in this administration’s dealings with Israel – or the Muslim world, for that matter!) and eminently preferable to what has occurred on Obama’s watch.
One more point TedL
DISBAND THE UN AND FORM A UNITED FRONT FOR THE STILL REMAINING SANE-CIVILIZED NATIONS.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Dear Curious, perhaps you could explain the shattering silence of Christians regarding global pogroms agians them by muslims. Chritians appear to have aboandoned their christian brothers, the Copts. Yet so many have an interest in Israels treatment of the pal muslims but apparently no interest in how the muslims treat their fellow christians. Why aren’t christians taking in their brothers as the Jews did in Israel rather than investing their energies in BDS movements, meddling in others affairs, etc. Shouldn’t they deal with their own issues first? I know there are many christians interested in seeing Israel flourish but in “getting to know them” I wonder why they abandon their own? Its dfficult to take christians seriously on seeing them abandon their own, without hardly a word.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Yamit82 made no reference to him being superior to you.
Anyway, and without meaning to be confrontational, i think you should realize that both your remarks and mine (i’m Greek, by the way) are cheap talk: If we are mistaken, no rockets will fall upon our heads as a consequence, since we don’t live in Israel. It is kind of rude not to take this into consideration when taking on someone who does.
I would have bombed Iran’s nuke facilities.
I would have insisted that only actual Palestinian refugees are granted refugee status. Counting as refugees their descendants too, as is the practice of UNRWA (contrary to other UN bodies who treat the descendants of refugees of any other country as non-refugees), is obviously antisemitic.
I would have threatened to withold any funding to the UN unless it ceases to single out Israel for condemnation in the UNHRC.
I would have made it clear to the western world that the USA supports the only both viable and humanitarian solution to the conflict: the granting of financial incentives to Palestinians of Judea and Samaria to rellocate anywhere they like (ok, not west of the green line!). I would make sure to stress the fact that, with the incitement going on in Palestinian schools and Media, it is naive to expect that Palestinians would want to live in peace with Israelis, ever.
I would have taken Spengler as my Middle-East advisor.
Its really come down to a simple choice that no one wants to admit. Israelis have to decide between themselves and the pals. all the prior approaches of peaceful coexistence have not only failed but have proved they will not work in the future. The pals have refused repeatedly to live in peace with the Jews and this will not change. Why do the jews want to keep beating this anachronistic dead horse? Someone has to leave Israel and I doubt it will be the Jews. Anyone who states that the Jews should live with the jew killing muslims are facilitating dead Jews. The Europeans have been pushing this and now they have to live with them. Bon voyage.
@ yamit82:
SarahSue are you sure you want Yamit to come up with a plan.
The thought alone should scare the hell out of them.
@ SarahSue:
😉
@ CuriousAmerican:
I don’t hate gentiles generically in principle or any other way. I hate Islam and Christianity but not individual Muslims or Christians unless I perceive them to be enemies of the Jews, Israel or myself. My loyalty is to Israel, The Land of Israel, The G-d of Israel and to those Jews I deem worthy to care about. If you notice most of my strongest criticisms are against other Jews.
You have openly stated your Christian agenda many times in this forum and you haven’t corrected or denied the specific references I made as to your open agenda, so if I am correct what are you complaining about? That I wish my enemies who would do much worse to me and other Jews given the opportunity, would at least receive the same in return? “The Mercy of Fools” brings bitter results.
I perceive Most Arabs as my enemy and I would do and wish for them what they would do and wish for me. That’s not a very complicated position to understand. Christians who support my enemies are mine. Christians would deny and wish to supersede my beliefs are my enemy. Every Christian who would actively seek to convert a Jew to Christianity is my enemy. Every Christian who donates money to other Christians to convert Jews is my enemy. Christian nations who support enemies of Israel with the means of war materially and diplomatically are my enemies.
Any friend of my enemy is my enemy as well.
These are enemies of Judaism,Jews and Israel. Were it up to me and Many, Many like me we would boot their sorry asses out of my country. It will happen eventually and it will not be pretty.
It must be wonderful to live in your mind, if you call it living.
You seem to hate all Gentiles on principle.
Get to know us. We are your equals.
Ted,
This is my fine tuning of your plan items one and two. It would be done in Israel, not America.
First, start a campaign directed towards the muslims called something like Operation Go Home. This campaign would state that any muslims willing to relocate would be given substantial financial incentives. Promise each person $1,000,000 to buy all their land and for them to relocate. Create documents that clearly shows title transfers of muslim land to Israel. Create another set of documents that certifies how payment will be made. They will need to travel to another country and set up a bank account so that the funds can be wired. This should take between sixty and ninety days.
Assure the muslims that their departure must be quiet and quick, most certainly before their fellows decide to prosecute them for selling their land. Assure them that it is a limited offer and they must accept quickly before the money runs out.
Then issue travel documents that gives them a one way ticket that they have to pay for. All travel expenses will be reimbursed.
But, as they say, the devil is in the details. After there was a mass exodus of people, they will find several things they did not know before they left Israel. They will find out that they have essentially been deported. They cannot come back to Israel for any reason. Then they find out that all efforts to receive the money do not work. The email address used to send their new bank account information never gets answered. The documents that promise payment are fake. There is no formally recognized government operation called Operation Go Home.
The Israeli government denies that they made any promises.
The muslims will be split up and their voices diminished. If they cannot get citizenship, so what? They are no longer Israel’s problem.
Muslims as a group, are easy to deceive. If the Iranian press believes that rural white Americans would rather vote for Ahmadinejad then President Obama, then they will easily believe that someone would pay them a million dollars. I can also see the muslims falling for something like this because it would play towards their sense of entitlement. Curious American said that any plan that requires muslims to act reasonably is doomed. How about a plan that plays on their greed, gullibility and stupidity?
Israel is full of bright, clever and resourceful men and women. They could pull something like this together without a doubt. While President Obama was forcing the Israel to make more concessions and keeping the media attention on him, the PA would wake up one day and find that they no longer had any people.
As for the muslims that refused to go, I would let Napalm Yamit come up with a plan for them.
All in all, a good plan. I like it.
SarahSue
@ CuriousAmerican:
I don’t care if they starve. You Christian Missionaries can then do your stuff if you have the cajones, which I doubt. All you bleeding heart seekers of Muslim souls care about is that the Jews pay for and facilitate your nefarious program.
Why does the transfer of arab muslims from Israel remain unthinkable. Transfer and population exchange was acceptable to the Pakistan India problem, the Kosovo Serb problem. The removal of an ethnicity was acceptable in Kosovo, in the arab nations that expelled Jews, in the continued maintenance of the JEW FREE creation of Jordan, in the current maintenance of arab west bank and gaza. Why is resettlement and absorption of the muslim arabs unacceptable when it has been acceptable to every other refugee? The muslim arab rulers keep the pals from being resettled as a thorn in Israels side. If they are transferred then absorption and resettlement will be forced to commence.
CuriousAmerican Said:
They wont leave voluntarily and the arabs will obstruct their leaving voluntarily. The easiest cheapest solution that can be succesful is first seizing buffer zones across the borders of Gaza and lebanon who are in constant hostiites with Israel. Create temporary camps there like was created for the Jews of Gaza after disengagement. Then with draw forces and leave the UN, arab nations and host countries to deal with the new realities. The new reality will only allow limited options. What will their options be? Many political motives of exploiting the pals will be rendered obsolete. No intifadas can happen in Israel only in the host countries. The only arguments against this solution are “morally” based(falsely,on double standards, I may add). It can be accomplished logistically and all the aid to the “pals” can continue in their new location.
CuriousAmerican Said:
I agree with much of what you say. However if the pals are first unilaterally transferred across the borders they will then have choices of who to fight..Right now their only choice is Israel but once transferred they will also have the choice to fight the govts of the countries of their new residence. This has already happened in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria. The Israelis will deal with them militarily, once transferred, like gaza. They will realize that greater success awaits them in fighting the govt of their new location. The Saudis, and their new locations, will have to choose whether to finance resettlement and absorption or to arm them to fight Israel. If they arm them to fight Israel they are risking the guns being reversed. Your resettlement to SA is one good approach but until they are first transferred to out of Israel no one will be motivated to solve their, or Israels, problems. When their problems are also arab problems solutions will emerge. However, only unilateral initial transfer only will initiate a solution of resettlement outside of Israel. I am looking at this from Israels interests and not the interests of the surrounding nations who are in hostilities with Israel or the pals who keep seeking to eradicate jews from Israel.
Israel cant expect the US to come to conclusions that Israel itself is unable, or unwilling, to arrive at. If I were president I would support militarily my only ally and then stay out saying the 2 sides will have to come to agreement and veto any UN action which seeks to impose a solution. It is in US security interest to support Israel militarily. There is no other reliable,dependable, sustainable, long term base location in the M
Eb>Ted Belman Said:
This can only be accomplished UNILATERALLY by Israel alone. I agree with Curious that no arab/muslim entity or the UN will agree to any resettlement of the pals outside of Israel. However, I also believe that the same detractors to resettlement will also successfully obstruct attempts to resettle aimed at individual arabs. However, if Israel unilaterally transfers the “pals”, as they did the Jews from Gaza, to any of the 3 neighboring belligerents, the uncooperative entities will be then forced to finance absorption, resettlement. Once they are outside of Israel things will change but before that there will be no other agreed solution that will work. I suggest a first stealth transfer which uses the breach of Oslo to nullify Oslo thus enabling the transfer of the PLO and PA which wereallowed back under the Oslo agreement. With Oslo dead no legal reason for them to remain. I suggest that first wave be to gaza which is at constant war with Israel, is de facto a palestinian state. This first wave can even be done in pieces by simply depositing PLO PA deportees across the gaza border.
I am in complete agreement with everything.
@ CuriousAmerican:
You begin by not asking anyone’s permission or acceptance. Tanks and Napalm work well enough. If the Arabs begin to kill other Arabs well to the good.
It will not be the Muslim world. The Muslims refuse to cooperate.
@ Ted Belman:
Create a Jewish agency for the emigration of Arabs to anywhere even if the relocation is a few miles from their current homes. Pay them for property at market values and kill anyone who resists w/out payment to their families.
Let the Arabs fight for their rights against the regimes were they have been forced to settle. They have my permission to use suicide bombers to effect their rights against their Arab brothers and sisters Muslim and Christian makes no difference. An Arab is an Arab.
@ CuriousAmerican:
My view is Islam and Christianity is the same as ‘zeh trefa vezeh nevela’:
Trefa = “animal wounded or diseased”
Nevela = “dead animal”
Neither is consumable under Jewish laws of Kashrut.
Jews have no global ambitions for world hegemony.
For we Jews there seems to be no good option and eventually we would have to war with Assad and or any Baathist just like we will have to war against a Fundamentalist Islamic Syrian regime. Israel should make no pacts or treaties with any Muslim or Christian nation but prepare to fight and destroy all our enemies when the time comes.
@ CuriousAmerican:
Bring em on, they want to reach their Muslim paradise, I am prepared to see them have what they want.
A word curious: Christian Arabs are more Muslim than the Pope in that their visceral hate of the Jews is two fold Arab hated of the Jews and christian hatred of the Jews. We Jews mess up both your crazy theologies.
UNRWA has some – albeit small – control over the text books used. If you get rid of UNRWA, all you will do is pull food from the Palestinians. The Lebanese will let them starve. So will the Jordanians.
Some here would love that, but the Saudis would give them food in exchange for armed resistance.
Rather than assimilate them, the Arabs will blame Israel for their condition, and instead of a meal, they will give them a gun and point them to the border.
The Lebanese TO THIS VERY DAY say the Palestinians should go back to where they came from. I have seen Lebanese say this on YouTube.
You say the Arabs should absorb them. They say they should go back to Palestine.
You are offering rational solutions for an irrational region.
Some here do not care, but all that will happen is that the Palestinians will be emiserated, and they will be more likely to fight.
Desperate people are more likely to fight Israel. Does not matter if they lose, a lot of Jews will get killed.
The solution is to move them out of the Muslim world in a way as to force assimilation in the West.
I would have cut a deal with Assad.
The Ba’athists are the only ones ruthless enough to contain Islamic extremism.
Assad was trained in the West.
All too often the West ignores opportunities.
Assad should have been culled into the West over time.
To seek Assad’s demise now is to invite Salafist radicalism.
We could be energy independent in 10 years EXCEPT FOR LOONEY ENVIRONMENTALISTS
But it will not help the situation.
China, India, and the emerging world will keep the Saudis humming.
It will not be the Muslim world. The Muslims refuse to cooperate.
In 2008 when Condoleeza Rice suggested South America they got upset.
The Palestinians will have to be settled in the non-Muslim world, because the Muslims will actually try to hinder any solution.
South America has a history of assimilating Muslims and Arabs. Right now there is a massive Evangelical Christian Revival going on. This would be the perfect time to do.
I get slammed by everyone, but all the indicators point to sending the 2 million in Judea and Samaria to South America. The Christians in Judea and Samaria – who are not violent as a rule – should be offered enfranchisement in Israel.
There are only 150,000 Christian-Arabs in the contested areas, and they breed slower than Muslims or Jews. Any demographic effect would be eradicated in ten years.
These are the stats
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=a9sY6jg5t68
If the Christians say no to enfranchisement, they could be assimilated into Chile in 10 minutes where there are 3 Christian Palestinians in Chile for every Christian in the West Bank.
Look at this video of Christian Arabs in Chile. They are so rich and respected that German- and Italian-Chileans convert from Roman Catholicism of the Eastern Orthodox Christianity of the Arabs in Chile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0cAlMeHuiU
A lot of those people are not Arab, yet many non-Arabs are converting to Orthodox Christianity in Chile
Pay for them to leave. Cheaper than war.
Totally agreed.
Agreed.
@ CuriousAmerican:You are right. Its a matter of propaganda. The OIC has demanded of all members not to allow the settlement of Palestinians and to keep their identity in tact. I am suggesting that the light should be shone on that.
But we must work to get them resettled elswhere.
Great idea Ted, but how would you do it.
Lebanon will refuse to do it given that Palestinians were a major cause of their civil war.
The Christian Lebanese will absolutely fight the idea. They fight any hint of legislation giving the refugees the most basic rights.
The Shi’a under Hezbollah will refuse to allow in Sunni. The Shia were mistreated by Sunni PLO fighters.
This may be the one area where Christians and Shia agree.
Even if you could force Lebanon, who got stuck with refugees from Jordana and Syria as well, the only effect would be to cause the Christians – who were not even anti-Israel, even in 1948 – to flee. Is that right to Christians of Lebanon who are the least guilty in this sad arrangement?
So you can forget Lebanon.
Syria and the Ba’athists. How are you going to force them.
So you can forget Syria.
Egypt?! Under the Muslim brotherhood.
So you can forget Egypt.
Saudi Arabia refuses to naturalize Palestinians.
Iraq expelled them.
This is all well and dandy, but how are you going to force the Arab states to naturalize them.
The Casablanca Protocols of 1965 declare that no Arab state will naturalize the Palestinians. It recommends that Palestinians be allowed to buy property and hold a job, but a lot of states refuse even that.
Any plan which requires the Arabs to act reasonably is doomed to failure.