- Reaction score
- 4,336
- Points
- 1,160
I think Jonathan Kay's analysis of Hamas' share of the outcome is quite valid. But I remain convinced that the IMF loan to Egypt was the most significant event of that week in the Middle East.
14 Nov 12: Israel Launches Operations in Gaza
- Thread starter muskrat89
- Start date
Infanteer said:
Well that, and the UN recognized them as a state. 138 FOR , 9 AGAINST and 41 ABSTAINED. Time for us to get on the right side of history.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/11/29/un-palestinian-state-israel-vote.html
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Nemo888 said:
Hmm, let's see...
I'm not informed enough to be pedantic, but I'm pretty sure those are the guys Hamas was throwing out of windows, murdering in their homes, and gunning down in the streets.
Having been violently ousted by Hamas from Gaza, the Palestinian Authority is only sovereign over the West Bank. Recognizing them as a state is in absolutely no way an endorsement of Hamas; quite the opposite, if anything.
- Reaction score
- 4,336
- Points
- 1,160
In my opinion, which is not anywhere near as well informed as I would wish, the whole Islamic Crescent is in a crisis:
1. There are sectarian disputes in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, and in Malaysia ~ especially between those who want to retain Asian traditions and those who want to impose Arabic culture under the guise of religious orthodoxy;
2. There are (still very small) revolts in some Philippines provinces and in the Malaysia/Thai border region;
3. There is a separatist movement in the far West of China (in Xinjiang province which borders Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (and even, for a wee bit, Afghanistan));
4. There is civil unrest in all the Stans, Afghanistan being in the worst shape;
5. Iran is spreading trouble and strife throughout West Asia and the Middle East;
6. The Arab Spring series of revolts still paralyzes the Middle East and North Africa;
7. Turkey may be challenging Egypt for leadership in the regions; and
8. Hams and Hezbollah engage Israel but threaten everyone.
It looks, to me, like a series of small crises which could, at almost any time, combine into an explosion. If you take a Clash of Civilizations view of the world then such and explosion is a "good thing" for the US led West because it turns Muslim rage inwards, against itself.
It may be, for those who see the world through a more cultural lens, that it may be that an (inevitable?) religious war between Sunni and Shia Muslims is be starting and this may coincide with a religious reformation which may (a lot of "mays" here) lead to an intellectual enlightenment. That, reformation + enlightenment, is also a "good thing."
1. There are sectarian disputes in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, and in Malaysia ~ especially between those who want to retain Asian traditions and those who want to impose Arabic culture under the guise of religious orthodoxy;
2. There are (still very small) revolts in some Philippines provinces and in the Malaysia/Thai border region;
3. There is a separatist movement in the far West of China (in Xinjiang province which borders Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (and even, for a wee bit, Afghanistan));
4. There is civil unrest in all the Stans, Afghanistan being in the worst shape;
5. Iran is spreading trouble and strife throughout West Asia and the Middle East;
6. The Arab Spring series of revolts still paralyzes the Middle East and North Africa;
7. Turkey may be challenging Egypt for leadership in the regions; and
8. Hams and Hezbollah engage Israel but threaten everyone.
It looks, to me, like a series of small crises which could, at almost any time, combine into an explosion. If you take a Clash of Civilizations view of the world then such and explosion is a "good thing" for the US led West because it turns Muslim rage inwards, against itself.
It may be, for those who see the world through a more cultural lens, that it may be that an (inevitable?) religious war between Sunni and Shia Muslims is be starting and this may coincide with a religious reformation which may (a lot of "mays" here) lead to an intellectual enlightenment. That, reformation + enlightenment, is also a "good thing."
- Reaction score
- 3,104
- Points
- 1,160
Or, it may lead to a (further?) descent into barbarism, and, given that area's track record over the last bunch of centuries, I'm not optimistic.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
An interesting counterpoint to what Edward said is in Robert Kaplan's new book "The Revenge of Geography"
Iran and Turkey both demographically and economically dominate the Middle East (and in the case of Turkey control much of the water as well). Their geographical positions also give them a huge advantage in the 21rst century in terms of "position", since they can act as hubs between multiple regions to transfer oil, natural gas and water throughout the region to markets in Europe, India and Asia.
These are very powerful advantages, which suggest that regardless of what happens in the rest of the Middle East, these two nations will have strategic advantages over the rest. The fact they are both the cores of ancient states/empires and have relatively homogenous, non Arab populations also suggest they will remain stable despite the turmoil around them.
How this plays out if the rest of the region descends into chaos (especially a war or series of religious wars) is harder to fathom, Iran and Turkey are on opposite sides of the Shiite/Sunni divide, and are historic rivals as well, but neither would relish the thought of having their infrastructure and access to markets disrupted. I suspect that they might play the game though various proxies, letting the Arabs (and maybe the Kurds) do their dirty work for them.
If you read Kaplan, he sketches out a more hopeful scenario based on mutual interests, but human nature being what it is I suspect that would be an outside probability.
Iran and Turkey both demographically and economically dominate the Middle East (and in the case of Turkey control much of the water as well). Their geographical positions also give them a huge advantage in the 21rst century in terms of "position", since they can act as hubs between multiple regions to transfer oil, natural gas and water throughout the region to markets in Europe, India and Asia.
These are very powerful advantages, which suggest that regardless of what happens in the rest of the Middle East, these two nations will have strategic advantages over the rest. The fact they are both the cores of ancient states/empires and have relatively homogenous, non Arab populations also suggest they will remain stable despite the turmoil around them.
How this plays out if the rest of the region descends into chaos (especially a war or series of religious wars) is harder to fathom, Iran and Turkey are on opposite sides of the Shiite/Sunni divide, and are historic rivals as well, but neither would relish the thought of having their infrastructure and access to markets disrupted. I suspect that they might play the game though various proxies, letting the Arabs (and maybe the Kurds) do their dirty work for them.
If you read Kaplan, he sketches out a more hopeful scenario based on mutual interests, but human nature being what it is I suspect that would be an outside probability.
Interesting news on Iron Dome . . . First I have heard the system in place right now is Pre Beta.
http://www.iag-inc.com/2012/11/30/iron-dome/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Don't tell the media that military kit is used even if it isn't 100% perfect by the book.
Can you say F-35 Helmet?
http://www.iag-inc.com/2012/11/30/iron-dome/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Don't tell the media that military kit is used even if it isn't 100% perfect by the book.
Can you say F-35 Helmet?
- Reaction score
- 4,336
- Points
- 1,160
My opinion: Israel is, at this moment, on the wrong track.
Israel's strategic interest is, put simply, survival. There is an old saying that Israel must win every war but the Arabs only need to get lucky once. There's a lot of truth in that. To raise the odds for survival Israel needs to reduce the number (and strength) of its enemies. The Palestinian Authority (Mahmoud Abbas, et al in the West Bank) need not be an enemy. Hamas and Hezbollah are strong, committed enemies and they must be weakened and, eventually defeated. Ditto Iran.
Now is the time to make peace - a generous peace - with the West Bank. In my opinion the primary condition of a generous peace, a peace the Palestinian Authority cannot refuse, is the unilateral establishment of a fair border. The existing wall provides most of that. The wall needs to be completed but it must exclude many, many Israeli settlements that hang like appendices deep in the West Bank. Big settlements like Ariel (pop 15,000+) must be abandoned. The new border will still be unpopular with the Palestinians and the Europeans and it will take (steal if you like) bits land that the Palestinians, with considerable justification, regard as their own. But it, a secure, defensible border, is an essential first step. I highly doubt that a negotiated border is possible so an imposed one - a fact on the ground - is the next best thing. The other conditions for peace, it seems to me, are easier. Abandoning many settlements is a HUGE political price for Israel, and Netanyahu may be one of the very few Israeli leaders with enough political capital amongst the settlers to manage it - but it will cost him his job. Mahmoud Abbas will also lose his job if he accepts such a peace but both he and Netanyahu must know that they, their countries, both need peace and they need it sooner rather than later.
Israel then needs to help the Palestinian Authority re-establish its political power base in Gaza. Targeted, covert, assassinations and financial espionage (mainly in European banks) are the best way Israel can help.
Then Israel can focus on making peace, of sorts, with whoever takes power in Syria.
That will leave Iran and its state sponsored terrorist groups. Israel can survive them.
My :2c:
Israel's strategic interest is, put simply, survival. There is an old saying that Israel must win every war but the Arabs only need to get lucky once. There's a lot of truth in that. To raise the odds for survival Israel needs to reduce the number (and strength) of its enemies. The Palestinian Authority (Mahmoud Abbas, et al in the West Bank) need not be an enemy. Hamas and Hezbollah are strong, committed enemies and they must be weakened and, eventually defeated. Ditto Iran.
Now is the time to make peace - a generous peace - with the West Bank. In my opinion the primary condition of a generous peace, a peace the Palestinian Authority cannot refuse, is the unilateral establishment of a fair border. The existing wall provides most of that. The wall needs to be completed but it must exclude many, many Israeli settlements that hang like appendices deep in the West Bank. Big settlements like Ariel (pop 15,000+) must be abandoned. The new border will still be unpopular with the Palestinians and the Europeans and it will take (steal if you like) bits land that the Palestinians, with considerable justification, regard as their own. But it, a secure, defensible border, is an essential first step. I highly doubt that a negotiated border is possible so an imposed one - a fact on the ground - is the next best thing. The other conditions for peace, it seems to me, are easier. Abandoning many settlements is a HUGE political price for Israel, and Netanyahu may be one of the very few Israeli leaders with enough political capital amongst the settlers to manage it - but it will cost him his job. Mahmoud Abbas will also lose his job if he accepts such a peace but both he and Netanyahu must know that they, their countries, both need peace and they need it sooner rather than later.
Israel then needs to help the Palestinian Authority re-establish its political power base in Gaza. Targeted, covert, assassinations and financial espionage (mainly in European banks) are the best way Israel can help.
Then Israel can focus on making peace, of sorts, with whoever takes power in Syria.
That will leave Iran and its state sponsored terrorist groups. Israel can survive them.
My :2c:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I'll qoute wikipedia, and another sight and add some notes on Hamas of my own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
Hamas's 1988 charter calls for the replacement of Israel and the Palestinian Territories with an Islamic Palestinian state. After the elections in 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a "temporary two-state solution", and stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it."[54] Xinhua reports that Al-Zahar "did not rule out the possibility of having Jews, Muslims and Christians living under the sovereignty of an Islamic state."[54] In late 2006, Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas, said that if a Palestinian state was formed within the 1967 lines, Hamas was willing to declare a truce that could last as long as 20 years, and stated that Hamas will never recognize the "usurper Zionist government" and will continue "jihad-like movement until the liberation of Jerusalem"
http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html
Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences
[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.” From time to time a clamoring is voiced, to hold an International Conference in search for a solution to the problem. Some accept the idea, others reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the implementation of this or that condition, as a prerequisite for agreeing to convene the Conference or for participating in it. But the Islamic Resistance Movement, which is aware of the [prospective] parties to this conference, and of their past and present positions towards the problems of the Muslims, does not believe that those conferences are capable of responding to demands, or of restoring rights or doing justice to the oppressed. Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the nonbelievers as arbitrators in the lands of Islam. Since when did the Unbelievers do justice to the Believers? “And the Jews will not be pleased with thee, nor will the Christians, till thou follow their creed. Say: Lo! the guidance of Allah [himself] is the Guidance. And if you should follow their desires after the knowledge which has come unto thee, then you would have from Allah no protecting friend nor helper.” Sura 2 (the Cow), verse 120 There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility. The Palestinian people are too noble to have their future, their right and their destiny submitted to a vain game. As the hadith has it: “The people of Syria are Allah’s whip on this land; He takes revenge by their intermediary from whoever he wished among his worshipers. The Hypocrites among them are forbidden from vanquishing the true believers, and they will die in anxiety and sorrow.” (Told by Tabarani, who is traceable in ascending order of traditionaries to Muhammad, and by Ahmed whose chain of transmission is incomplete. But it is bound to be a true hadith, for both story tellers are reliable. Allah knows best.)
The highlights are mine in bold. This second link is from the Hamas Charter. How do you achieve peace with someone who thinks like this?
my 2 cents says Hamas has no interest in peace. If they did why would that put stuff like this in the charter, If you read the whole charter it gets worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
Hamas's 1988 charter calls for the replacement of Israel and the Palestinian Territories with an Islamic Palestinian state. After the elections in 2006, Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a "temporary two-state solution", and stated that he dreamed "of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it."[54] Xinhua reports that Al-Zahar "did not rule out the possibility of having Jews, Muslims and Christians living under the sovereignty of an Islamic state."[54] In late 2006, Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas, said that if a Palestinian state was formed within the 1967 lines, Hamas was willing to declare a truce that could last as long as 20 years, and stated that Hamas will never recognize the "usurper Zionist government" and will continue "jihad-like movement until the liberation of Jerusalem"
http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html
Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences
[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.” From time to time a clamoring is voiced, to hold an International Conference in search for a solution to the problem. Some accept the idea, others reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the implementation of this or that condition, as a prerequisite for agreeing to convene the Conference or for participating in it. But the Islamic Resistance Movement, which is aware of the [prospective] parties to this conference, and of their past and present positions towards the problems of the Muslims, does not believe that those conferences are capable of responding to demands, or of restoring rights or doing justice to the oppressed. Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the nonbelievers as arbitrators in the lands of Islam. Since when did the Unbelievers do justice to the Believers? “And the Jews will not be pleased with thee, nor will the Christians, till thou follow their creed. Say: Lo! the guidance of Allah [himself] is the Guidance. And if you should follow their desires after the knowledge which has come unto thee, then you would have from Allah no protecting friend nor helper.” Sura 2 (the Cow), verse 120 There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility. The Palestinian people are too noble to have their future, their right and their destiny submitted to a vain game. As the hadith has it: “The people of Syria are Allah’s whip on this land; He takes revenge by their intermediary from whoever he wished among his worshipers. The Hypocrites among them are forbidden from vanquishing the true believers, and they will die in anxiety and sorrow.” (Told by Tabarani, who is traceable in ascending order of traditionaries to Muhammad, and by Ahmed whose chain of transmission is incomplete. But it is bound to be a true hadith, for both story tellers are reliable. Allah knows best.)
The highlights are mine in bold. This second link is from the Hamas Charter. How do you achieve peace with someone who thinks like this?
my 2 cents says Hamas has no interest in peace. If they did why would that put stuff like this in the charter, If you read the whole charter it gets worse.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
Not to Pick nits, but do not forget that what you are reading is someone's translation of a document in another language, so things can get lost or misinterpreted in translation.
Not that I support Hamas or it's declared aims. But you always need to consider the source, particularly if it involves translated materials.
Not that I support Hamas or it's declared aims. But you always need to consider the source, particularly if it involves translated materials.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
cupper said:
That's fair, I will translate it out from Arabic using Google and post the results. The translation will be in the raw form this way. Slightly harder to read although still manageable.
This section of Charter in Arabic from http://www.aljazeera.net/specialfiles/pages/0b4f24e4-7c14-4f50-a831-ea2b6e73217d
الحلول السلمية، والمبادرات، والمؤتمرات الدولية:
المادة الثالثة عشرة:
تتعارض المبادرات، وما يسمى بالحلول السلمية والمؤتمرات الدولية لحل القضية الفلسطينية مع عقيدة حركة المقاومة الإسلامية، فالتفريط في أي جزء من فلسطين تفريط في جزء من الدين، فوطنية حركة المقاومة الإسلامية جزء من دينها، على ذلك تربى أفرادها، ولرفع راية الله فوق وطنهم يجاهدون.
?واللهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمْرِهِ وَلكِنَّ أكثر النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ? (يوسف: 21).
وتثار من حين لآخر الدعوة لعقد مؤتمر دولي للنظر في حل القضية، فيقبل من يقبل ويرفض من يرفض لسبب أو لآخر، مطالبًا بتحقيق شرط أو شروط، ليوافق على عقد المؤتمر والمشاركة فيه. وحركة المقاومة الإسلامية لمعرفتها بالأطراف التي يتكون منها المؤتمر، وماضي وحاضر مواقفها من قضايا المسلمين، لا ترى أن تلك المؤتمرات يمكن أن تحقق المطالب أو تعيد الحقوق، أو تنصف المظلوم، وما تلك المؤتمرات إلا نوع من أنواع تحكيم أهل الكفر في أرض المسلمين، ومتى أنصف أهل الكفر أهل الإيمان؟
?ولَنْ تَرْضَى عَنْكَ اليهودُ وَلاَ النَّصَارَى حتَّى تَتَّبعَ مِلَّتَهُم قُل إنَّ هُدَى اللهِ هُوَ الهُدَى وَلَئِن اتَّبَعْتَ أَهْوَاءهُم بَعْدَ الذي جَاءَكَ مِنَ العِلْمِ مَا لَكَ من اللهِ من وَلِيٍّ وَلاَ نَصِيرٍ? (البقرة: 120).
ولا حل للقضية الفلسطينية إلا بالجهاد، أما المبادرات والطروحات والمؤتمرات الدولية، فمضيعة للوقت، وعبث من العبث. والشعب الفلسطيني أكرم من أن يعبث بمستقبله، وحقه ومصيره. وفي الحديث الشريف "أهل الشام سوط في أرضه ينتقم بهم ممن يشاء من عباده وحرام على منافقيهم أن يظهروا على مؤمنيهم ولا يموتوا إلا همًا وغمًا". (رواه: الطبراني مرفوعًا وأحمد موقوفًا، ولعله الصواب، ورواتهما ثقات، والله أعلم).
لى هذا الأساس الذي تعبأ فيه إمكانات الدوائر الثلاث، فإن الأوضاع الحالية ستتغير، ويقترب يوم التحرير.
End Result after running the language through http://translate.google.com/
Peaceful solutions, and initiatives, and international conferences:
Article XIII:
Contradict initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences to resolve the Palestinian issue with the doctrine of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Valtafrat in any part of Palestine overcook part of religion, Fotunaih Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its debt, it reared its members, and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland struggling.
? Allah has ordered, but most people do not know? (Yusuf: 21).
And raised from time to time call for an international conference to consider in resolving the issue, Tribal accept refuse from refuse for one reason or another, calling for the achievement of a condition or conditions, to approve the contract and participation in the conference. The Islamic Resistance Movement to know the parties that make up the conference, and past and present positions of Muslim issues, does not believe that these conferences can achieve demands or return rights, or do justice to the oppressed, and those conferences only type of Arbitration people of disbelief in the land of Muslims, and when did justice the people of disbelief people of faith?
? You will not be satisfied with the Jews nor the Christians until you follow their religion Say God is Huda Huda While followed their own lusts after which comes from knowing what you God or helper? (Baqarah: 120).
There is no solution for the Palestinian cause but jihad, and the initiatives and proposals and international conferences, time فمضيعة, and the futility of tampering. The Palestinian people Akram of tampering with his future, and his right and his fate. In the Hadith, "the people of Syria whip in their home avenge those whom He will of His slaves and haram Manafiqihm to show their underwriters and die only two mines." (Narrated by: Tabaraani brought Ahmed suspended, and perhaps the right thing, and trustworthy Roathma, and God knows best).
Lee This is the basis on which the potential packed three circles, the current situation will change, and is approaching the day of liberation.
- Reaction score
- 4,336
- Points
- 1,160
There is a longish article in the National Post headlined ‘Where was the outrage?’ As hundreds of thousands cheer Hamas chief in Gaza, world remains silent: Israel. The article cites a recent series of appearance and speeches by Hamas leader-in-exile Khaled Meshaal and Ismail Haniya. Hamas' leader in the Gaza Strip that, quite explicitly, called for the destruction of Israel and pledged never to accept a two-state solution. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is quoted as wondering "Where was the outrage? Where were the UN resolutions?"
It's a fair question that points to the hypocrisy and, I suggest, racism in the US led West. Not anti-Semitism, rather simple racism: we Westerners hold the israelis to a much higher standard than the one to which we hold Arabs. Quite simply: israelis are "like us" and the Arabs are ... well a bit "less" than us, unable to be held to "our" standards. We "know" that the Arabs will lie and go back on their word but we "excuse" them because ... because, being Arabs, they are not quite as "good" as us. It is pure, simple, institutional racism.
"Meanwhile," the article ends, "the European Union warned Israel of unspecified consequences if it went through with plans to build thousands of new homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank. The bloc’s 27 foreign ministers said in a statement, “The EU will closely monitor the situation and its broader implications and act accordingly.”
If you don't like the racism argument then you must, at the very least, accept that President Obama and the lesser leaders of the West are hypocrites.
It's a fair question that points to the hypocrisy and, I suggest, racism in the US led West. Not anti-Semitism, rather simple racism: we Westerners hold the israelis to a much higher standard than the one to which we hold Arabs. Quite simply: israelis are "like us" and the Arabs are ... well a bit "less" than us, unable to be held to "our" standards. We "know" that the Arabs will lie and go back on their word but we "excuse" them because ... because, being Arabs, they are not quite as "good" as us. It is pure, simple, institutional racism.
"Meanwhile," the article ends, "the European Union warned Israel of unspecified consequences if it went through with plans to build thousands of new homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank. The bloc’s 27 foreign ministers said in a statement, “The EU will closely monitor the situation and its broader implications and act accordingly.”
If you don't like the racism argument then you must, at the very least, accept that President Obama and the lesser leaders of the West are hypocrites.
- Reaction score
- 2,389
- Points
- 940
An article by Eitan Shamir (Office of the Prime Minister, Jerusalem) in Infinity Journal, states that those who interpret Israel's handling of Hamas through the lens of either a population-centric or an enemy-centric approach will most likely get it wrong. Israel assumes that neither the population will reduce its ideological support for such organizations, nor can the smuggling of rockets/mortars be eliminated.
Rather, the aim is simple deterrence: "The Israeli approach is much more limited and is primarily designed to merely persuade the other side that any action against Israel will result in a high price – thus achieving deterrence."1
Based on Lebanon '06 and Gaza '08, it seems to work for short periods, which is probably all Israel can hope for, regardless of the hand-wringing and finger-pointing coming from dubiously effective organizations like the UN or EU.
[size=8pt]1. Eitan Shamir, "Coping with Nonstate Actors," Infinity Journal, Issue No. 2, Spring 2011, p. 8.
Rather, the aim is simple deterrence: "The Israeli approach is much more limited and is primarily designed to merely persuade the other side that any action against Israel will result in a high price – thus achieving deterrence."1
Based on Lebanon '06 and Gaza '08, it seems to work for short periods, which is probably all Israel can hope for, regardless of the hand-wringing and finger-pointing coming from dubiously effective organizations like the UN or EU.
[size=8pt]1. Eitan Shamir, "Coping with Nonstate Actors," Infinity Journal, Issue No. 2, Spring 2011, p. 8.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
This blogger wonders if the recent recognition of "Palestine" by the UN hasn't set the stage for an even longer and more terrible war between Israel and her enemies. Between this, an almost unlimited supply of arms and money from oil rich nations like Iran or radicals in the Gulf (not to mention lots of manpower from various Jihadi groups eager to be in on the kill) and the ability to receive favourable coverage from the world press, there seem to be very few reasons for the Palestinians to exercise restraint.
Perhaps the only true solution would be a "Roman Peace", but the reaction to that would only compound the initial problem.
http://www.russ-campbell.net/2012/12/un-set-stage-for-war-in-palestine.html
Perhaps the only true solution would be a "Roman Peace", but the reaction to that would only compound the initial problem.
http://www.russ-campbell.net/2012/12/un-set-stage-for-war-in-palestine.html
- Reaction score
- 9,199
- Points
- 1,260
Journeyman said:
Well, Infinity Journal does publish high quality works.
It's funny, for all its foibles, the 2006 invasion of Lebanon is, politically, a success; not only has there been nothing of interest cast from South Lebanon, but Hezbollah clearly didn't see value in taking advantage of Israel's attention to Gaza in 08 and 12.
Sometimes deterrence is all you need - it worked from 1945-1991.
- Reaction score
- 2,389
- Points
- 940
The author appeared to have some insight on the Israeli perspective....Infanteer said:Well, Infinity Journal does publish high quality works.
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
Lawrence Solomon suggests there is a perverse incentive for the Palestinians to reject an actual peace and two state solution; foreign money. This reminds me a bit of my early experience doing UN Peacekeeping in Cyprus. There was a lot of protest theater by both sides to convince the UN it was still needed, and the UN obligingly spent millions of dollars on the island to maintain the peacekeeping force and infrastructure. The Ledra Palace hotel was still a ruin in 1989 when I was there, despite having been in UN hands since 1974 and the UN paying a huge yearly rental to the owners there was still no water pressure past the third floor and the elevator did not work in the section we lived in (two quick memories). There was no political movement for peace or reconciliation in the island because there was no incentive to do so, but lots of incentive to encourage the UN to remain.
Maybe we need to eliminate the payments the Palestinians receive and watch their entire outlook and behaviour change:
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/12/14/lawrence-solomon-two-state-solution-benefits-only-israel/
Maybe we need to eliminate the payments the Palestinians receive and watch their entire outlook and behaviour change:
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/12/14/lawrence-solomon-two-state-solution-benefits-only-israel/
I'm a little confused by what Mr. Solomon is trying to say. The tone of the article seems to be condescending, like an audience member in a poker tournament who knows what cards everybody holds. He does not outright denounce to a two-state solution yet it is implied that peace would not be in Palestine's favor. Then would that mean he is in favor of prolonging conflict between the two states? According to the provided statistics, it certainly appears to be the wise economic choice. I can understand why he is reluctant to suggest that they continue killing each other, even though he believes it to be the best financial outcome for a percentage of the Palestinian people. But is throwing money in their general direction the goal here?
In the closing remarks Mr. Solomon posits two points for the state of Palestine to thrive. It must have been made in jest because he knows that neither will occur. Then, was the article written for the sake of satire - or comedy, even? If not, then what he is saying is that Palestinians shall never thrive and that both external and internal factors contribute to it.
It is written with no consideration for the humanity of the parties involved. Mr. Solomon writes as though he lives in a world where people, emotions and feelings can be bought or traded for money. As though all the hate that has built up - due to religious texts or otherwise - could be brushed aside if only the Palestinians could see the greater good.
And this is not about the world being unfair by holding Israel to a higher standard. Israel, as proven in the article, is doing quite well. They are living at a higher standard across the spectrum regardless of how you define success and that is precisely why the world does not treat both states as equals.
In the closing remarks Mr. Solomon posits two points for the state of Palestine to thrive. It must have been made in jest because he knows that neither will occur. Then, was the article written for the sake of satire - or comedy, even? If not, then what he is saying is that Palestinians shall never thrive and that both external and internal factors contribute to it.
It is written with no consideration for the humanity of the parties involved. Mr. Solomon writes as though he lives in a world where people, emotions and feelings can be bought or traded for money. As though all the hate that has built up - due to religious texts or otherwise - could be brushed aside if only the Palestinians could see the greater good.
And this is not about the world being unfair by holding Israel to a higher standard. Israel, as proven in the article, is doing quite well. They are living at a higher standard across the spectrum regardless of how you define success and that is precisely why the world does not treat both states as equals.
