<p>Hey, hey, hey – brew – lay off the sauce!</p>
<p>So, Israel is doing the dirty work for the US, getting it all ready for the Iran invasion, by involving Hezbollah and Syria. Do I have al the players? Am I understanding you correctly?</p>
<p>Oops, I forgot. AIPAC controls American foreign policy, and the Jews are taking over the world. Protocols of the Elders of Zion, anyone? Sickening.</p>
<p>Even the Vatican has come out and condemned Israel. Jeez Louise.</p>
<p>For the record, I think Israel is using too much force. I think that destroying electricity, bridges, airports and other infrastructure is inhumane myself.</p>
<p>But, the Arabs have declared war. I still want to know how all this diplomacy and restraint the Israelis are supposed to display should play out. Apparently, they are just supposed to sit and have rockets rained on them daily, suicide bombers waiting at bus stops and restuarants, soldiers kidnapped (er, captured). Certainly they should just take that.</p>
<p>“So, Israel is doing the dirty work for the US, getting it all ready for the Iran invasion, by involving Hezbollah and Syria. Do I have al the players? Am I understanding you correctly?”</p>
<p>Oh, it’s even more than that. I think you need to take a multivalent look at how violent conflicts occur, and why they are “in everyone’s best interest.” For the Israelis, it deflects criticism of their policies (and most recent invasion of) Gaza and the West Bank, and provides an opportunity for what looks like a very inexperienced leadership and defense ministry “to act tough”. It’s just good politics. For Hezbollah, it is a good thing - this is what they are being paid to do. It destablizes the situation in Lebanon, and gives them carte blanche to launch any kind of attack on Israel that they please in the near future. For the Palestinians, it is simply a “see, I told you so”, and creates them impression of their being further aligned with the rest of the Arab world than they in fact are. For the U.S., it is a welcome attempt to take out Hezbollah and provoke Iran, deflect attention from the catastrophe in Iraq, and, ultimately, they hope, support so-called democratic forces in Lebanon. For Syria and Iran, it is another “I told you so”, paints the U.S. into the corner of being supporters of an aggressive Israel (again), which couldn’t come at a more welcome time, as relationships between Sunni Arabs and Shias in the Middle East are very frayed. For Iran, it has the added advantage of deflecting attention away from the so-called nuclear issue. For Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, it is not directly a good thing politically, but it sure raises the price of oil! (It’s good for Texan oil millionaires, too, with resulting increases in contributions to the Republican National Committee.)</p>
<p>It’s a win-win all around!</p>
<p>All-Music - I’d humbly request you lay off the ad hominems. I happen to be Jewish. (And, specifically contrary to your point, I see U.S. policy toward Israel as being profoundly “Christian” in its orientation.)</p>
<p>Mini, I give you a lot of credit for being so completely clear on where you stand: for Iran, against the US and Israel. Hey, I may not agree, but it’s certainly a clear and consistent point of view.</p>
<p>I’m not for or against any of them. I just call it as I see it.</p>
<p>Well said, mini! (your previous post)</p>
<p>My apologies, Mini. I was just using my usual sarcasm, not meaning to sling ad-hominems, if that is how my comments were construed.</p>
<p>Actually, I think your analysis is interesting, because it takes all players into account.</p>
<p>It’s a bit after the fact, but I am curious as to what you think Israel’s response to rockets and suicide bombers should be. This is a sincere question.</p>
<p>Dupe…don’t know how that happened…</p>
<p>It’s a fair question, and not an easy one to approach. I mean, just suppose for a moment, that you lived in Iran and were surrounded by Iranian propaganda but had some fondness for your government or at least the idea of your government (which I think is a pretty good description of the majority of Iranians), and were asked how Palestinians should respond to the takeover of their lands, bulldozing of homes and olive groves, killing of civilians, and holding of thousands of individuals without trial. </p>
<p>The point being the questions one asks, even if they are good ones (they are) depend upon where one is sitting. Five years ago I would have told you I thought the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was solvable - because the two peoples actually have more in common than differences. I could have foreseen a one-state solution (I’ve never seen a two-state one as workable) - the Israelis could use the labor force, the Palestinians a reasonable accommodation into a body politic and an economic life. The wild card in all of this are the Israeli Arabs, and will remain so for several generations. </p>
<p>But as a result of Israeli and/or Palestinian actions (the blame game doesn’t work for me), there has been a mass exodus of Palestinian moderates to other countries. Virtually all the Christians, more than half a million of them, are gone. The land-grabs or security assurances (call 'em what you like) has destablized the Palestinian body politic (and I think that’s what the Israelis wanted), and moved the center of the Palestinian body politic significantly more militant, and more Islamicist, than ever before. (Prior to the last several years, Palestinian Arabs have never been a particularly religious people.) This has been coupled with the catastrophe in Iraq, which has pushed many more Iraqi secularists, and Sunni Arab secularists around the world, into more Islamicist garb. </p>
<p>The thing is, you ask what Israel’s response to rockets and suicide bombers should be, and someone else might ask the question I posed above. The majority of the time, neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians respond to either. Other forces are in play (as I attempted to describe, but things are even more complex than I posed there.)</p>
<p>Tit for tat almost always works for governments - but the problem is that real people get “titted and tatted”. As in “deaded”. At some point, someone stands up and says the war gods have been propitiated, and it’s time to move on.</p>
<p>Hamas, Hezbolla, Syria, and Iran may not believe the Holocaust happened, but they definitly have it in the works</p>
<p>Do any of the Arab countries care a whit about their Palestinian brothers, though? Most other Muslim countries only use the I/P situation to further their own political agendas, not because they really care about the mowed down Palestinian olive trees, don’t you think? </p>
<p>The rampant Israeli hatred that is systemic in Islamic countries, is like a disease. The Israelis have made plenty of mistakes in the past 60 years, but the hatred existed before day one, despite the common semitic background of both peoples. Jews lived in dhimmi status in Arab countries long before Israel was created, and were expelled, almost a million of them, in 1948 or shortly thereafter.</p>
<p>So, in some respects, I still don’t know what the Israelis could have done differently, or could do now, because my pessimism says that the whole scenario was doomed from the start.</p>
<p>“Do any of the Arab countries care a whit about their Palestinian brothers, though? Most other Muslim countries only use the I/P situation to further their own political agendas, not because they really care about the mowed down Palestinian olive trees, don’t you think?”</p>
<p>Oh, yes! And I don’t believe that the “Christian” U.S. government really gives a darn about Israel either, except to further its own political agenda. Actually, it is not necessary to make such extreme statements - rather I think the other Arab countries care about Palestine to about the same degree the U.S. really cares about Israel - the difference being that Arab countries benefit politically from Palestinian sorrows, and the U.S. benefits politically from Israel being an armed camp and surrogate for its interests.</p>
<p>It’s not a matter of what anyone could have done differently - one can’t go back - but what the future may hold. The biggest hurt that Israel could put on the rest of the Arab world would be to create a peaceful and extremely prosperous Palestinian minority within its borders, a model for the rest of the world to admire.</p>
<p>mini–likely statements about the US government and testament to the power and backing of powerful pro-Israel groups. But don’t you think the political connection of the Arab neighbors is far more emotional and visceral? </p>
<p>An article from the Times this morning, following on my initial worries.</p>
<p>Concerns About Olmert’s Military Judgement</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And marite…have you already commented on Chirac’s Bastille statement?</p>
<p>Oh, I know all about the care and concern that the rapturists have for Israel…once Jesus is returned to Israel, only 144 Jews will be “saved” and the rest go to hell! Fat lot of care.</p>
<p>Israel suits the geopolitical and corporate interests of the US. I totally agree with that, and completely believe that once Israel is no longer necessary, she will get a very cold shoulder and need to go it alone. That will make for some very interesting times.</p>
<p>How might Israel include a Palestinian minority within its borders? Demographically, the Palestinian population is growing at least twice as fast as the Israeli Jewish population. I think I read somewhere once that, at this rate, the Palestinian population will increase 55% in the next ten years or so, whereas the Jewish birthrate is more constant. Palestinians will outnumber Israeli Jews by several million in ten or so years.</p>
<p>Which is why <em>I</em> think the conflict continues, and why the Palestinians have no desire to make peace. The Palestinians have demographics on their side. This is the opinion of a good friend’s husband, who was born in a refugee camp in Gaza and now lives in the US. He believes this about demographics and he may well be right.</p>
<p>True, though many countries surrounded by hostile neighbors use social engineering to balance precise population ratios. Singapore, for example, with an army trained by the Israelis, surrounded by Muslim nations; it uses a variety of social welfare policies to maintain exactly 77% full Chinese. Mind you, they fly under the media/G8 radar with these policies where Israel cannot.</p>
<p>The US will never abandon Israel. Never. However, if China eclipses American dominance in coming centuries, Israel will cease to exist.</p>
<p>“But don’t you think the political connection of the Arab neighbors is far more emotional and visceral?”</p>
<p>I don’t think it was. In fact, the Saudis and Kuwaitis and Iraqis and Egyptians had all been giving the Palestinians the cold shoulder for several decades. But I think it is much more the case now, with the catastrophic U.S. occupation of Iraq. The Palestinians themselves (as noted) have become far more Islamicist than they used to be, and far less secular, thanks to a combination of Israeli, Palestinian, and U.S. policy. </p>
<p>“The Palestinians have demographics on their side.” </p>
<p>As already noted, I think Israeli Arabs have demographics on their side, even if the Palestinians didn’t exist. And always have, which is one of the reasons Israel governs without a constitution. But that demographic reality is a reason for the Israelis to make peace, not war. Note - I said the Israelis, not their government. Governments always have good reasons for making war, as do guerrillas (or “insurgents”). There are always “reasons” if you want to find them.</p>
<p>The point is - Israel has that Palestinian minority within its borders now - one that has become impoverished and embittered. It is hard to see how the people of Israel are better off as a result of this process (though it is easy to see how their government is.) The demographics suggest the Israeli people are in a better position to make peace now than they will be 10-20 years down the road. But it’s hard to see, especially when the interests of the United States (government) may no longer converge with those of Israel.</p>
<p>Ah, my bad. I didn’t realize you were talking about demographics as they relate to the Israeli Arabs (as oppposed to the Palestinian Arabs), but of course, you are 100% correct.</p>
<p>Demographics present a pesky problem, I concur, and yes, this is one that doesn’t bode well for the future, with birth patterns being as they are.</p>
<p>I still do not see how one makes peace with so much neighboring hostility. Do you really believe that the violence and hatred would end, even if Israel pulled back to the 1967 borders completely, including all the WB and East Jeruselum? I think recent events alone, the shelling and solider capture from Gaza, and the Hezbollah capture, which both occurred within Israel’s 1967 borders, reflect the true intent of Israel’s neighbors.</p>
<p>I just don’t know how one makes peace, in whatever form peace could possibly exist, with that much hostility. But I am always interested in the ideas of others, who feel that it could. I’m worn out and pessimistic at this point, but still have a shred of optimism that reveals itself now and again.</p>
<p>“I think recent events alone, the shelling and solider capture from Gaza, and the Hezbollah capture, which both occurred within Israel’s 1967 borders, reflect the true intent of Israel’s neighbors.”</p>
<p>Again - shake up your perspective, and name two events (doesn’t matter which ones) from an Iranian perspective, would reflect the true (malevolent) intent of Israel (and the United States). </p>
<p>One makes peace because it is in one’s interest to do so. As noted, I don’t think the borders are really the issue (though both Israeli and Palestinian governments would have you believe it is). </p>
<p>Again, some perspective. The second largest Islamic country in the world, and the largest democracy in the world are the same country - India. They have a 90% Hindu majority, a Muslim President, and a Sikh Prime Minister. Now try to think back to the slaughters of 1948 and imagine how that would ever be possible.</p>