Why Lifting the Israeli ‘Occupation’ Won’t Stop Violence

There seems to be a wide misconception that the Middle East conflict is complicated.  In fact it is really rather simple.  Indeed, one can basically summarize and explain the entire conflict within the context of the words “occupation” or “occupied territories” and with respect to beliefs about the effects of such “occupation.”

Let me explain.  For most of the past 46 years (since 1967), there has been something of a universal consensus among those agreeing that removing or eliminating the Israeli “occupation” over the West Bank and Gaza, areas dubbed “The Occupied Palestinian Territories,” would reduce tensions and make the region more tranquil, possibly leading to full peace between Israel and its neighbors.  Let us dub this theory the Removal of Occupation Lowers Violence (henceforth the ROLV) Axiom.

It would be hard to exaggerate how broad the ROLV consensus is in the world.  Outside of Israel it is essentially universal.  Even within Israel, for much of the past two generations this ROLV has been the consensus position of the bulk of the Israeli political spectrum.  Almost all Israeli parties have long agreed, certainly since the “Oslo Accords” of the early 1990s, that the key to reducing tensions between Israel and the Arab world is via partial or total removal of Israeli “occupation” of those territories.   With the exception of small parties on the Israeli Right, basically the entire Israeli political elite, including Bibi Netanyahu and the Likud, is at least nominally committed to the ROLV axiom.   In this sense, (Israeli President) Shimon Peres’ recent pronouncement that there is near consensus in Israel behind the so-called “two-state solution” was only partly his imagination.   (The President in Israel is little more than an honorary post like the queen of Holland, whereas the real head of state is the Prime Minister, and so Peres really represents no one.)  While acceptance of the ROLV axiom, holding that removal of occupation leads to reduction in violence, is not quite the same thing as the “Two-State Solution” that Peres advocates, its broad acceptance by so many Israeli political parties provides a small basis for Peres’ grandstanding.

Everything needed to understand the Middle East conflict can be grasped if one bears in mind that near-universal consensus behind ROLV and one second fact.   The second fact is that the international consensus about removal of Israeli occupation is empirically false and nearly all Israelis understand that it is false.

It is somewhat difficult to document exactly what Israelis think about the “removal of occupation” and the so-called Two-State Solution.  Many of the public opinion polls in Israel are deliberated distorted by people with an ideological axe to grind, one that precludes asking candidly what Israelis think.   An example was a recent poll that asked what the respondent would think about a Palestinian state if it were to be effectively demilitarized, proclaimed its friendly intentions towards Israel, and proved its intentions over a long testing period.  The question was science fiction; it was like asking how you would respond if friendly space aliens landed in a flying saucer on your lawn and offered you a Starbucks.   So it was not surprising when fewer than half of Israelis said that even then they would still be opposed to a Palestinian state.

Occasionally the truth seeps through, such as in another recent poll in which Israeli Jews opposing the “Two State Solution” outnumbered those who endorse it by between 6 and 10 to one.

The simple truth of the matter is that almost all Israelis by now understand clearly that removal of Israeli occupation does not reduce violence, but rather it escalates violence.  Almost all Israelis understand that a cut-and-paste job of the unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza applied to the West Bank, which is pretty much what the whole world is demanding (including the Obama administration), would result in tens of thousands of rockets and missiles fired at the Jews of Israel by the Arabs in those “liberated territories.”    And probably also weapons of mass destruction.  The universal ROLV axiom is simply wrong and almost all Israelis realize it is wrong, even if nearly 100% of the rest of the world thinks it is correct.

And wrong it is.  The unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza proved better than any controlled laboratory experiment how invalid ROLV is and what the real effect of “ending occupation” is.   True, the anti-Semites and their terrorist allies claim Israel never really relinquished its occupation over the Gaza Strip, although their claim exhibits Orwellian levels of NewThink pretense and cognitive dissonance.   If there is not a single Jew in Gaza and the Gazans enter and leave Gaza freely and smuggle in unlimited stocks of weapons from Iran, while running their own economy,  in what way exactly can this be considered to be Israeli occupation?   It is occupation only in the sense that the US “occupies” Castro’s Cuba, by imposing some limits and restrictions on the trade done with the pseudo-occupied by the pseudo-occupier.

In my opinion, at least 95% of Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs understand perfectly that the ROLV axiom about removal of Israeli occupation producing tranquility is fallacious.  Israeli Arabs and the Jewish Far Left (and that includes the Tenured Left) support the removal of occupation precisely because they know – like other Israelis – that it will produce escalation of violence and tens of thousands of rockets and missiles landing on Israeli Jewish civilians.  Unlike other Israelis, the Radical Left and Israeli Arabs favor those developments because they hate Israel and want it eliminated.   They understand as well as everyone else that the axiom of Removal of Occupation Lowering Violence is incorrect.

For the rest of the Israeli public, skepticism and disbelief regarding ROLV is nearly universal, almost as widespread as belief in the ROLV axiom outside of Israel.  The only group within Israel that still believes in ROLV is confined to one or two political parties (the Labor Party and Meretz) of the less-extreme Left, and these parties are expected to get less than one vote in 6 in the upcoming elections.   In my opinion, even many of those who vote for these two parties do not really believe in ROLV, and in fact much of the remaining vote in favor of Meretz is coming from the anti-Israel extremists who seek Israel’s elimination.

While Israeli political parties, especially the Likud, may still pay lip service to ROLV, almost none of their rank and file supporters and voters believe in it.  Indeed, the parties pay the price for their superficial posturing in favor of ROLV.  Some of the posturing is to gain support (including financing) from overseas believers in ROLV, or to curry favor with the Obama administration and other foreign governments.   But those going through the posturing are as aware as everyone else that the ROLV is false and that almost all Israelis understand that it is false.

There have been proposals to condition any “deal” that removes Israeli occupation from large swaths of the West Bank on an Israeli national referendum.   The Likud and most of the establishment Israeli parties strongly oppose this.  The Israeli radical Tenured Left opposes such a referendum with hysterical jeremiads, labeling any proposal for such a referendum anti-democratic and fascist.

Everyone, including Israel’s treasonous Left, knows that a referendum on ROLV would not pass because almost no one in Israel believes in ROLV anymore.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Ben Cohen

    Interesting article. But there is one key distinction; when Israel withdrew from Gaza they did so unilaterally, in any formulation of a two state solution Israel's withdrawing from the West Bank would be conditioned on a final resolution to the conflict. In most formulations of a two state solution Israel would be able to place troops in the Jordan valley.

    • The Inverse

      In other words, if Israel withdraws from teh West Bank it will have a piece of paper signed by the genocidal nazi terrorists and THAT will make all teh difference. What you been smoking, Ben?

      • Ben Cohen

        Most people who support a two state solution would stipulate that it would have to be an agreement with a strong probability of holding. I agree with you that right now that isn't possible, but I think the vast majority of people would support a two state solution in principal.

        • Larry

          I agree with that "two state solution" hypothesis, but with a twist; Let's have Gaza give half of their land to Israel! Maybe that would appease the mean old Israelis and they'd stop defending themselves so harshly! Whaddaya think there, Ben boy?

    • stern

      And given the Arab record of honoring pledges and agreements – and their refusal to acknowledge that a final resolution would actually mean an end to the conflict rather than just one more stage on the way to destroying Israel – do you honestly believe that such a solution is likely?

      • Ben Cohen

        no.

    • Lan Astaslem

      right – and the arabs turned it into a cesspool

    • aspacia

      Read and listen to what Hamas and Fatah really want–This is Cohen first they will come for you, then me. READ THE TEXTBOOKS–There will never be peace as the Muslims are sworn to destroy Israel.

      Geez, another self-hating Jew

  • Ben Cohen

    Overall though you are more or less correct that a peace agreement is impossible right now.

    • aspacia

      There will never be peace between dhimis and Muslims when the Muslims outnumber the dhimis. Do I really have to post what their religious and government leaders claim in Arabic (MEMRI) for you to understand that most want all Jews dead.

  • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

    MANY Jews in Israel (aside from the die-hard left and their Arab counterparts) are finally understanding that "peace" is not bought by surrendering Jewish land. Period. In fact, they have internalized that missiles/rockets not "only" target their poorer fellow Jews in the south, but also in Tel Aviv!

    In fact, the efficacy of Dr. Martin Sherman's strategic policies is gaining a consensus. The truth has finally sunk in, after too many dead and maimed Jews were sacrificed, under the so called "two state solution" and "occupation" – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/01/01/presenting-a-

    Besides, Daphe Netanyahu, Bibi Netanyahu's sister-in-law, pierces the veil too – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/27/pm-netanyahus

    Adina Kutnicki, Israel – http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

    • AnOrdinaryMan

      The "moderate" and "balanced approach" cliches are also used by the left, in America. And they're used because they're successful. For example, on Fox News' "Face the Nation," Sen. Chris Van Hollen kept on stating that the approach to reducing America's debt has to be a "balanced approach," a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. Of course, the deal that Van Hollen and his comrades offer is immediate tax increases, "balanced" by PROMISES of future spending cuts, which are never kept. In Israel, its immediate land concessions, "balanced" by PROMISES of future peace, which are never kept. John Boehner needs to stop talking to the Democrats, and Israel should cut off the free food and medical supplies to Gaza, ASAP.

  • The Inverse

    For Ben Cohen:
    In other words, if Israel withdraws from the West Bank it will have a piece of paper signed by the genocidal nazi terrorists and THAT will make all the difference. What you been smoking, Ben?

  • rodger the dodger

    If the Jews gave the Muslims $1trn, packed up and left the middle east to relocate to an island in the pacific, it wouldn’t end there. The genocidal Muslim psychopaths of the MENA countries would build a navy to pursue them there to anihilate them. And Obama would probably give them some old US navy ships to get the ball rolling.

    • Mary Sue

      and the Muslims would go on about how the island is really Muslim land to begin with, and the Jews are stealing it, and they have to liberate it because they've had it since Caliph Haroun Al-Raschid or some nonsense.

    • EarlyBird

      You may be correct. So what to do about the Muslim Problem?

      If we have determined that the Pals and their allies are simply unyielding, fanatical, implacable enemies of Israel, then Israel simply has no choice but to wipe them out with a cataclysmic war and/or a massive expulsion by force. Nibbling around the edges by building on disputed land is just silly.

      I'd like those who honestly feel this way to start honestly getting to the point. Perhaps Israel will be electing someone soon who will be willing to come out and talk about the Solution.

      • Drakken

        There is no solution unless one side finishes the other, if you think the muslims will give the jews peace? Your crazier than the muslims.

        • EarlyBird

          I appreciate the clarity, Drakken.

      • JJD

        Haha Muslim Problem?
        talk about the soloution?
        Sound familiar in the slightest?

  • Rostislav

    The poll in which Israeli Jews finally outnumbered those who endorse the two-state madness by between 6 and 10 to one, is very good news, indeed! I was always of opinion, that no Islamic hordes, however multiple, well-armed and loud-howling, can ever defeat this land, UN collaborators or not. Such an evil task could be performed from inside only, by the Israelis themselves (just as the USA could be destroyed by the Americans only, or my Russia – by the Russians). So, being a Christian optimist, I'd like to raise a hopeful toast to the future poll of 10 to zero proportion – Lechaim! Rostislav, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.

    • stern

      I salute you and join you in your toast. Lachaim.

  • Omar

    Israel is not "occupying" anything. Israel has a right to exist. If anyone wants to see real occupation and oppression, check out Tibet, which Communist China has occupied since 1950, and where Beijing is committing widespread human rights violations against the Tibetan people (about 1.2 million Tibetans have died since the Communist occupation began 63 years ago). Where are the calls for a Free Tibet? Where are the UN resolutions condemning Beijing for its genocidal and totalitarian policies? As for the U.S. trying to "occupy" Castro's Cuba, that is so absurd. The U.S. was one of the first countries to diplomatically recognize the Castro regime in 1959. If anything, it is the other way around. For years, the Castro regime has been trying to undermine America's efforts to bring democracy and freedom to the world. For years, the Castro regime in Cuba has consistently tried to transform the United States into a Communist totalitarian country through front groups like the Center for Constitutional Rights and Occupy Wall Street. During the 1960s, the Castro regime has tried to destroy the United States at least twice. The first time was during the Missile Crisis, and the second time was during the Thanksgiving season a month after the Missile Crisis. The second attempt was averted by the FBI, which arrested and deported the Cuban diplomats (who worked at the Cuban mission to the U.N.) for plotting to detonate 500 kilograms of TNT explosives at Macy's, Gimbel's, Bloomingdale's and Manhattan's Grand Central Terminal. Check out this article for more information on the truth: http://townhall.com/columnists/humbertofontova/20… . For over 50 years, the Castro dictatorship in Cuba has committed acts of aggression against its own people as well as against the people of the world. The regime in Havana has trained numerous terrorist groups (FARC, ELN, PLO, IRA, ETA, etc) from different parts of the world to carry out their aggression. The Castro regime has also tried to obstruct democracy in many parts of the world as well. In Puerto Rico (which is a U.S. territory), the Castro regime has supported and financed many Communist separatist (as well as terrorist) groups (like the FALN and Los Macheteros) whose goal is to force the island of Puerto Rico to secede from the United States in order to install a Communist totalitarian regime in the island allied with Castro's Cuba, the former Soviet Union, the Chavez autocracy in Venezuela and other despotic regimes, despite the fact that a majority of Puerto Ricans do not want secession. The majority of resident in Puerto Rico want either statehood (becoming the 51st state of the Union,which I support along with more than half of the island's population), or remaining a territory (Commonwealth). The Castro regime's (as well as the Chavez autocracy's) constant meddling in Puerto Rico's internal politics by supporting and funding the opposition with lies and false propaganda against the constitutional government of Puerto Rico (as well as causing voting fraud in some elections) led to the downfall of the democratically-elected, pro-statehood conservative New Progressive Party government of Luis Fortuno this past November 6th. So, no, the United States is not "occupying" Castro's Cuba. It is the other way around. America is a victim of Cuban imperialism, just like Israel is a victim of Islamist imperialism, while Tibet is a victim of Chinese imperialism. That's the reality.

    • Ghostwriter

      I agree that Israel has a right to exist. Why not tell the Palestinians that,if you can?

      • Omar

        You're right Ghostwriter. I can also tell the so-called "Palestinians" that they are an invented people who are used for propaganda purposes against Israel. Remember that the KGB and the Naser regime in Egypt helped to create and finance the PLO in the 1960s. To this day, Israel's adversaries still do not want to acknowledge the fact that Israel has a right to exist as a state.

    • Mary Sue

      Oh there are calls for "Free Tibet" among the Left (I see the bumper stickers on cars around here all the time), however the calls are made from peace hippies that wouldn't know how to actually Free Tibet. They think peaceful protest will move China, when it never has before.

      • Omar

        While it is true that some leftists support a free Tibet, other leftists oppose independence for Tibet because the left generally supports China since technically, China is still Communist (in all except economics). Generally, conservatives support a free Tibet because Tibetans, like the West, Israel and their allies, are pro-democracy, pro-freedom and pro-American. While the Tibet issue seems to look a bit more complicated, it is generally true that conservatives support a free Tibet, while much of the left, oppose a free Tibet. That's the reality.

        • EarlyBird

          You are completely wrong, Omar.

          Real kinship with, let alone knowledge of, communism on the left has nearly completely atrophied but for some very rare academics and grey haired radicals (Horowitz's old comrades who still cling to it. Lefties are by no means supportive of China.

          You drive around Los Angeles, my town, and you will see "Free Tibet" bumper stickers right next to Obama stickers and "War Is Not The Answer" stickers. These people are lefties, and they generally grandstand about their compassion. Richard Gere, no conservative, is a major critic of Chinese mistreatment of Tibet.

          Surely conservative are also pro-freedom for Tibet in as much as they give the issue any thought.

          But your entire analysis is about 40 years out of date. It's not always 1972.

          • Ennis

            "Lefties are by no means supportive of China. "

            George Galloway would disagree with you.

          • Omar

            I said some leftists support a free Tibet. But the fact remains that a majority (not all) of leftists sympathetic to far-left regimes oppose a free Tibet, since the Free Tibet movement is viewed as an adversary of the Communist regime in China. That's the reality.

          • EarlyBird

            If I missed the "some" leftists in your statement, I apologize. I still think the focus on communism – but for the aforementioned old school, doddering lefties like Galloway – is way out of date. Those who last talked about good ol' Chairman Mao, or Ho Chi Minh or Uncle Joe are pretty much in rest homes. (Sadly, most of today's lefties really never received a proper education on communism, or the Cold War.)

            That doesn't mean the average radical lefty isn't definitely anti-capitalism – they certainly are – but the entire language of communism and sympathy for it has gone the way of the Nehru jacket. They want unbridled social rights, paid for cradle to grave government services, and an end to religion, pretty much. That may sound like socialism, but it's not Red communism. And of course they sympathize with any party they consider the underdog, regardless of the morality of it (e.g. their support for Hamas or Iran), which makes them very much included to support Tibet.

    • Ennis

      "The Castro regime has also tried to obstruct democracy in many parts of the world as well."

      Pre-Pinochet Chile being a lesser known example that more people need to know about.

  • JacksonPearson

    IMHO, the way to end the so-called “occupation” or “occupied territories” is to give the PLO a 30 day eviction notice. Vacate, or be forcibly removed. Winning lands in wars are spoils of wars.

    If the opposite would have happened,, there'd been 7 million or more notches of dead Jews added to Muslims AK-47s. For the misinformed, historically, where did the "Dome of the Rock" magically appear from, if not the spoils of war?….Okay, Israel won it back, so now….,bulldoze it.

    • EarlyBird

      "IMHO, the way to end the so-called “occupation” or “occupied territories” is to give the PLO a 30 day eviction notice. Vacate, or be forcibly removed. Winning lands in wars are spoils of wars."

      Jackson, your's in the only honest post on this thread, and I appreciate it.

      If we have determined that the Pals and their allies are simply unyielding, fanatical, hell-bent enemies of Israel, then Israel simply has no choice but to wipe them out with war and/or a massive expulsion by force. And if that's what others want, and those right of Likud want, they need to finally come out and say it.

      • JacksonPearson

        Nope, I made no suggestion of what you're talking about. The PLO doesn't want peace. They've been active since 1964, and consensus is, they're in place to cause turmoil, and serve no other purpose. Like most other so-called Palestinians, Yasser Arafat was an Egyptian, and not indigenous to the holy land.

        I'm a pro life person. War is the last resort, and for sure, the wiping of ANY people off the face of this planet should never be an acceptable solution.

        • EarlyBird

          I didn't meant to suggest that you were for wiping anyone out.

          I'm just trying to clarify the minds of those who have decided, perhaps correctly, what it means to consider the Pals absolutely implacable enemies. Where does this go? How does the whole thing sort out?

          The really scary thing for Israel is not Hamas or Iran, ultimately, but the massive and increasing population of Palestinians compared to Israelis.

          • JacksonPearson

            "How does the whole thing sort out?"
            Palestinians and the Muslim world do not want it to be sorted out with the end result being peace with Israel. The Qur'an demonizes Jews and Christians, whereas this hatred is continually being preached daily in mosques world wide, including here in the United States.

            No other major or minor religion in the world singles out in writing their hatred and destruction of other religions as does Islam. A cursory examination of the Qur'an exposes it as not being the Word of a loving and compassionate God, but instead, a backward book of intolerance and punishment.

  • david

    Now if the idiot liberal American jews would wake up!

  • ObamaYoMoma

    The conflict in Israel is not a conflict over occupation at all. It never was. It's a jihad to make Islam supreme, as Jews are the ultimate infidels. Further, although Muslims hate Jews in particular, they also hate all other non-Muslim religions as well. Indeed, can anyone point to a single Muslim country anywhere in the world where non-Muslim religious groups aren't purposely discriminated against as dhimmis?

    Moreover, Muslims don't migrate to the West in mass to assimilate and integrate and to matriculate into productive and contributing citizens. Instead, they migrate to one-day make Islam supreme via the eventual imposition of Sharia, which will be the fate of Europe later on this century. Indeed, there are already thousands of Muslim no-go zones throughout Europe ruled by Sharia today and they are forming fast in the USA as well. It's stealth, deceptive, and non-violent jihad!

    • EarlyBird

      Israel's bad luck is simply the timing of its establishment. Had European Jews started massacring and dislocating Palestinians back in the 1700s and 1800s, like Americans did as we expanded to the west, Israel would have no more of a problem with Palestinians as Americans do with the remaining American Indians. Just a bit of collective guilt here and there, no Occupied Territories or conflict with "Palestinians."

      As it were, European Jews started when cameras were around, and white people didn't feel right anymore about wiping out the local savages for God and country.

      • Ghostwriter

        Or maybe if the Palestinians finally woke up and found out that Israel ISN'T going anywhere,they might at least,TRY for peace,but I doubt that will ever happen.

        • EarlyBird

          Sadly, I think you're right. Their entire reason for being has become to "Fight the Jew" rather than build a productive society.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Apparently you don't get it. The sole purpose of Islam is to make itself supreme throughout the world. Hence, as long as Israel and Muslims exist there will be jihad. Additionally, as long as Muslims and all other non-Muslim infidels exist, there will be jihad. The timing of Israel's creation has nothing to do with anything. The sole purpose of the conflict is to return Israel back to Dar al Islam and make the Jews subjugated dhimmis. Hell, that is why we were attacked on 9/11 too.

        • EarlyBird

          Uh huh. So in essence, Americans also have no other choice but to attempt to annihiate every living Muslim on the face of the earth. Otherwise we are utterly helpless. There is absolutely no relationship between American policies in the Middle East and the attacks of 9/11, or the generalized hatred of an admittedly violent and immature religion. I see. Oh and "they hate us for our freedom." Gotcha.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            So in essence, Americans also have no other choice but to attempt to annihiate every living Muslim on the face of the earth

            Not really. We could expose the truth about Islam to the world. Then a united west and non-Islamic world together could isolate the Islamic world. After two or three generations of Muslims living in crushing poverty relative to the rest of the world, Islam as a totalitarian ideology that incorporates a modicum of religion would be discredited and destroyed.

            There is absolutely no relationship between American policies in the Middle East and the attacks of 9/11, or the generalized hatred of an admittedly violent and immature religion.

            There never was a relationship between American policies in the Middle East and 9/11. We were attacked on 9/11 simply because we are infidels and also because we stand as America — the biggest obstacle in the way of Islam taking over the world. Indeed, without the military might of the USA, the world would soon become subsumed by totalitarianism.

            Moreover, Islam is not a religion the way we in the West that are products of Western civilization as opposed to Islamic civilization understand religion. Islam is more a very retrograde totalitarian ideology that incorporates a modicum of religion. Islam initially started out as being a religion, but after the Hirja, when Muhammad was thrown out of Mecca and forced to migrate to Medina, Muhammad abandoned religion and turned to politics and jihad instead. As a matter of fact, the sole purpose of Islam is to take over the world via the imposition of Sharia, and it is the imposition of Sharia. i.e., the will of Allah, that incorporates totalitarianism.

            I see. Oh and "they hate us for our freedom." Gotcha.

            No…you don't see. They hate us because we are infidels, and they do view freedom as an abomination that must be destroyed, as freedom could lead to the destruction of Islam. Apparently, you've never studied Islam, yet you are pretending to be an authority. Give me a break.

    • stan131

      Couldn't have said it better myself.

  • EarlyBird

    Plaut is correct that simply moving out of the Occupied Territories (no "quotes" needed), would not make the region more tranquil, or Israel's enemies more placid.

    But Plaut's obvious, glaring and intentional omission is that relentless building on those Occupied Territories – except for strategically necessary military encampments – only adds fuel to the fire and puts the lie to the idea of the radical Zionists ever considered the holding of that land "temporary."

    These settlements have been called "leverage in peace talks" with the Pals, which is a lie. It's only destroyed any possible trust that Israel is honestly trying to find a solution. Both sides are liars and unwilling to live with a Two State solution.

    Israel should continue to very aggressively and overwhelmingly defend itself against Hamas, Hezbollah, rockets, etc., AND pull people off those Occupied Territories except for the military installations. And do everything they can to make it so the Pals simply tired of being Terror Central, and build a real country for themselves.

    • Sarah J

      Let Israel build a thousand new settlements and let all teh Palestinians move into Early Bird's yard

      • EarlyBird

        So, where should Israel go from here, Sarah? It's clear the Pals and other Muslims will never back down. It's clear that Israel is surrounded on all sides. It's clear that building or not building on the Occupied Territories, making peace or not making peace, does nothing to stop the relentless attacks on Israel.

        So, what to do? Just nuke 'em and get it over with? I'm serious. I'd love to hear where the Greater Israel actually goes and actually takes place. I'd have more respect for you if you honestly said you wanted to wipe them out ala' the American Indian.

        • Ghostwriter

          Well,maybe if the Muslims stopped trying to murder Israelis,there would be some peace. But,they don't want to do that.

          • EarlyBird

            I agree. They are an implacable enemy. So what is Israel to do? Where does this whole thing lead?

        • rodger the dodger

          Earlybird,

          You keep repeating yourself, so just for you:

          Israel should raze every surrounding Muslim country to the ground, killing every single man, woman and child. If they don’t, these muslims will do it to them first.

          There. Happy now?

          • EarlyBird

            Thanks for the reply.

          • Drakken

            I am in complete and total agreement with Roger. Time to give the Fakestinians a taste of Carthage.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          So, where should Israel go from here, Sarah? It's clear the Pals and other Muslims will never back down. It's clear that Israel is surrounded on all sides. It's clear that building or not building on the Occupied Territories, making peace or not making peace, does nothing to stop the relentless attacks on Israel.

          First, get the Occupied Territories crap out your mind, as that is all taqiyya or propaganda intended to dupe you. The conflict was never about Occupied Territories, as that is a convenient pretext created by Muslims and used to justify jihad against Israel.

          Moreover, the jihad being waged against Israel is a smaller part of the much greater global jihad at large being waged against all non-Muslim infidels around the world. In addition, there is no making peace with Islam. Indeed, it is impossible for Israel to ever make peace with Muslims, just like it is impossible for the USA to ever make peace with Muslims.

          Hence, the jihad against Israel will be waged as long as there are Muslims in the world to wage jihad, and likewise the jihad against America and all non-Muslim infidels throughout the world will also be waged as well as long as there are Muslims, as all Muslims are jihadists and obligated to wage jihad as a condition of being Muslim. Again, the sole purpose of Islam is to take over the world, i.e., to become supreme, and to subjugate all non-Muslim infidels into harsh and degrading dhimmitude.

          Indeed, Israel is in the same boat as us and all other non-Muslim infidels in the world with respect to Islam and Muslims. In fact, the Muslims have spent billions of oil dollars vilifying and demonizing Israel and dumbing down non-Muslim infidels as part of there jihad and it looks like you were a victim of it. Divide and conquer is a very effective strategy and there divide and conquer strategy employed against Israel has been extremely effective.

          I'd love to hear where the Greater Israel actually goes and actually takes place.

          More insane taqiyya (propaganda) you've swallowed. Of course, if you don't study Islam then it is very easy for you to have your ignorance's exploited to the hilt.

          I'd have more respect for you if you honestly said you wanted to wipe them out ala' the American Indian.

          You are a certified leftwing loon addicted to thinking with his emotions rather than with a rational mind. Indeed, you are one of those low information voters that voted for BHO!

    • Mary Sue

      The only "occupation" going on is the Palestinians occupying Israeli Land.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Dude…with all due disrespect, you are a bonafide and certified loon and you don't have the first clue what you are talking about.

  • Ken Kelso

    Steven why are you calling Judea and Samaria occupied.
    You sound like someone from Al Jazeera.
    Judea and Samaria and all of Jerusalem are liberated Israeli Land.
    Tell us when did it ever belong to Palestinians? Answer Never. It was never a Pal land to begin with, so your question is invalid.
    The Palestinians never governed or controlled any land before 1993. To make it simple, please tell me one Palestinian President before 1948? Keep thinking. The Palestinians want a capital, which they never had, in a country that never existed.

    Israel existed 1500 years before Muhammad was born. Look at Islamic countries and look at
    Sharia laws. Its a brutal, violent and an intolerant religion. It produces the most inhumane people on this planet. Besides Saudi Arabia, the entire Middle East and North Africa was never Arab or Muslim. The thieving Arabs stole all the land from the Native peoples in the Middle East and North Africa from the Berbers in the 7th century and forced everyone they colonized, to become Muslim. Anyone that didn't convert, had there heads cut off. The Jews resisted the terrorist Muhammad and didn't convert.

    • PhillipGaley

      Ken?

      I would marvel to know the name for the logic or rational path upon which you call Islam a religion, . . . it is inherently cruel and violent, not also, presenting as it does, with in institutionalized sensuality, it cannot call its adherents to the higher characteristic; it suffers not to be inquired into and questioned; in that, it does not appeal to the better character in man, it is therefore, both brutal and brutish; as is to be seen in their indulgent and riotous holidays in Bahrain—"The City Where Allaha Cannot See"—its adherents are given over to baseness and coarseness; whereas, matters of religion concern belief in any given individual's relation to his maker, Islam functions very much as a criminal ideology in regimentation of its subjects; depending as it does, upon ad hoc interpretation and application of sharia, it this provides that, Moslem nations are ruled by their mullahs, . . . who are somewhat comparable to our idea of what their lawyers would be, . . . and although more could be said against them, . . . much more, . . . if I were but king for a day, . . .

    • EarlyBird

      So, who DID live and work on that land before Israel was established? Was it just a wide open wasteland? Surely no European Jews lived on that land until roughly the first pioneers started coming over in the late 1800s/early 1900s, right?

      Jews are smart, energetic, tough, industrious and were willing to kick ass on the locals to get a homeland where they could finally feel safe. And they engaged in a massive land grab, violence and all the rest of it. Good for them.

      They waged and won a war and they should enjoy the spoils, and the Pals should stop whining about it. But drop the fantasy of some virgin Israeli birth. They did in Palestine what Americans did on a much, much greater scale to the Native American.

      And no, acknowledging reality doesn't make me anti-Israel or an anti-Semite.

  • Ken Kelso

    To all Arabs. Stop sending your infants to fight your war. Stop sacrificing your children and hiding behind them. Stop Abusing your women. Stop with your honor killings. Sad but I know, Israel cannot protect all Arab women and children from Arab men

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Being Arab has nothing to do with anything. Do Christian Arabs hate Jews too? Hardly. Do the Muslims in Pakistan that are not Arabs hate Jews and all other infidels too? You bet.

      The problem is Islam and being Arab has nothing to do with anything except for the fact that a lot of Arabs also happen to be Muslims. Do the Jewish Arabs living in Syria hate Israel? How about the Persian Jews living in Iran, do they also hate Israel too? How about the Muslims living in Syria, Iran, and throughout the world? They all hate Jews and all other infidels with a passion, but in particular Jews. Arabs aren't the problem. However, Islam is the problem for Israel and indeed the entire infidel world.

    • Drakken

      Ken, you know that is a impossible request right? Those bloody savages would sacrifice every last man, woman and child to attain their jihadist goals of once islamic lands, always islamic lands.

    • Drakken

      Ken, you know that is a impossible request right? Those bloody savages would sacrifice every last man, woman and child to attain their jihadist goals of once islamic lands, always islamic lands.

  • Ken Kelso

    Arabs CANNOT make peace with Israel. Without Israel to blame for all the death, poverty, destruction, misery and oppression across Islam, who will the Islamic people blame?
    Wait, they’ll blame the Mossad Shark, Mossad Vulture, the 4000 Jews who didn’t show up at the World Trade Center, and the new crazy Arab theory that Bugs Bunny doesn’t like Muslims.
    If only the Arab could put himself in the 21st century.
    Even the 19th century would be an improvement.

  • Ken Kelso

    A must read article.
    http://www.masada2000.org/palestine-myth.html
    The Myth Of The Palestinian People
    Yehezkel Bin-Nun
    December 26, 2001

  • EarlyBird

    Plaut is right: there is no value to removing settlers from the Occupied Territories in regard to creating peace or security for Israel. Time and again, Hamas has shown that it sees such concessions as weakness to exploit. And here come the rockets, or a new wave of suicide bombers.

    It's clear no Two State Solution is possible. It's clear that Israel has become so exhausted and hardened by the conflict, so certain it is facing a relentless and implacable enemy with whom no real agreement can ever take place.

    So what to do?

    Does it annihilate the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and/or engage in mass expulsion by force? Or, does it merely "absorb" these areas, call it Israel, and keep these people in the equivalent of a reservation with far fewer rights than Israeli citizens?

    Israel is in a quandry, isn't she? I'd really like to hear what many on this board think that Israel should do, and wants Israel to do. They may have a more open minded government soon if Bibi goes down to the hard right.

    • Drakken

      Push Gaza into the sea, push the West Bank into Jordan and call it a day, the muslims will knash their teeth at the Israeli's but that is about it. The next rocket or mortar fired should be returned by opening up rolling artillery barrages.

    • NAHALKIDES

      Tough question. I'd say Israel should annex whatever portion of the West Bank it needs for its security, and certainly claim the remainder of Jerusalem. Then the problem (in the West Bank) reduces to what to do with the remaining territory. Clearly the P.A. is useless and should be dissolved. Also, it's clear the Arabs there aren't ready for peace or competent to run a new nation. I'd say it would have to be run as an administered territory, either by Israel or Jordan, with the Arabs permitted limited local government under certain anti-Sharia restrictions (no death penalty for apostasy, etc.).

      As for Gaza, I think Israel will have to annex it.

      • EarlyBird

        You're probably right.

  • Ghostwriter

    It's a shame,EarlyBird,that the Palestinians aren't as open-minded. Then,they would have had a state long ago.