Israel Attacked on Four Fronts

Israel2The wreckage of earlier Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts – the Camp David Accords, Oslo, the Road Map to Peace and all the rest – was on particularly vivid display this week.

Reuters reported Monday that “at least one rocket fired from Lebanon hit northern Israel on Monday….The rocket was fired from the area around the southern city of Tyre, Lebanese security sources said.” AFP noted that “a rocket fired from Syria hit the Israeli-occupied sector of the Golan Heights on Sunday.” Rockets from Gaza continue to hit Israel despite the Israeli defensive actions. And according to Al Arabiya, “Egyptian security thwarted on Sunday an attempt to launch two rockets from Sinai at Israel.”

Southern Lebanon, Gaza, Sinai – all previously “occupied territory” from which Israel withdrew in order to help bring about peace.

Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in May 2000. Prime Minister Ehud Barack’s government thought that the withdrawal would show that Israel was serious about making peace, and would bring to an end the relentless attacks against Israel at the United Nations and in the international media. Israel withdrew from Gaza in September 2005. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government thought that the withdrawal would show that Israel was serious about making peace, and would bring to an end the relentless attacks against Israel at the United Nations and in the international media. Israel withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula by 1982 as part of the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty resulting from the Camp David Accords. Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s government thought that the withdrawal would show that Israel was serious about making peace, and would bring to an end the relentless attacks against Israel at the United Nations and in the international media.

Are you starting to see a pattern?

Israel carried out all three of these withdrawals in pursuit of peace. But peace never came.

The UN and the media never let up on Israel, and in each case, the Israeli withdrawal led to the previously “occupied territory” becoming a base for new jihad attacks against the Jewish state.

How many more times is this going to have to happen before the leaders of the free world stop pressuring Israel into entering into these self-defeating and fruitless “peace” agreements? The events of the last few days have assuredly not persuaded Barack Obama and John Kerry to stop pressuring Israel to withdraw from the “settlements” so as to show that Israel is serious about making peace, and to bring to an end the relentless attacks against Israel at the United Nations and in the international media. But even if such an agreement comes about, and it looks unlikely now with the latest jihad savagery and Netanyahu apparently resolute against it, it will fail, yet again. The war against Israel is a jihad for the sake of Islam. It will never be negotiated away. It will never be turned away from its ultimate goal of the destruction of Israel and the genocide of the Jews.

Obama and Kerry and the rest may know this. Obama’s anti-Semitic associations are so many and so long-lasting that it is hard to sustain the idea that he is pressing the Israelis to curtail their latest operations and enter into what would certainly be a disastrous ceasefire agreement with Hamas out of naivete and a well-meaning but ill-considered desire to make peace. He must know. And many in the Leftist intelligentsia must know.

Those who do not yet know, however, should ponder the spectacle of Israel being attacked from southern Lebanon, Gaza and the Sinai all in one day, as well as from Syria, with which the Nixon Administration pressed Israel to make peace in 1973.

It is long past time for a new paradigm in Washington — an across-the-board repudiation of the prevailing political establishment, and the ascendancy of people who are willing to face the reality of the jihad threat in its full magnitude, and to defend Israel to the hilt as being on the front line of that jihad. But with the Republicans so richly deserving their sobriquet of The Stupid Party, such a change in the political culture is not, alas, on the horizon.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • yo neighbor

    All Netanyahu has to do is lead his people into the sea. Heaven forbid he treat those barbaric murderous bloodthirsty rat Nazis the same as alied invaders did in Europe when free people loved liberty, or even knew what it was.

    • Damaris Tighe

      The comparison with Britain’s existential war with the Nazis is a good one which I repeatedly make on uk threads. Some Brits need reminding that their grandparents had no problem bombing Germany after the blitz – & they would have considered agonising about ‘proportionaliaty’ sheer insanity. In 1945 the Allies didn’t stop at Germany’s borders simply because the German army was by now ineffective. And they didn’t allow Germany to keep land from which it had launched invasions of its neighbours – millions of Germans had to leave the Sudetenland & Poland & relocate within Germany’s new borders.

      I very much doubt that Britain is capable of fighting such a war today. Not because it doesn’t have the military capablity (it was also militarily weak in the 1930s) but because, as you say, it doesn’t have the mentality.

      • Lightbringer

        It’s hard to believe that the Greatest Generation could have engendered such degenerate ones. (Pardon the puns. Couldn’t resist.) Once Queen Elizabeth is gone, there will be nobody to remember that generation’s sense of honor, duty, and patriotism.

        • Damaris Tighe

          Indeed Lightbringer, although I’m beginning to wonder whether Queen Elizabeth could have done more to stop what is after all her sovereignity from being ceded to Europe.

          • Lightbringer

            Possibly, but her power and influence are pretty limited as I understand it.

  • Lanna

    Complacency and apathy for any nation results in their doom….That’s why its important to have leaders who will stand up for the freedom of their citizens and act accordingly to stop tyranny.

  • https://twitter.com/LibsHateUs Ban Liberals

    Israel needs to do to these savages what it did in ’67, and Obama and his Jew-hating Sec. of Defense, State Department, and UN be damned!

    • New Yorker

      The problem is that Israel failed to do in 1967 what should have been done in the first place – annex the newly won territories outright and repatriate the Arabs (who were Jordanian citizens) to Jordan. The Israeli leadership of the time had exercised certain illusions about the nature of the conflict with Israel’s implacable fanatical neighbors. Hence Israel finds herself in this horrible situation.

      • Americana

        The world’s Jews CHOSE to believe in the Zionist dream of their return to the ancient Jewish homeland that had been conquered and forced out of existence multiple times thousands of years ago. God knows why any Jew would pretend this migration would be a wise course and that the KNOWN ENMITY of the Muslims wouldn’t continue to present grounds for conflict, especially when you’re stealing the ground out from under them. One really has to believe in one’s Bible to overlook all the sociological issues inherent in insisting on doing what they did.

        As for repeating the lies about the Palestinian Arabs being “mandatory” Jordanians, this fallacious claim does Israel no favor in the public relations sphere. The scenario the Israelis would have the world believe is that the Jews arrived in “The Empty Quarter” — there were no Palestinian Arabs residing there and there were no permanent communities — and that the Jews subsequently made the desert bloom. This is not an accurate portrayal of the area or the number of indigenous Palestinian Arabs living there. Israel is a fixture in the region now but so are the Palestinian Arabs. Wishing them away isn’t a tactic in which Israel can indulge.

        • Jimmy D

          Most of the Jews entering Israel came from an area of somewhat greater “Known Enmity” called post WWII Europe. The world told them you have have no home and they answered, “Yes we do.” How’s that for sociology? It may be that the Bible’s framework provided a reference for a very secular and logical need.
          In any case, now it’s plain. The Jews would enjoy the company of peaceful neighbors but their neighbors choose war. It’s one of those situations where “Pacifist” only works on an exit visa or a gravestone.

          • Gee

            Most of the Jews entering Israel came from an area known as the Middle East. They were forced out of the countries created for Arabs were ethnically cleansed.

            Over 3/4 of Israelis have their families from Arab countries. Not Europe (which is less than 15% of the country)

          • Jeff Ludwig

            Excellent point that you reference here!

        • vlorg

          Yea. They could all have moved into your grandma’s house after WWII and she could have made them all cheeseburgers. I thought Jews were smart.

        • Jeff Ludwig

          Would it be racist to say that I don’t want Jews, blacks, or Muslims for that matter living in my neighborhood? Isn’t that what Arabs are doing? It’s a crime punishable by death to sell land to a Jew in Jordan. Why can’t Jews live wherever they want?

          • Americana

            Jeff, there are a huge number of things that require to be changed to make Islam a tolerant religion. That’s one of them. Is it the top choice? I’m not so sure. My personal desire would be for Islam to give up the proselytizing that demands one choose Islam or die or the alternative variation of that which is that one announces one’s faith and then is taxed heavily, labeled an unbeliever and treated as a second-class citizen. It’s ridiculous for Muslims to believe they must live surrounded by culturally mandated “correct behavior” or they’re faced w/too much temptation. Sorry, guys, if you can’t face down temptation of several kinds then your faith doesn’t rate as highly for integrity as it should.

            On the other hand, in the case of the selling of property between the Palestinians and the Israelis, that’s a matter of not just cultural preference, that’s likely going to influence how much land is taken from the Palestinian state. It’s a different issue than Jews buying property in Jordan and other Muslim-dominant countries.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            Americana, I’m relieved that you and I agree that there is some serious cultural oppression if non-Muslims going in in the Muslim world.
            On the other point, the matter of disposal of land for Palestinians, I think our positions are quite far apart. (1) There never was a country of Palestine. The region known as Palestine belonged to Syria. There was never a demand by the Arab people living there for their own state independent of Syria, (2) A brilliant negotiation for a two state solution was carried forward by Dennis Ross under Pres. Clinton only to be sabotaged on the last evening before signing by Arafat. I personally heard Dennis describe this in detail on tje Charlie Rose show in the 1990′s. (3) Jordan controlled Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) from 1948-1967. At no time did tjey offer, nor did the PLO request, that that land be given to them as a sovereign state. Why not, if that is truly what the Arabs say is the “right thing to do?”(4) The U.N. presented the original two state solution in 1947. It was accepted by the Jews but rejected (and abrogated) by the Arabs, and a war ensued. Therefore, the Arabs have repudiated a two-state solution. The Palestinian Arabs are lying when they say they want their own terror-state (oops, I meant to write ‘country’). I am old enough fo remember the situation from before the Oslo accords. It sounds to me that you are younger than I. Please meditate more on your premises. The Palestinians don’t deserve your ‘compassion’ because history shows they never wanted a state even though they keep saying they do.

          • Americana

            Jeff, I don’t believe I’m showing “compassion” per se to the Palestinians by what I write. I’m terrified by the various alternative scenarios I see possibly happening because of the intransigence of both sides. I fully believe that the best course is to allow for a Palestinian state. It would demonstrate the fundamental justice of the Jewish people to the world. That would stand for something even if the Arabs would likely never admit it for decades upon decades. Israel is there to stay but I believe she must play her cards right for peace to eventually reign in the region. Israel does set a unique example in the region but she must continue to follow through on her philosophy. Hopefully, the right Arabs will eventually come forward and dominate their societies so peace can truly take root.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            I respect the sincerity of your tone, and do not wish to engage in vituperations. It’s quite likely we would have agreed in the late 1990′s, but the events since the Clinton-brokered talks suggest to me that your position is, at the present time, naive. I see a much darker scenario than you if two state thinking continues to be the model driving Arab-Israeli negotiations. Best wishes to you though.

          • Americana

            Believe me, I’m not naive in the least. I recognize there are quite a number of Palestinians set on driving Israel out of the region. However, I think if the Palestinians were to achieve a reasonable land grant state, their ability to raise Palestinian ire against Israel would be much reduced. It might never entirely disappear given the circumstances of Israel’s creation but it would be nullified by the number of Palestinians who might focus on other aspects of the Palestinian-Israeli interactions. Let’s face it, those Palestinians whose blood lust would survive statehood are likely not ever going to be satisfied. The idea that Israel must outlive the most bloodthirsty of the Palestinian liberation fighters is a fact of life. I trust the international community would not allow Israel to face the most dire military circumstances if something catastrophic were to happen and the world was required to take action.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            What has the international community done to protect Israel from the “bloodthrsty” ones to date?

          • Americana

            So far the international community has not done terribly much. In 1948, I believe the world community was terrified of being dragged into another world war and the United Nations wasn’t an old enough organization to become entwined w/the hostilities. Should the U.N. have taken action that early on in its life? Probably, but the founding of Israel was not a neutral situation.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            “the international community has not done terribly much.” We agree on that one. I raised that question in response to your oft-repeated view that Israel needs to trust the international community to protect it from the worst among the Palestinian Arabs. Yet, your answer is as much as saying that if the international community had “done more” there wouldn’t have been an Israel in the first place. In short, you are dodging the question about how, given the existence of Israel (which you resent and are not really accepting), the international community could be expected to protect Israel against bad treatment in the future. The answer of course is: it can’t and it won’t, and if Israel depends on the international community to protect it against extremists, it will disappear from the face of the earth (which you would welcome since you have already said that it should never have existed in the first place).
            Despite the balanced tone by which you try to present yourself, I must conclude you are anti-Israel and ipso facto anti-Semitic. Just face the truth, despite the fact that you might appear or sound like an otherwise nice person, you have this deep-seated animus. However, there is help. I was deeply liberal and never considered myself anti-black. When I came to faith in Jesus Christ and repented from my sin, Jesus freed me from the bondage to deep seated racism that I never understood was there as I could never accept that in myself. It may be that anti-Semitism is operating in your heart in similar fashion. I don’t know of course. Only God knows. But when one is anti-Israel he or she is typically anti-Jewish. Well, what about the Jews who reject Israel’s policies towards the Arabs, you may ask? Perhaps you are one of them? The answer is that those people also hate being Jews. It’s the only possible answer.

          • Americana

            Must you folks ALWAYS resort to this anti-Semitic name calling if you’re the least bit threatened by the CONTENT of someone’s posts? If you would have THOUGHT for a few minutes about that post of mine, you would have connected the dots and realized that what I wrote indicated there likely would have been a HUGE difference in what the international community chose to do in the immediate post-WW II period during and after Israel’s founding and what the international community would do NOW. Israel is finally a full member state of NATO and as such would be a beneficiary of the NATO military alliance. Does that make things more clear?

            http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-global-nato-s-29th-member/17010

            From the above link:

            Extending Article 5 protection, hitherto limited to full member states, to Israel was being advocated with the inescapable implication that a coalition of most of the world’s most powerful military nations, led by the self-designated world’s sole military superpower, would retaliate against Iran if it responded to an Israeli first strike attack. As the U.S. stations hundreds of nuclear warheads at NATO bases in Europe, including in Iran’s neighbor Turkey, invoking NATO’s war clause could provoke a nuclear conflagration.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            Israel is presently not the 29th member of NATO eligible for Article 5 protection as far as I can find. I went to the URL you provided and can’t find a definite statement to that effect within it. An article appearing in the Israel Times only two months ago (May 2014) advocated that Israel replace Turkey in NATO thus becoming eligible to come under Article 5. The URL for that article is http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/nato-turkey-out-israel-in/
            Even under Article 5, the 28 members do not automatically retaliate militarily, but agree to take joint action together. The joint action is not specified (as in your example you write of “retaliation” and imply that it would be “massive retaliation.” You don’t have any certain basis to believe that especially since Turkey is a member and the new “ever expanding” NATO has “relationships” with many Muslim countries. Israel, as far as I know, is an active player in what NATO calls its “Mediterranean Dialogue.” However, it’s importance as a bastion of moderate democracy has been recognized NATO, and Israel has participated in a few military exercises with NATO. Likewise, India is on the horizon for eventual membership in NATO. [But oh no, we're not ready for Israel or India to become full members yet because we don't want to offend the Muslim states that we would like to have a cozier relationship with. You see, the Muslim world not only is offended by Israel and the Jews, but also by the way those damnable Hindus have treated the Muslims and Pakistan. It is an unending hatred coming out of the cruel fanatical Islamic souls.]
            But here’s the ultimate question related to your response.
            You posit that in some ultimate scenario, NATO would be there for Israel against Iran. But how about NATO and/or the U.S. being there for Israel in some less than ultimately threatening scenarios? Where have they been? Where were the NATO friends of Israel in 1948, 1967, 1973, while Hamas has been shelling Israel, when suicide bombers were coming in high numbers before the security fence was erected? Where were they? Where was NATO when the U.S. back-tracked on missiles to Poland and Czech Republic in order to begin a reset with Russia (some reset, huh?). I don’t think your comments begin to address any of these points.
            Also, the website you have referenced on Global Research has some interesting articles, but I read one piece that puts foreign policy through a Freudian lens that is an unbecoming mumbo jumbo.

          • 1Indioviejo1

            Muslims need to repudiate Mohammed, a know pedophile (Aisha), rapist, genocidal murderer, looter, and slave trafficker, yet they built a satanic cult around this man’s delusions. I say we get down to the existential war in front of us, which is unavoidable, and proceed to win. Unconditional surrender from all Muslim nations as in WW II.

      • Johnny Paleswine

        Correct. Thank You/ toda raba the oney eyed jack and his lesbian duaghter who today still says that Israel should have immediately left Judea as an inidcation of good faith

      • Jeff Ludwig

        Amen. But the Jordanians don’t want them….

    • jesse s. pierce

      like Mario implied I am alarmed that people can get paid $5621 in one month on the computer . find more information
      ========>>>>> http://WWW.MONEYKIN.COM

  • http://senatormark4.org senatormark4

    All we have to do is immediately stop sending money to places and people that can’t enshrine the First Amendment. Bright line.

  • Johnny Paleswine

    I want to see Gaza burned to the ground. I am not Jewish but my father is. I am half Jewish and Chibcha Colombian Native. I follow Judaism. It is important Gaza be reduced to ashes. I want the world to see when the Jewish people go to war. Enormous destruction that the twisted left and liberals in America, the UK, Mundo Latrino never forget!!!!

  • Michael Garfinkel

    The author deduces that Obama and the “Leftist intelligentsia” of which he claims to be a part “must know” that the direction of his administration’s policies are detrimental to Israel, if not overtly anti-semitic.

    I would only add that this is a self-evident truth, hiding in plain sight.

  • bettyjwidner

    Peyton . true that Jessica `s blurb is shocking, last
    monday I got a gorgeous Peugeot 205 GTi after having earned $6860 this past 4
    weeks an would you believe ten-k this past-month . with-out a doubt this is the
    easiest-job I’ve ever had . I actually started six months/ago and pretty much
    immediately started to bring in minimum $84… p/h . Read More Here C­a­s­h­f­i­g­.­C­O­M­

  • Gee

    There was a fifth front not even mentioned. The daily terrorist attacks in Judea and Samaria have never let up. Every single day the Arabs attempt to murder any Jews they can

  • Americana

    So Israel is battling on four fronts because there are occasionally rockets fired by militants in these various countries? That’s not “fighting on four fronts” to me, but then again, maybe I’ve got higher semantic standards for accurate war terminology than Robert Spencer. If Lebanon’s government is not engaging in the occasional hostilities arising from Hezbollah, then Lebanon is NOT A BATTLEFRONT in common parlance. There is no real war threat coming from Lebanon. That could change at some point but, for now, Lebanon should not be considered to be one of Spencer’s “four fronts.” The same standards apply for the Sinai. There is a trickle of weaponry that comes from the region which the Egyptians can’t entirely interdict.

    Perhaps Robert Spencer should more honestly consider what making peace efforts toward the Palestinians should consist of instead of his confusing inclusion in this article of Israeli political moves as “peace” overtures to other bordering nations like the return of the Sinai to Egypt and leaving southern Lebanon. These were moves that effectively have no bearing on what the Palestinians feel are “peace overtures” made to Palestinians. Those were genuine efforts on Israel’s part of making a peace offering by returning captured territory, but let’s not confuse the audience at which each of those gestures were aimed w/Israel making overtures toward the Palestinians.

    • Michael Garfinkel

      As is evident in this post, and others like it, there is an attempt to disingenously offer advice to the Israelis, while cultivating a a pro-Arab bias accompanied by counter-factual accounts of the conflict.

      There’s a lot of talk of what would constitute peace overtures that the Arabs might “feel” were sufficient. There’s no mention, however, of what “peace overtures” the Arabs might consider that the Israelis would find even mildly persuasive.

      Hamas is desperately attempting to gin up this sentiment – that the Arab position is the only legitimate one – through the reprehensible use of civilians for propoganda purposes.

      Hamas is banking on this kind of anti-Zionist bias.

      It appears this this time, they may be disappointed.

      • Americana

        I’d hardly call that post “offering advice to the Israelis” because I denigrate Robert Spencer’s drama queen storyline which is attempting to liken CURRENT CONDITIONS to previous wars where Israel WAS facing multiple Arab opponents from every compass point. No other major military actions by other Arab nations are being taken against Israel though the ISIS/ISIL al Qaeda folks are ramping up to do so eventually. As is obvious from other news stories and other op eds on this site, Israel is even offering military assistance to Jordan and Jordan is potentially willing to accept such military assistance despite the fact it then pits Arabs against Arabs. A mutual assistance pact would be a game changer which Robert Spencer is blithely ignoring as indicative of a substantive change in the regional power balance.

        As for anti-Zionist bias, my bias is for the continuing presence of Israel which is not going to continue to find itself w/an audience that tolerates the increasingly ginned up stories of being the only true nation in and of Palestine. Faking history and assorted propaganda initiatives that don’t stand scrutiny isn’t something Israel should encourage on her behalf. Israel either faces the fact there is another culture that is entitled to a portion of that land or she continues to pretend that she’s the one and only entitlement case. In that case, God help her.

        • Michael Garfinkel

          Rest assured that God will help Israel.

          Since you insist upon framing the discussion solely in terms of overtures to be initiated by Israel, I wonder what offer you would recommend be made to the Arabs at this juncture.

          After all, the Arab muslims have consistently inflicted violence on the Jews in Palestine – and in Europe with their SS division, and more recently have walked away from all negotiations for a “two states solution.”

          What do you suggest?

          • Americana

            Considering the Jewish kingdoms were conquered multiple times by many different civilizations thousands of years ago, the Jews during that time period were abandoned by God many times over. The fact He is now seen as fulfilling their Biblical fantasy of being returned to their regional kingdoms is really indicative of nothing other than wish-fulfillment by Israelis coupled w/the confluence of diplomatic and world events.

            Israel has always had the most credibility in the peace talks w/the Palestinians being a fractious peace partner. at best Israel has a united front and the nation’s aims are clear while Palestinian aims are linked to which Palestinian faction you belong. Israel wouldn’t lose anything by understanding that. Making peace w/the vast majority of Palestinians and letting the outliers from Hamas continue to foment trouble while the main body of Palestinians becomes accustomed to peace is feasible. Israel will likely have to fight a war of attrition against Hamas for the foreseeable future.

          • Michael Garfinkel

            Your assertion that the Jews were “abandoned by God” many times over is not at all the view of the ancient prophets.

            More over, your denigration of biblical prophecy as “fantasy” and “wish fulfillment” is a little too glib, even for boiler plate Leftists. Well, maybe not for them.

            I’m quite sure the Israelis “understand” that the Palestinians are divided. They often point to this. Why assert otherwise?

            Unfortunately, you’ve evaded the question. Apart from “making peace” with the “vast majority” of Palestinans, you haven’t proposed an offer that Israel might make that the other side would accept.

            This is not surprising, because, in fact, the only offer that would be accepted is one of complete and unconditional surrender.

          • Jeff Ludwig

            Well stated I think.

        • Jeff Ludwig

          Israel’s existence is directly a function of the enactment of the principle of national self-determination for peoples living as minorities within certain states after World Wars I and II. Jews had lived as a minority in their own former country for thousands of years. Finally, the major powers of the world righted this wrong. Other new states were created as well following the world wars: Slovakia, Czech Republic, Pakistan, India, the many republics of the former USSR, numerous African countries, etc. So there is no “faking history” by Israel. She was an indigenous minority in the Middle East that was being oppressed for centuries by Arabs, Seljuks, Catholics, Persians. Finally, her time for sovereignty and freedom came. Thanks be to a merciful God!!!! Where’s your love and compassion for the Jewish people? Why are you fussing about with nit picking when the morality of Israel’s existence and policies is so obviously valid?

          • Americana

            But all those other new “countries” didn’t import vast numbers of citizens from other locations, neither did those countries choose to force out large numbers of the previous occupants of the area. The Jews may have remained a minority in the region but that didn’t necessarily entitle that minority to assume statehood against the wishes of the majority in the region. No matter how you cut it, Israel’s creation was a messy diplomatic failure for everyone concerned other than the Jews and some of the Arab factions involved in the diplomatic resolution of the issues. Either you look at the situation from the perspective of all the various peoples of the region or you don’t. If you look at the situation solely from the Jewish perspective then you’re failing to appraise all aspects.

            I’d hardly call what I’m arguing about is “nitpicking” or doesn’t reflect “enough compassion” for the Jewish people. If you don’t see the dangers inherent in what was decided upon as the diplomatic solution surrounding the creation of Israel then you’re not assessing the situation honestly. Why is that so? Because if the situation hadn’t been resolved as it had, the Israelis wouldn’t be facing what they’re facing today.

      • Lightbringer

        Please don’t feed the troll, Michael. It only encourages her.

  • Jeff Ludwig

    “the sobriquet of The Stupid Party….” This is a flash of brilliance within the context of an already penetrating article. Mr. Spencer is having a great influence even though the powers that be are trying to shut up him and his ilk who are truly portraying the dangers we face as a nation (yes, we are still a nation but with our porous borders, our declining numbers of highly skilled homegrown computer and engineering folks [forcing us to recruit foreign programmers and Ph.D.s], and our “global vision” of sustainability [sic] who knows how long we shall remain a nation).
    He is always an example of moral clarity amidst the obscurantism of today’s political figures.

  • gbyrneg50

    Again we see the ghost of Sir Neville Chamberlain peace agreement in one hand and umbrella in the other. “Peace in our time”, he said. Most prime ministers and presidents are like Sir Neville Chamberlain. But Sir Winston Churchill was very different and President Reagan very different. In the 20th Century these two strode like giants across the world stage. People want the short-term quick fix and that is what the aggressor offers them ready to give them the business again.

  • Lanna

    There will be wars and rumors of wars, strife, and chaos, Islam believes it will rule, but there will be a time in history where they will bend to the God of Israel..its coming…I cannot say the exact time frame…all this has been foretold in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Revelation as well as the outcome for those who have cursed Israel.

  • Americana

    I’m not sure how you arrive at these statements from my comments — “…you show that you reject the creation of Israel to begin with.” And…”you make it appear that if Israel wants to survive and be a moral country besides, it must give the Arabs what they want.”

    Those aren’t my claims, those are what Israel is constantly claiming — that she is a moral country, the most moral in the region by Western democratic standards, and that she’d give the Palestinians a state if only they’d stop shooting at Israel and causing terrorist havoc.

    It’s no wonder the Palestinian Arabs were already attacking Israel at the time of her creation because they were well aware they were being blocked from full participation in the deliberations over the two-state process. The British were so desperate to get out from under the seemingly insoluble diplomatic difficulties inherent in constructing a Jewish home inside the Palestinian region, they simply threw up their hands after one too many Jewish terrorist attacks. The Jews can make the claim the British “abandoned the Jews to their fate at the hands of the Arabs” but that’s falsehood. The British didn’t want any more diplomatic envoys assassinated or British soldiers assassinated after their troops had fought a horrific world war through to an Armistice. Why should British soldiers have continued to die because Jewish Irgun and Haganah were obsessed w/the formation of the Jewish state? At that point, those Jewish fighters weren’t really going to be saving Jews from the Holocaust, it had already happened.

  • 1Indioviejo1

    Spencer, you nailed it. The GOP is the stupid Party, therefore I will not vote for any Candidate but a conservative. Preferably T-Party candidate, win or lose.