PDavidHornik

Quote of the day

It goes to former defense minister Moshe Arens. Asked why, then a Likud Knesset member, he voted against the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty in 1979, he replies:

I objected because there was no reason, after they attacked us four times and were defeated, to give them back what they lost. There is no precedent for that in the history of international relations.

He adds, "So I thought we needed to insist on much better terms." Insist on better terms, or don't do it at all. For thirty years it was claimed that, while the treaty didn't cause Egypt to fall in love with Israel, it was worth Israel's tremendous sacrifice of the Sinai--oil, strategic depth, thriving communities--because it brought peace. Now it's all falling to pieces. Just think how much better it would be if the Israeli army still controlled Sinai and Gaza. Instead we're in a horrific situation where Gaza terror organizations are shelling southern Israel (including my city, Beersheva) but truly fighting them entails a risk of war with post-Mubarak Egypt. And there were those who were gung-ho (and there are probably still some) about doing the same damn thing with the Golan.

Glenn Beck's profound friendship toward Israel

Discussed by me on Frontpage today, in the context of the profound nonfriendship lately expressed toward Israel by Gaza and Egypt.

James Kirchik on Egyptian rabid anti-Israelism/anti-Semitism

Kirchik, who contributes occasionally to Haaretz, has this strikingly reality-oriented piece about Egypt on its English website, though it doesn't appear to have been translated for its Hebrew website. Not surprising, since the article directly contradicts Haaretz's dovish-lefty dogma of an Arab world that yearns for peace with Israel but is stymied by the Israeli right-of-center. Kirchik: "After talking to a cross section of people in Egypt, I have come to the conclusion that it is naive to think that Egyptians or, as polls indicate, the Arab world writ large will ever accept the presence of a Jewish state in their midst."

Kirchik believes that, notwithstanding, practical considerations will prevent Egypt from abrogating its peace treaty with Israel. I think that optimism is unwarranted, particularly if Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood gains greater power in the near future--which is a near-certainty.

Kirchik also writes: "attempts by American administrations and leftist Israelis to alter Arab attitudes by hastily arranging a two-state solution, thereby falling into the trap of 'linking' the Palestinian issue to a variety of regional and global problems, are a waste of time."

How do they react to that at Haaretz? I think they brush it aside, the cognitive dissonance being too great. Kirchik adds: "To be sure, the Palestinians deserve justice and a state for their own sake...." Is that a sop to Haaretz? How could anyone who knows anything about the behavior of Palestinian society both in the West Bank and Gaza, particulary the values they teach their children, think that they "deserve" sovereignty, of all things?

 

Cal Thomas: No cause for optimism in Libya

In this great, insightful piece Thomas puts the Libya situation in the--gloomy--perspective of the other Arab "revolutions" and the Arab and Muslim world in general.

Thomas:

None of the nations now experiencing revolutions or unrest have a history of democracy, freedom or human rights. That's because they believe in a God who wants his followers to violently impose their religious beliefs on those who believe differently.

Paste that wherever you paste pithy and important truths.

Avi Yesawich: Israel, be proactive and assertive

Again making points that seem clear to most of us here, while the government seems stuck in Hamlet-like hesitancies. Yesawich:

The defensive PR campaign strategy must be eradicated. When Israel faces these violent confrontations, it must initiate an aggressive, pro-active approach highlighting the atrocious nature of our enemies’ actions. Remind the world that the Palestinians are not united and that a peaceful Palestinian state at this moment is nothing more than a pipedream. Hamas can’t even rein in the terror in its own 140 square mile backyard.

Show the world images of hundreds of rockets falling on our cities, buses riddled with bullet holes and Israelis running for their lives, huddled in bomb shelters trying to evade death.

Whatever action we decide to pursue in the face of repeated attacks on our civilians, one thing is clear: Even if the world demands an apology, it doesn’t mean the demand is justified. We live under daily threats of terror and death, and we will tend to those dangers without apologizing.

Come on, Bibi, the highly skilled communicator who was so impressive in Congress a few months ago-- how about a press conference?

 

Allen West: Israel, stand tall

The congressman, now in Israel, suggests a different approach.

How much longer Israel's "restraint"?

With southern Israel again under a barrage of rocket fire, here in Beersheva we had an air-raid siren last night at about 10, and another one at about 1 a.m. In the earlier one we could hear the very loud boom as an Iron Dome projectile hit the rocket in midair, directly over Beersheva.

The Israeli government has cited some reasons not to take strong action now: not to allow the terror axis to divert attention from what's happening in Syria, not to risk a worsening of relations with Egypt at a sensitive, dangerous time, not to worsen Israel's diplomatic standing before the Palestinian UN statehood bid around September 20. All these have some weight and plausibility; do they justify, do they dictate, passivity before ongoing attacks? Yes, Israel keeps making pinpoint strikes in response, but these obviously are just token efforts that don't deter and don't turn the tide. 

Israel Harel says "enough already"; Israel has to get out of the defensive posture and start asserting the right of its citizens to live normal lives, and to live. I know that the top echelon of our government includes some tough, realistic people and I take their concerns seriously. But patience starts to fray. Netanyahu can be a very effective speaker. One could imagine him finally ordering an operation to eliminate the phenomenon known as Hamas, while giving a major press conference, flanked by his major ministers, detailing what Israel has undergone from these rocket barrages and clearly and forcefully making the point that no other country would tolerate it. Imagine...

 

 

David Meir-Levi: No unilateral terror-state in the West Bank and Gaza

This is an excellent compendium of why the idea is outrageous and flies in the face of logic, morality, and international law.

Efraim Inbar: Nothing to fear in September

Efraim Inbar, head of Israel's BESA Center and a sharp commentator, argues that the Palestinians' upcoming UN statehood bid in September poses no real threat to Israel and fears are inflated. He says the UN is a corrupt, discredited body whereas Israel is united and strong behind Netanyahu's successful policy.

It's true that Israel has been doing somewhat better lately in the diplomatic arena. However, reportedly one reason the government decided not to seriously strike Hamas in Gaza at this point, despite severe provocations, is the belief that Israel currently has "low legitimacy" on the international plane. The true test is whether Israel will be able to handle its security problems effectively, or will once again be slandered and curtailed--or, one might say, Goldstoned--when and if it moves seriously (as it needs to) against the dangerous enemies massing on its borders and elsewhere.

Glenn Beck's pro-Israel address a month ago

Excerpts from it here, and he says pretty extraordinary things.