The Lesson of '73.
I think that the israeli public (especially the politicians) believes that Israel is indestructible and that no matter how stupid a policy we adopt it would always be possible to pay a blood price and extricate ourselves from the consequences .
This was the result of the yom kipur war where the best efforts of the arabs combined with the worst efforts of the israeli government and IDF high command and still ended up in jewish victory. I don't necessarily disagree with this attitude I just don't like paying blood prices for goals I disapprove of.
Monday, April 26, 2004
Wednesday, April 21, 2004
I'm not going to say anything about the planned expulsion of the jews from the gaza strip because I don't have anything wise to say about that . It's an action which I can not understand and because of that it makes me feel powerless . How can you communicate with the insane when there isn't any method in their insanity?
Monday, April 19, 2004
A little bit of bar-b-que
the body of a spanish policeman killed by arab terrorists is mutilated
this is preaching to the choir but I just love the language of that article
"Police do not know who committed the crime, and an investigation is under way."
Can anyone give them a clue? And while at it give it to CNN too.
"The suspected terrorists set off a bomb during the raid "
Suspected are they? Innocent until proven and all that?
what's the net abbreviation for bitter laughter ?
the body of a spanish policeman killed by arab terrorists is mutilated
this is preaching to the choir but I just love the language of that article
"Police do not know who committed the crime, and an investigation is under way."
Can anyone give them a clue? And while at it give it to CNN too.
"The suspected terrorists set off a bomb during the raid "
Suspected are they? Innocent until proven and all that?
what's the net abbreviation for bitter laughter ?
Saturday, April 17, 2004
Is the current loll in terrorism in Israel the result of Syria and Iran and all their proxies being too involved in staging the fight in Iraq to spend any resources on Israel?
If that is true there should be a surge in attacks in Israel as soon as one or both decide that the fight in Iraq is lost . That would probably happen sometimes next week.
An interesting implication is that Iraq and/or Syria cannot fight a two front terror campaign
Could they be even weaker than I thought they are?
If that is true there should be a surge in attacks in Israel as soon as one or both decide that the fight in Iraq is lost . That would probably happen sometimes next week.
An interesting implication is that Iraq and/or Syria cannot fight a two front terror campaign
Could they be even weaker than I thought they are?
3 down and about 3 million to go
But lets put some spin on it
It's time for a little bit of the obvious truth
The israeli establishment has no interest in stopping arab violence since , just like the arab rulers, the war gives it a carte blanche to do whatever it wants in all areas of life as long as it seems to be active on the arab front. This is what Oslo was all about and this is also what the planned expulsion of the jews from the gaza strip is all about . Whenever it might seem as if the arabs are losing someone on our side would give them a break with lots of money and power and a huge moral boost (not to mention international credibility) thrown in just so the endless war never ends and no politico or the Sir Humphrey's of Israel's establishment ever actually has to do anything except spouting one or another kind of nonsense about "the conflict" (and be paid by public money)
But lets put some spin on it
It's time for a little bit of the obvious truth
The israeli establishment has no interest in stopping arab violence since , just like the arab rulers, the war gives it a carte blanche to do whatever it wants in all areas of life as long as it seems to be active on the arab front. This is what Oslo was all about and this is also what the planned expulsion of the jews from the gaza strip is all about . Whenever it might seem as if the arabs are losing someone on our side would give them a break with lots of money and power and a huge moral boost (not to mention international credibility) thrown in just so the endless war never ends and no politico or the Sir Humphrey's of Israel's establishment ever actually has to do anything except spouting one or another kind of nonsense about "the conflict" (and be paid by public money)
Wednesday, April 14, 2004
progress !
after 40 years (or 60 depending on how one counts) a US president acknowledged publicly that like maybe the jews have a right to live at least on some parts of their homeland because it would be a bit complicated to take it away from them.
At least as long is it doesn't hamper the arabs from flooding into it
I wonder how many years before the USA actually recognizes Israel de jure and not just de facto
dream on
after 40 years (or 60 depending on how one counts) a US president acknowledged publicly that like maybe the jews have a right to live at least on some parts of their homeland because it would be a bit complicated to take it away from them.
At least as long is it doesn't hamper the arabs from flooding into it
I wonder how many years before the USA actually recognizes Israel de jure and not just de facto
dream on
Friday, April 09, 2004
Things I would love the american public to hear before November comes
About 10 years ago we jews decided to abandon our war against arab terrorism and engage in a multilateral dialogue of peace , understanding , good will and the EU.
You know what happened.
there were two key phrases used by the supporters of the "peace process" at the time .
1) "the PLO would fight HAMAS with no bullshit"
the assumption was that if Israel would give the PLO land and weapons and money and political support then the interests of the PLO would coincide with israeli interests against it's political rivals. That never happened because the interest of the PLO was to prevent HAMAS attacks on them and NOT in preventing attacks against jews.
It seems that Kerry and a lot of the american left think that if the USA would cozy up to the "axis of weasels" and the 'moderate' muslims it could make them turn their power against the islamists who are obviously their enemies too .
It's the same mistake.
The europeans and the arab rulers interest is in preventing attacks against them and NOT in protecting the USA . So if they believe that turning a blind eye to or even aiding attacks against americans would keep the islamists off their back then no amount of diplomatic rhetoric or economic and military aid would change that .
2)"if this doesn't work we can always take Gaza back"
That never happened also. The assumption was that since the state of Israel is stronger than any combination of arab countries and/or groups it could always force its terms or return to its previous position. This didn't happen not because Israel became weaker or the arabs stronger but because the political will was gone. No politician in Israel who is committed to the use of force against the arabs can get more that 10-20% of the vote even thou polls show that at least 60-70% of the israelis don't believe negotiations with the arabs can lead anywhere . people simply don't vote for radicals who offer the public "blood , toil ,sweat and tears" even when they agree with everything the radicals say. (in the USA it took 9/11 to change US policy and even then it was an executive decision and NOT one put to the popular vote)
Since resolving the conflict by force ( nice euphemism? ) is politically impossible and at the same time has proved itself to be the only realistic possibility Israel is locked into an endless cycle of violence.
Please , Please don't go there.
I could be wrong , my analogy might be off or it could be that the whole jewish/arab peace process imploded because of some detail that escaped me and not because of faulty basic assumptions and so it has no bearing on the war on terrorism . but be aware that if you abandon the bush doctrine it will never be possible to return to it even if it turns out to be the right thing after all and you'll find yourselves , like us, locked into endless ritualistic blood letting in the best Aztec tradition.
Learn from our mistakes , Don't repeat them
no matter how fun they sound
About 10 years ago we jews decided to abandon our war against arab terrorism and engage in a multilateral dialogue of peace , understanding , good will and the EU.
You know what happened.
there were two key phrases used by the supporters of the "peace process" at the time .
1) "the PLO would fight HAMAS with no bullshit"
the assumption was that if Israel would give the PLO land and weapons and money and political support then the interests of the PLO would coincide with israeli interests against it's political rivals. That never happened because the interest of the PLO was to prevent HAMAS attacks on them and NOT in preventing attacks against jews.
It seems that Kerry and a lot of the american left think that if the USA would cozy up to the "axis of weasels" and the 'moderate' muslims it could make them turn their power against the islamists who are obviously their enemies too .
It's the same mistake.
The europeans and the arab rulers interest is in preventing attacks against them and NOT in protecting the USA . So if they believe that turning a blind eye to or even aiding attacks against americans would keep the islamists off their back then no amount of diplomatic rhetoric or economic and military aid would change that .
2)"if this doesn't work we can always take Gaza back"
That never happened also. The assumption was that since the state of Israel is stronger than any combination of arab countries and/or groups it could always force its terms or return to its previous position. This didn't happen not because Israel became weaker or the arabs stronger but because the political will was gone. No politician in Israel who is committed to the use of force against the arabs can get more that 10-20% of the vote even thou polls show that at least 60-70% of the israelis don't believe negotiations with the arabs can lead anywhere . people simply don't vote for radicals who offer the public "blood , toil ,sweat and tears" even when they agree with everything the radicals say. (in the USA it took 9/11 to change US policy and even then it was an executive decision and NOT one put to the popular vote)
Since resolving the conflict by force ( nice euphemism? ) is politically impossible and at the same time has proved itself to be the only realistic possibility Israel is locked into an endless cycle of violence.
Please , Please don't go there.
I could be wrong , my analogy might be off or it could be that the whole jewish/arab peace process imploded because of some detail that escaped me and not because of faulty basic assumptions and so it has no bearing on the war on terrorism . but be aware that if you abandon the bush doctrine it will never be possible to return to it even if it turns out to be the right thing after all and you'll find yourselves , like us, locked into endless ritualistic blood letting in the best Aztec tradition.
Learn from our mistakes , Don't repeat them
no matter how fun they sound
Tuesday, April 06, 2004
Following Fallujah a Victor David Hasnson wrote in his weblog about how sick he is of arab barbarism . One Michael Ledeen responded in LGF saying basically 'have faith , be patient ,we fixed Germany we can do this also but we need to fix not only Iraq but all the rest too' .
A fine sentiment that I agree with.
BUT...
ML says "...I do not think there is anything in their genes or their DNA that makes it impossible for them to achieve a democracy, or maybe better a democracy of sorts." .
And what if there is?
One of my current theories* on democracy is that it is a creation of aggression.
In a society where the majority of people want to the alpha males and are willing to fight for it a voluntary sharing of power between everyone is a stable solution while in a society where the majority are much more submissive the aggressive minority would seize power.
So IF social aggressiveness is genetic and IF my theory about it being a necessary part of what makes democracy stable is true then the problems of the arab world might be solved better by hormonal implants than by any social or legal mechanism .
Good luck with trying that one.
To begin to test this theory you need to look at arabs who were raised by jews as jews ( and also at all the other permutations ) and see what differences there are (if any) between the various groups.
I'm using arabs/jews because (apart from my racism) arabs and jews are supposed to be genetically close
*my other theory of democracy is that it is an over abundance of love
Love leads to Respect
Respect leads to Trust
Trust leads to Cooperation
And Cooperation leads to Democracy
A fine sentiment that I agree with.
BUT...
ML says "...I do not think there is anything in their genes or their DNA that makes it impossible for them to achieve a democracy, or maybe better a democracy of sorts." .
And what if there is?
One of my current theories* on democracy is that it is a creation of aggression.
In a society where the majority of people want to the alpha males and are willing to fight for it a voluntary sharing of power between everyone is a stable solution while in a society where the majority are much more submissive the aggressive minority would seize power.
So IF social aggressiveness is genetic and IF my theory about it being a necessary part of what makes democracy stable is true then the problems of the arab world might be solved better by hormonal implants than by any social or legal mechanism .
Good luck with trying that one.
To begin to test this theory you need to look at arabs who were raised by jews as jews ( and also at all the other permutations ) and see what differences there are (if any) between the various groups.
I'm using arabs/jews because (apart from my racism) arabs and jews are supposed to be genetically close
*my other theory of democracy is that it is an over abundance of love
Love leads to Respect
Respect leads to Trust
Trust leads to Cooperation
And Cooperation leads to Democracy
Thursday, April 01, 2004
The next big* muslim attack is going to be in europe and against a jewish target
here is something I found thro europundits
an analysis of the european situation after Iraq and Yassin
I don't agree that europe can not sit on the side lines . I think they think they can , mostly because they think that the War on Terrorism is an american invention and that the moment the americans grow tired of it and leave it would all go back to business as usual. And partly because they think ( and they are probably right in that) that they have something to offer the arabs , their jews.
What I found interesting was the suggestion of an attack in europe by Hamas in order to put european pressure on Israel. This has two (to me) obvious flows . First the assumption that muslim/arab terrorism has political aims , that it is a kind of diplomacy by force , it's not , or at least that is not its primary purpose (but that deserve an analysis of it's own) . Secondly europe has very little actual power over Israel , most of it is economical power (the EU is Israel's main trading partner ) and I don't think the various EU members would sacrifice money for politics .
But they do have something to offer the arabs and that's more than a million jews living in the EU . If they can make sure that muslim attacks in europe are directed against the jews and not the general population they'll take that deal since in their minds the yankees will go home long before they run out of jews to throw to the muslim wolves.
So as I see it the next succesful big attack would be in europe against a jewish target and it would be successful becuase the various european authorities would "neglect" to pay attention to threats which are specificly directed at jews while concentrating what little powers they have on protecting the population as a whole . Or thats how they'll explain it if anyone ever catches on to that.
* by big I mean more than 50 dead
here is something I found thro europundits
an analysis of the european situation after Iraq and Yassin
I don't agree that europe can not sit on the side lines . I think they think they can , mostly because they think that the War on Terrorism is an american invention and that the moment the americans grow tired of it and leave it would all go back to business as usual. And partly because they think ( and they are probably right in that) that they have something to offer the arabs , their jews.
What I found interesting was the suggestion of an attack in europe by Hamas in order to put european pressure on Israel. This has two (to me) obvious flows . First the assumption that muslim/arab terrorism has political aims , that it is a kind of diplomacy by force , it's not , or at least that is not its primary purpose (but that deserve an analysis of it's own) . Secondly europe has very little actual power over Israel , most of it is economical power (the EU is Israel's main trading partner ) and I don't think the various EU members would sacrifice money for politics .
But they do have something to offer the arabs and that's more than a million jews living in the EU . If they can make sure that muslim attacks in europe are directed against the jews and not the general population they'll take that deal since in their minds the yankees will go home long before they run out of jews to throw to the muslim wolves.
So as I see it the next succesful big attack would be in europe against a jewish target and it would be successful becuase the various european authorities would "neglect" to pay attention to threats which are specificly directed at jews while concentrating what little powers they have on protecting the population as a whole . Or thats how they'll explain it if anyone ever catches on to that.
* by big I mean more than 50 dead
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)