No more "Land for Peace"
Prefacing the above: I, for one, never saw fit to tell Israel what it should or should not do.
I do not live there, I am not on the front lines of terror everyday. When Edgar Bronfman Sr. came out most vocally against the security barrier I wanted to go the Four Seasons where he dines and spit in his face. Where did he get off telling these people what they should or should not do to save their own lives. I had, for years, admired Bronfman's work on behalf of Israel but on this he had lost me. He was a fool.
I hated Oslo. Never saw the logic in it. Rewarding murder. Arafat saying one thing in English to the West and in the same moment congratulatory moment, encouraging war and Jew killing in arabic to his own people.
On the other hand, I supported Sharon on Gaza. Not for land for peace, but land for war. It seemed to me that after exhaustive efforts to secure peace with Israel's hostile neighbors, it was time Israel set defensible borders, lock down the country and prepare for war. Shut down the borders and defend its people. Gaza was impossible to defend in terms of manpower and money. Strategically it was a nightmare. Even so, the disengagement was heartbreaking - and the toll it took on the whole of the country can not be underestimated.
But now I am stepping out of my passive but supportive role of Israel and saying NO MORE LAND. It is not so much that it accomplishes nothing except to embolden the terrorists and wannabe islamokazes and render Israel perceptively weaker.............but more significantly, the "peace of jihad is founded on the principle "peace and security for land": peace and security are conceded by the jihad armies if the infidels cede their territory and submit to the rules of dhimmitude. [dhimmitude: the condition of "subjection with protection" of non-Muslims in their own countries, obtained by the cessation of their land to the Muslim ruler. Subjection because the infidels submit to Islamic law or face forced conversions, slavery or death. Dhimmitude is the direct outcome of jihad.1
Warning Shots - Martin Peretz (New Republic)
- The withdrawal from Gaza by Israel was supposed to be a test. That the hudna (ceasefire) would hold. It didn't. What about security undertakings with regard to Gaza's border with Egypt? Again a failure. Is there elemental public order on the streets? Chaos rules in Gaza, utter mayhem.
- The fact is that almost no one in Israel any longer believes in a negotiated peace with the Palestinians. Not because sensible and humane Israelis can't imagine a fair divide of the land between the river and the sea. But because Gaza has truly shown them that there are - let's be perfectly frank - no Palestinians with whom to treat. Not a single security assurance from the Palestinians has ever held. There is no dispute: This is the record.
- All this has consequences for the West Bank. Sooner or later, and particularly if there is a withdrawal from the West Bank and the Jordan Valley, rockets and missiles will be as common there as they are in Gaza and Lebanon. Already, al-Qaeda has claimed (and Israeli intelligence has confirmed) that it was responsible for at least one rocket attack on Israel proper.
- Those who casually promote the notion that Israel should disengage from here, there, nearly everywhere close to the 1949 lines are proposing that the Jewish state commit suicide. Virtually the entire country, including Ben-Gurion Airport, would be vulnerable to even simple weaponry.
Footnaote 1 Bat Yeor page 34 Eurabia