Hat tip Family Security Matters.
Caroline Glick, a writer and deputy managing editor for the Jerusalem Post, has written a most perceptive analysis of our current administration's animus toward Israel. Glick, as usual, nails it when writing on Israeli matters vis-a-vis the forces who seek her destruction. The below article is cross-posted from Family Security Matters.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10978/pub_detail.asp
Our treatment of Israel is shameful. From the personal snubbing and disrespect to PM Bibi Netayahu at the White House by Obama, to the arrogance of Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta's demands that Israel negotiate with people who have not given up the goal of eventual destruction of the Jewish state, it is clear that Israel has no ally in the current administration, nor in the State Department.
Exactly whom is Israel to make a deal with? Hizbollah in Lebanon? Hamas in Gaza? They both openly promise the destruction of Israel. The Palestinian Authority? Abbas may talk a good tune when he speaks in English to the West, but in Arabic, he promises no Jews will be found in the State of Palestine. He also presides over a news media in the West Bank that teaches everyone from children to grandpas that Jews are evil.
In addition, Israel now has to deal with the so-called "Arab Spring" in Egypt and other nations where the Muslim Brotherhood is busy taking over. Not to mention Iran, with its calls for Israel's destruction and those nukes nearing completion.
And now the US is siding with Israel's foes. They may as well admit it. Our current administration is taking the same approach that the ever-so practical Europeans, craving Arab oil and fearing their own restive Muslim populations who demand that they condemn Israel, a demand with which the Europeans gladly comply.
For Israel, it seems there is only one course of action; wait until the American people wake up and vote Mr Obama and his rotten adminsitration out of office.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
You have expressed my feelings exactly, Gary. The left will stop at nothing until they see Israel wiped off the face of the Earth. Then they will wonder why the Islamists come for them next.
I predict that Obama will not even get one third of the popular vote in the next election. Americans are waking up to what a criminal he is.
There is an old Jewish Prophecy:
The Messiah will come when the whole world has turned its back on the Jewish people.
I am starting to watch for Him.
“Then people will deliver YOU up to tribulation and will kill YOU, and YOU will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name. abandoned. Keep on the watch, therefore, because YOU do not know on what day YOUR Lord is coming.
This is what Jesus said, so which is it gonna be Findalis?
I happen to believe in Jesus and you don't, and Gary doesn't know what he believes.
Obama shouldn't cater to Israel so daintily. He should tell Bibi straight up that as a sovereign nation, Israel can set its own foreign policy, but cannot expect a blank check from the rest of the world to sustain it.
Of course Israel should have signed a permanent treaty with the Palestine Authority several years ago. That would leave Hamas and Hizb-i-u-Lah with no more raison d'etre, although they would scream and moan and posture for another decade, while the people of the West Bank got on with building a sustained economy. Why should there be Jews in Palestine? Jews already have Israel.
(I believe God knew what he was doing when he set our sun to sustain its current benign level of radiation for another 5 billion years or so.)
You know who disagrees Gary? <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64034.html>Benjamin Netanyahu</a>.
It is when Jesus appears in Jerusalem, and makes his assessment, when judgement is done. Jews need to be in Jerusalem, when he makes his next appearance. If Jews are absent, then there will be real trouble. Islamists have already bricked up the the gate at the wall and created a grave yard in front of this gate that Jesus would come through to enter the old city.
Squid
"Siarlys Jenkins: Of course Israel should have signed a permanent treaty with the Palestine Authority several years ago."
Israel tried when they compromised in the 1947-1948 and accepted the partion plan. They tried again in the 1970s and in 2000 and in 2008The Palestinians have never accepted a proposal where a Palestinian state would coexist with Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people.
Now if you want to cut defense funding for Israel - which most of it goes back to buy American weapons and is really more of a way to boast American engineering jobs - that is reasonable.
Israel should probably fund their own defense these days. I hope you place the same demands that Korea foot the bill for US troops there too.
In a recent poll by Brookings showed 80% of Israeli Jews have a favorable view of the United States.
A majority (54%) of Israeli Jews polled expressed a favorable view of the U.S. President while 39% expressed negative views.
That is probably higher than the US.
Matan,
Could not pull it up.
Funny. I could have added you in that post.
Anonymous: Prior to 1973, Israel could not have signed a treaty with any Palestinian entity, because there was none. There were only a population of refugees, interned by Arab governments that wanted to use them as pawns.
After 1967, the land where the largest population of those refugees lived was under Israeli control. By 1980, Israel had treaties with the two most significant Arab states directly bordering Israel.
Now, there is just the matter of partitioning the Former British Mandate of Palestine between Israel and a Palestinian state, which is exactly what the Jewish population sought and expected in 1947. The boundaries look a bit different now, because several Arab nations chose to send in armies in 1947, and lost. But a partition there still needs to be, unless a deal can be worked out to provide full citizenship to the entire population within an ethnically and religiously mixed single republic. Both Jews and Arabs are dubious about that.
Israel could have had a treaty with the PA anytime in the last five years. It would require removing settlements from the territory of the Palestinian republic, and finessing overlapping claims to Jerusalem.
Sure, Korea should pay for its own defence. So should Germany, Britain...
Israel and Jordan signed a peace agreeement in 1994.
In the 1970s Sadat urged the Palestinian to negotiate with the Israelis. He told them the Israelis were serious about peace but the Palestinians ignored him.
Watch at 1:15. Benny Morris at a lecture in London this year briefly answers a question why there hasn't been a two state solution? He briefly brings up the 1970s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEn2o_Jr3VA
While I think we agree more than we disagree, I disagree your statement -
"Israel could have had a treaty with the PA anytime in the last five years."
Olmert presented a good proposal and it Abbas did not respond to it.
The proposal gave Palestinians 94% of the West Bank, control of Arab areas of East Jerusalem and a symbolic return of some refugees, he said.
The Palestinians made a "dramatic mistake" by not accepting the plan, he said.
Mr Olmert suggested the Palestinians do something "very smart" and even now, formally accept the peace proposal he made, regardless of Mr Netanyahu's stance.
The move "could be very embarrassing for Netanyahu," he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8272425.stm
map of what Olmert proposed
http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D171209/olmertmap.pdf
more info on Olmert's peace plan
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/haaretz-exclusive-olmert-s-plan-for-peace-with-the-palestinians-1.1970
anon1
Gary, sorry, copy paste this: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64034.htm
Ingrid,
Moses is also considered a prophet by Muslims. Yet Jews are not treated very well in the Koran. Anti-Semitism exists to this day among many Muslims.
Ingrid, Josef Goebbels would have been proud of you.
Still using the "Jews killed Jesus" canard, huh? Your past is showing.
I always thought Squid was Jewish. So, it appears he is one of those wierd American Christians who only sympathize with Jews and Israel so that they Jews can be in the right place to be slaughtered in accordance with Christian prophecy, rather than Islamic prophecy.
(Both such "prophecies" are abominations to their own faiths, but when has that ever stopped a determined theocrat?)
Yes, Abbas could have had a deal with Olmert, and Netanyahu could have had a deal with Abbas. But at the moment, Netanyahu is the one most conspicuously in the way. There is no reason the U.S. should commit itself to "Israel uber alles."
Yeah? So why is he talking about the Second Coming of some odd-ball Jewish character executed by the Romans?
Post a Comment