"We're here for our payment, so youse don't have any problems."
Forget about that freeze Congress placed on that "protection money" we send to the Palestinian Authority. Obama has lifted it. In his mind, it is "important to the national security interests of the US."
Times of Israel has the story.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/obama-lifts-freeze-on-192-million-aid-package-to-palestinian-authority/
Of course, it is important. Here is why: It is bribe money-or protection money, take your choice. It is so Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas will go through the motions of wanting to negotiate a peace settlement with Israel that will end in a two-state solution, when we all know that Abbas and his cohorts want it all (Israel). It is protection money for the PA to "crack down" on those who would attack and murder Israeli civilians (like the Fogel family). It is hoped that if we continue to send funding, the PA will someday put an end to all those anti-Jewish images that infest their TV shows and newspapers. It is also hoped that with this generous aid, somehow, the Palestinians will like us. And, of course, Obama, like all his predecessors, is hoping to achieve that elusive dream of being the president who finally achieves peace in the Middle East. That requires more bribe money-US taxpayer money.
The truth is that money cannot fix what is wrong in the Middle East.
8 comments:
This isn't bribe money at all Gary. Only an enemy of Israel, a fool, or someone whose vision was restricted by ideological blinders, would say such a thing.
Israel has been understandably skeptical about the peaceful outcome of relinquishing control over an anarchic, faction-ridden territory full of political operatives hostile to Israel, with access to a variety of advanced weaponry.
In order to accept a Palestinian Arab state on its borders, Israel needs to know that there are stable state institutions, an economy capable of sustaining its citizens, and a competent security service, on which those across the negotiating table can rely to deliver what is verbally promised.
There is no better development toward a peaceful resolution than PA officials who are trying to foster such an economic life, or the emergence of a stable internal police force in the West Bank. These developments are not yet self-sustaining, but are a wise investment which will yield substantial dividends.
Good move, Mr. President.
Right Siarlys,
Another wise investment. American tax payers footing the bill to construct someone else's society. Money down a rathole. Literally and figuratively.
Siarlys,
You are wrong I think but for entirely different reasons than you state here.
I could perhaps agree that the "Palestinians" may, at some point, be able to manage their own "nation" and live peacefully with Israel. Although I doubt it.
The reason we should give them no assistance has little to do with that however. I remember after the attacks on Sept 11, the rejoice in the environs of "Palestine." They are an enemy of this country and any assistance whatsoever is absurd.
Cabbie, if we all lived in Middle Earth, you might be right. Every race, kingdom, cave, and outpost is either fighting for the Return of the King or the Evil Sauron. Unfortunately, we live in the real world.
The author of the Declaration of Independence never freed his own slaves, and in fact sold most of them to pay his debts. The greatest experiment in Republican liberty was funded by free land stolen at gun point from the original inhabitants. The American people would have sat out WW II until we were totally isolated in the world, if the Japanese hadn't foolishly bombed Pearl Harbor. If they had settled for taking over east Asia, Roosevelt couldn't have sustained a draft long enough to dislodge them.
The Arabic-speaking population of the former British mandate of Palestine are composed of a variety of communities, tribes, and sub-ethnicities, following several religious sects, political ideologies, and aspirations, with varying educational levels and job prospects. Some were dancing in the streets over 9-11. Yassir Arafat was donating blood for the victims... however hypocritically, or cynically.
Some people in my neighborhood were out talking on cell phones "Come on over, we fine, they just after the white folks." Other Americans of African descent were risking (or losing) their lives at Ground Zero, or coming in to repair damage in the area, or serving in the armed forces, calling home to tell their mothers "We're going to go get them!"
Cabbie, you wrote the post about seeing the Muslim children at a patriotic picnic in your home town, and the mixed feelings this evokes. Where do you go off after that insight, trying to tell us that "the Palestinians" are, lock stock and barrel, our enemy? Some of my favorite corner grocery store owners are Palestinians.
Since we live in the real world, we have to do what delivers beneficial results in the long run, not what feeds our egos and inspires us to pat ourselves on the back and brag to each other about how tough we are. Which is about all the answer Gary's petulant little rant deserves either.
Yes. Mixed feelings about an American (or at least in America)family that was doing nothing but having a night out. I think of it often.
I also went out the other week to the famed Houston Galleria (about a once a year venture) and noted a man with a "Palestine" t shirt. The logo showed the "nation" of Palestine to be in the exact shape of the current state of Israel. My feelings on this were not mixed. I saw him as an enemy. Not that I am a Zionist (quite yet).
What I saw on the day after Sept 11 was rejoice in the area of "Palestine." People were in the streets, in vast numbers, celebrating. Therefore they, by an large, are an enemy of our nation.
If it walks like a duck.....
Yes Cabbie, the people who were out celebrating that we took 3000 deaths (a fair number of the dead being Muslims) could reasonably be called enemies. Everyone who lives in the same territory cannot. If someone filmed Frank Collins's Nazi rally in Skokie, would that mean that all Americans hate Jews?
As for how many of them there were, I recall hearing from a young lady whose father's business took him abroad a lot, a man of very conservative politics, who told her after one of the post-post-Soviet crowd actios in Bulgaria that "CNN could make a half-time show look like a popular uprising." It doesn't take a huge percentage of the population to fill a television screen.
A stable Palestinian authority is our best hope to make things like you describe more and more rare.
Siarlys,
I had a feeling that something would be insinuated about television making things appear more than they are. I can agree with that.
I do not think all in "Palestine" jumped for joy after the attack. I do believe however that there was a good deal of satisfaction felt by the majority.
I am not sure the comparision to Skokie is fitting.
There will likely be no such thing as a "stable" Palestine. Not so long as there is the desire to possess all of the territory of their neighbor. That desire can't be stated by most of the political class of the Palestinian Authority for obvious reasons. It is there though.
Frankly the "Palestinians" are being used by others in the Muslim world to create a distraction and irritate those in Israel. There is no real desire by many Muslim leaders in the region to really see a stable Palestinian state that can get along with and live in peace their neighbor. The Palestinians are to many Muslim nations' leadership what Cuba was to the Soviet Union. An effective irritant to their enemy. Much more effective than Cuba ever was though.
Siarlys,
The more I ponder your reply I can't help but get past the reference to Skokie. Neo Nazi rallies are usually nothing more than a few nuts and misfits who desperately want their fifteen minutes. People to be shunned and frankly, to be laughed at. (Some of them may be dangerous though. Can't discount that possibility).
In "Palestine" the day after the attacks, I do believe that it was more than a few whackos who were taking to the streets.
Post a Comment