How long do you think it will take for the Israeli Left to blame this on Jewish extremists? Sounds crazy . . . no it sounds like the Israeli left. Let’s wait and see.

Let’s see: Israel has not changed anything. The terrorists have not changed.
Is this news?
Is it surprising?
Is it morally considerable to stop paying attention to every Jewish injury until there is some reason to believe it isn’t a result of Israeli policy?

Turn your backs on the Arabs and you’ll get stabbed in them. Build a fence and watch the rockets fly over them. For them, the occupation ends when Israel no longer exists. They don’t care who is right and left wing. We’re going to be fighting terror until the world stops rationalizing and says ENOUGH.

TTC,
It isn’t only Israel’s problem anymore. If the international community really wants this process to play out in a productive way, with an emergent Palestine beside a secure Israel, then there has to be a better coordinated effort to disarm the Hamas-Jihad-Martyrs militias and hold the Palestinian Authority to its monopoly on violence. Otherwise forget about Palestinian national aspirations. Independent responsible statehood or Egyptian autonomy for Gaza and Jordanian for the West Bank. Put the decision on the Palestinians themselves.

We have defensible borders, when we pull out of the territories. The terrorists can have their pick of the litter of cities with greater populations, that are only a kassam rocket away. Their bombers will be that much closer to our malls, and major cities, and their terrorism will be rewarded which they will consider one of their greatests triumphs, only adding fuel to the fire…..

Digital: “It is Israel’s problem… Israel receives the brunt of international criticism. If you think this will all go away once we’divorce’ ourselves from the PA, then I have some prime real estate to sell you in FL.”
If you can get a grip on your reading comprehension skills you’ll see that I wrote it was not ONLY Israel’s problem. That includes Israel, y’see. Israel is not disengaged from the territories yet, let alone divorced, but existing settlements do nothing to stop terror or save Israeli lives. Go figure. No one, nobody, nowhere is saying withdrawal will end terror overnight. But it will strengthen Israel’s alliances with like-minded enlightened democratic states among the international community who are reasonably frustrated with an Israel otherwise obsessed with a futile expansion policy. Or do you believe it’s wise for Israel to try and exist completely on its own?
Digital (cont’d): “Their bombers will be that much closer to our malls, and major cities, and their terrorism will be rewarded which they will consider one of their greatests triumphs, only adding fuel to the fire…..”
By then we’re dealing wtih an emerging state, subject to international law. That is why it is best for the West (which, if you haven’t noticed, is now heavily invested in political stability in the region) to ensure Palestinian leadership control its monopoly on violence and disarm Palestinian terror militias. Because if they fail to do so, there is no argument prohibitting Israel from responding in a manner way beyond occupation of the territories of an emergent Palestinian state.
Regarding Digital’s bizarre “Al Franken shrine” comment: It’s amazing the way the political right insists that anyone who approaches things from a liberal perspective is either a deluded pacifist or a Arab establishment fellow traveler. Clearly, the right is so absorbed in its own cynicism that anything outside its little circle jerk must be twisted, ridiculed and dismissed.

J: “Yeah, that’s it. All these countries are just dying to line up with Israel….”
I am actually very proud that Isael’s largest trading partner is the EU. I am even prouder that the Jewish state is a player in the global economy. Too bad if that annoys you so much.

What arguments, J? Just more juvenile name-calling from you. I’m so naive because, like most Israelis and diaspora Jews, I can’t agree with you that Israel is made any stronger by draining its own resources and foreign good will (including significant American foreign aid) for the sake of settlements in disputed and unannexed territories….
Fear works wonders for keeping some Jews insecure and suckered into right wingnut rhetoric like the so-called “Oslo war” and other cynical political bullshit. Strike up your one-note song about Israel the pitiful victim of “anarchic jungle of self-interested and sometimes murderous polities,” and for once explain exactly how it helps Israel build and sustain investment and trade?

J: “So Israel deserves what it gets, huh? So much for your pose as a moderate. Go join the other Israel bashers on this site, and take your pathetic, aimless political party with you.”
Nope, never said anything like that and you know it. But it’s nice of you to illustrate my earlier point for me, i.e. that the right is so absorbed in its own cynicism that anything outside its little circle jerk must be twisted, ridiculed and dismissed (that would be a good example of the twist). So much for your pose as a supporter of a strong, democratic and self-sustaining Jewish state. Go back to your circle jerk.

Zionista claims “Nope, never said anything like that and you know it. ”
Judge for yourselves-
“But it will strengthen Israel’s alliances with like-minded enlightened democratic states among the international community who are reasonably frustrated with an Israel otherwise obsessed with a futile expansion policy.”

Wow J, you basically summed up the rebuttal.
“like-minded enlightened democratic states among the international community”,
when has the world ever ruled objectively in Israel’s favor?? HAHAHA, you must have been a strong supporter of the league of nations in a past life
“Clearly, the right is so absorbed in its own cynicism that anything outside its little circle jerk must be twisted, ridiculed and dismissed.”
You must have been thinking about yourself when you said this. It seems every comment you made, you some how manage to include your anti-conservative rhetoric. It’s actually pretty impressive. Al Franken would be impressed hehe
“to ensure Palestinian leadership control its monopoly on violence and disarm Palestinian terror militias.”
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight… ……

Reading comprehension, Z. See, if “enlightened” states treat Israel as less of an ally than they otherwise would, and this is because of “reasonable frustration” with Israel’s policies…then, according to you, Israel deserves what it gets.
But let’s question further. If the “enlightened democratic states” are “reasonably frustrated”, what about the Arab states, Arab people, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians? Is their “frustration” reasonable too? If yes, which acts would it justify?
Cynical asshole? Tsk, name-calling. I generally prefer to be thought of as a “hard-line realistic guarded idealist”, but “cynical asshole” ain’t bad.
Enjoy your drive with Senator Kennedy. Watch out for the bridges.

“Of course the Arab states are not enlightened, let alone reasonable, in any sense. The Arab-Muslim establishment is a network of totalitarian despots. ”
Well, yes. I wasn’t comparing the (more) enlightened democracies to the Arab states, etc. My point was that if the democracies saw the settlements as unjust (when they are not directly affected or aggrieved by them), how much more would you say that the Arab states, etc. are justified in feeling aggrieved?
“Yes they bitch about Israel’s occupation and settlement of the territories. In some sense they are watching their investments drained for the sake of settling Israelis in disputed areas.”
Not really. Any investment made since ’67 was made with the full knowledge that some resources would go toward settlement. In any case, these amounts (foreign investment funds’ reduction in value due to settlements) is negligible. I find it hard to believe you think that this could possibly be the cause of the hostility Israel receives. They bitch for the reasons I mentioned above – “placating Muslim voters in their own countries, unwillingness to oppose the countries that supply their oil and provide markets for their products, misplaced (and self-serving) guilt over colonialism, and good old-fashioned anti-Semitism”. If policies that affected investment were paramount, you’d never hear the end of complaints about France and Germany’s labor, welfare, pension and tax policies, whose wealth-reducing effects would dwarf ten times the number of settlements.
“This is not good for international relations, and it’s not good for Israel.”
The settlements are not the cause of Arab-Israeli hostility or of terrorism. The hostility and terrorism preceded the settlements. Should the settlements disappear, the Arabs will not be placated. For them, Israel itself is a settlement, in any form, shape or size.
As to the justification for the settlements, clearly they were designed to establish a Jewish presence on the West Bank and thus solidify Israel’s hold on that land. There was a degree of realpolitik in that policy, yes, but I don’t see the alternative. Israel can allow local Arab governments there, but to cede sovereignty entirely? And expose the heart of the country to whichever arms or armies the local Arabs invite in?
(Re Gaza, I think that originally settlers should not have been allowed in. The only reason I oppose the current disengagement is that by giving up what the Arabs will inevitably interpret as a victory will only encourage the Arabs to continue their murderous behavior.)
“But by the same token, Israel is not powerless to control its own environment, despite your bizarre desire for Israel’s helplessness.”
See, now THAT’S something I’ve never said or implied. Even clueless Pelosi and drunk Kennedy would realize how silly it is to accuse me of desiring Israel’s helplessness.

It just keeps getting crazier. The November elections must have shredded what little sanity the Z-man had left.
“So what else could you imply when you write, “Fear is sometimes justified, and helps focus people on what’s important”?”
That real dangers be acknowledged and addressed? Which is theopposite of helplessness.
“To suggest exploiting fear to implement policy tips your hand, J. ”
I did not suggest that fear be exploited, whether to implement policy or for any other reasons. I spoke only of legitimate fear, things that really exist that need to be feared and consequently dealt with. And when did you stop beating your wife?
” It’s the bread and butter of totalitarian authority, not genuine leadership. ”
It’s a part of ANY leadership, legitimate or otherwise. For legitimate leadership, idebtifying what’s most dangerous and problematic is essential.
“FDR and Churchill didn’t exactly embrace fear in rising to their greatest challenges.”
What a bizarre example for you to use. Churchill was derided as a scare-monger regarding Hitler. His fears, of course, were well-founded. The lack of fear on the part of his opponents will subject those opponents to mockery for as long as people study history. When you use examples, you would be advised to cite items that bolster your own arguments rather than mine.
“I was not the one who introduced the effect of Israel’s settlement policy on the Arab states. You did. ”
I guess the Z-man’s context-ometer is broken, again. I “introduced” the settlement policy re Arab states to find out to what degree you would hold Israel responsible for Arab hostility. As usual, you didn’t answer the question. I can’t wait for the answer.
“By now its clear that you are incapable of having a discussion in good faith.”
You got chutzpah, that’s for sure. Of all the people I’ve debated on this site, with all of the huge political differences involved, you are the only one who has ever blatantly tried to BS me and anyone reading (I refer to your remarks awhile ago re Ireland’s rising economy). You could have said you didn’t know, could have said nothing, but instead you mixed up some catch-phrases that made no sense in the hope that I would buy it. You have no business attacking the good faith of anyone here.