Tuesday, May 24, 2011

President Obama is no friend of Israel

The Middle East ‘peace’ effort is to implement borders being adjusted to what Israel was in 1967. The gap from withdrawal of Israeli ‘occupation’ would allow for room for the new state of Palestine. If Israel does not withdraw, according to international law; Israel would then be occupying a sovereign nation.

How can this NOT start a war?

Why is the 1967 border so important? Why not 1917? Why go into the past at all? Is this not why wars are fought in the first place? I had thought that wars are fought to decide the issue. Otherwise, wars are not worth waging. In that case, why not today’s border?

1967 was the only Arab-Israeli war begun with an Israeli offensive. It was the 3rd of 4 major wars. Going back to 1967 is to set things right. Now we have the moral high ground. Who are we kidding?

When the shooting starts, you find out who your real friends are. Whose side are we on? We are certainly happy to jeopardize Israeli lives, while holding our own so dear as to withdraw from active contact with our enemies. This is not being even handed; it is taking the other side.

In the Muslim world, we are considered to be in the house of war. (The other house, the ‘house of peace’ is the areas under Islamic control) The definition of ‘innocent’ is Muslim. ‘Guilty’ is everything else. Islamic law is about as different from our system as can be imagined. Just look at Rape. Rape is certainly not defined in Islamic law in any way near our definition. According to Muslim law, a man may take his wife against her will. A woman who is not married is ‘public property’. A large percentage of Muslims believe that Islamic law allows a man to beat his wife. And this is only part of the picture. Physical violence is much less discouraged within Muslim culture. Few emotions are allowed, anger being one that is OK to express publicly. And now this culture will obtain a new national status where land is internationally recognized as ‘occupied’. This is a far cry from “Occupied Muslim land”. It can be compared to the occupation of France by Germany, 1940-1944.

Islam has been and is today fielding an army. By granting statehood in this way, we will be giving Islamic ‘soldiers’ a uniform, a flag, a national government and the ability to declare war though internationally recognized means. One of the big advantages in fighting terrorism is that they do not have a state. Like dealing with pirates, countries have many options as to what they can do with captured terrorists. Statehood will remove much of this advantage when fighting Islamic terrorism. Why do we wish to do this? And we will be doing this at Israeli expense. Some friend and ally we are.

No comments:

Post a Comment