Israel Matzav

Spanish Lessons for Israel

A friend sent me Nicloas Kristof's drivel from today's New York Times, since I refuse to pay for the privilege of reading their uber-leftist columnists.

He sent it to me after sending me his letter to the editor, which I will not reproduce here in the hope that he will get it published there.

But I do want to look at part of Mr. Kristof's column. I will not discuss his comparison of Israel with England and Spain and why we too - in Kristof's view - should not respond to terrorism. My friend does a great job of demolishing that argument. But I wanted to look at another aspect of Kristof's column, which has less to do with Lebanon and more to do with our old nemesis the 'Palestinians.' Mr. Kristof continues to spout the kind of nonsense that led our government to flee from Lebanon and surrender Gaza, which is why we are fighting a war on two fronts today (yes, the 'Palestinians' shot some more Kassams today):

In the past, terror attacks spilled blood and spread fear, but they did not challenge the survival of Israel itself. At some point, though, militant groups will recruit teams of scientists and give them a couple of years and a $300,000 research budget, and the result will be attacks with nerve gas, anthrax, or “dirty bombs” that render areas uninhabitable for years.

All this suggests that the only way for Israel to achieve security is to reach a final peace agreement, involving the establishment of a Palestinian state (because states can be deterred more easily than independent groups like Hamas). Such an agreement is not feasible now, but it might be five or 15 years from now. Israel’s self-interest lies in doing everything it can to make such a deal more likely — not in using force in ways that strengthen militants and make an agreement less likely.

First, I don't know why Kristof thinks the terrorists cannot make nerve gas or anthrax or "dirty bombs" today. Oops - if he admitted that, he might have to admit that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction too, and it is a mantra of the left not to admit that.

Second, Kristof recites the biggest leftist mantra of our generation: "The only way for Israel to achieve security is to reach a final peace agreement, involving the establishment of a Palestinian state (because states can be deterred more easily than independent groups like Hamas)." Rubbish.

That statement is not rubbish because there is no such thing as a 'Palestinian' (even though there is no such thing as a 'Palestinian'). It's rubbish because even the creation of a 'Palestinian state' would not be enough to convince the 'Palestinians' to stop trying to destroy Israel. Don't believe me? Take a look at Egypt:

But then I rememebrd that we- the majority of us anyway- don't want peace with Israel, and are not interested in any real dialogue with them. We weren't then and we are not now. The Entire peace process has always been about getting the land back, not establishing better relations. Even when we do get the land back, it's not enough. People in Egypt lament daily the Camp David treaty that prevents us from fighting. In Gaza they never stopped trying to attack Israel. In Lebanon Hezbollah continued attacking even after the Israeli withdrawel. And the people- the majority of the arab population- support it. Very few of us are really interested in having any lasting Peace or co-existance. I mean, if our left is asking for war, what do you think the rest of the population is thinking?

I think that the Israeli want peace with us because they don't want their lives disrupted. They don't want to have the IDF soldiers fighting in Gaza, rockets coming into their towns from Hamas or having to go to wars against Hezbollah to get their soldiers back. I think they want peace because they want their peace of mind. They view us as if we were a headache. We view them as if they are a cancer.

Does anyone really think it would be different with the 'Palestinians'? Sure it would be - the 'Palestinians' are within shooting range of our airport. There's no Sinai desert to serve as a buffer zone with the 'Palestinians.' The 'Palestinians' - if we let them - will end up with a state reichlet that has two parts that they will forever be trying to bring closer together.

If anything, the 'Palestinians' will have more reasons to remain hostile to Israel than the Egyptians have. A 'Palestinian state' will not bring Israel 'security.' It will bring us a nightmare.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:55 PM