Posted on 04/16/2010 6:36:45 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
The Obama administration is reportedly signaling another major shift in policy towards one of its staunchest allies, Israel, and this shift could change the way it votes at the Security Council. The change would mean an end to the US' use of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council when certain anti-Israel resolutions are introduced for a vote.
Reports surfaced a couple of weeks ago, that a senior US diplomat met with Qatar's foreign minister in Paris. They discussed the possibility that the US was giving serious consideration to not using its veto if a vote on Israeli settlements was to come up. It has been the policy of successive administrations to veto virtually all anti-Israel resolutions at the Security Council.
(Excerpt) Read more at liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com ...
This could start a world war.
How is that relevant to the discussion? The post you reponded to recommended driving the Arabs OUT of the W. Bank altogether and into Jordan (a position I heartily agree with, btw), not socially engineering their society into a Western-style democracy as we've attempted to do in Iraq/Afghanistan.
“How is that relevant to the discussion?”
I thought it was obvious. I was responding to this remark:
“How about securing the West Bank and aggressively driving the filthy subhumans back into Jordan, where they came from in the first place.”
The filthy subhumans of whom he speaks are the Arab Muslims, unless I misunderstood the writer. I was merely pointing out that we are now fighting two wars to help those same filthy subhumans, and I was interested to see what the writer thought about that.
“Go away, lefty.”
I don’t know why it is a “lefty” opinion that Israel should do what is best for Israel, even if it is also something what the Arabs want. Because the Muslims produce more babies, the Jews in Israel are going to be outnumbered in their own country in the next decade or so.
When that happens, what will their alternatives be? Allow the Arabs to vote and elect Hamas to govern Israel? Or deny the Arabs to vote and become an apartheid state, with subsequent loss of support of the world community? It would be almost impossible for even the USA to support Israel in such a case.
I want Israel to survive and prosper. I think that long term, they are going to have to either embrace a two state solution or induce Jordan to take over the West Bank and allow the Muslims to immigrate there, or something along those lines. In any event, it seems like continued Israeli building in the West Bank makes these options more difficult.
Now, are you just a name-caller, or do you have a point to make?
“If the Palis really wanted a two state solution, settlers would be no issue at all. They could stay where they are and the Palis could welcome them.”
Really, you think so? I’m a Texan, and I think you know how most of us feel about illegal immigrants. Somehow I doubt that the Palis would be more generous in their attitude towards what they consider to be illegal immigrants as well.
The last thing Jordan wants is to absorb 2.5 million nutballs into their population, and no inducement will be enough to get them to change their minds. (Remember Black September?). So you can forget that idea. Israel would have to force the Palis upon the Jordanians. ...by driving them across the Jordan River. Of course that's a major war scenario, but one that's increasingly becoming less far-fetched by the day.
Another plan (as George Will outlined in the article I posted in #29) is to drive the Palis to the Eastern half of the W. Bank and then build a wall to keep them out. Of course Jordan would be guarding their Western border to keep the Palis out of their nation as well. No one wants them, and for good reason.
The Arab nations, using the Palis as pawns both to redirect the attention of their populaces away from the corruption and tyranny at home and onto an external enemy ("The Zionist Entity") and to create a forward army on the front lines of their war to destroy Israel, have created a monster.
I read the George Will article you recommended, and as usual with Will, I was impressed. He might well be recommending a reasonable solution except for the problem of the Muslims within Israel already. Now I am not sure of this, but I assume they are already citizens and it would be difficult to just remove them. Or perhaps they identify themselves as Israelis first and Muslims second, so their desires are not the same as the Palestinian Muslims (I am sure this must be true to some extent). But most writers seem to feel that there will be a crisis when the Muslims of Israel outnumber the Jews, and Will’s short war and secure walls won’t solve that problem.
You’re correct, the high birth rate of Arabs within Israel proper is indeed a problem. ...a problem that will still exist even if the Israelis cede to the demands of “the rest of the world” and give the Palies the entire W. Bank as a new state, including the areas currently settled by Jews. Why? Because life is too good for Arabs with Israeli citizenship (a fact the MSM duly ignores), and the chances of more than just a small % of them wanting to move to a new state run by those Hamas/Fatah crazos is close to zero. ...even with monetary incentives (unless they’re large enough).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.