Posted on 08/06/2006 2:27:37 PM PDT by dangerfield
Al Gore’s movie about global warming has a brilliant title: It flatters us—those of us who believe the scientific consensus about climate change—that we are clear-eyed and honest and brave enough to admit this “inconvenient truth” that the Bush administration and its reckless, craven, venal corporate allies refuse to admit. Yet the truth about greenhouse gases, although plenty scary, is really not so inconvenient: The blame for inaction is easy to lay on others, a solution seems possible, and that solution doesn’t look that onerous.
Whereas concerning the Middle East, there is for most of us no obvious overriding analysis, let alone fix. Concerning Israel and the Palestinian territories, all the truths tend to be truly, deeply, tragically inconvenient.
And the big one is this: Israel is a good and miraculous nation that deserves the support of civilized people, but the great unfortunate fact about its creation—being carved by the U.N. out of Arab land in 1947—cannot be ignored or wished away. We have no choice but to support Israel, even though the Israeli Defense Forces are killing civilians, dozens a day, in Lebanon. All of those deaths, one wants to believe, are unintentional, unavoidable mistakes. Yet as Richard Cohen wrote in his Washington Post column last week, “Israel itself is a mistake . . . an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable [but which] has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now.” Sixty years on, there can be no revising or reversing that mistake—and when the choice is Israel versus unaccommodating Islamist fanatics, we must be for Israel. Is there any more inconvenient truth?
(Excerpt) Read more at newyorkmetro.com ...
How many other countries have been created out of whole cloth since WW1, with rivaling populations? Only Israel remains a controversy, it seems.
This article may be a watermark in our culture of capitulation to Jihadis and backwards, violent Arab cultures.
Kurt Anderson is associated with NPR.
Israel was not carved out of Arab lands. Rather, the Jewish homeland was partioned to give more land to Arabs.
Why was Israel selected as Jewish Homeland? It has something to do with thousands of years history, and somewhat to do with Jews bought the land from Turkey (which had most of the titles) as they were kicked out of their home countries.
As the Jews moved into a wasteland, they developed it, and Arabs moved in to take advantage of the job opportunities thus created.
What a hoot. I know he's refering to the election of Hamas, and the insidious, Iranian backed social services/Capone like prestige that led to Hez Ebolas' election victories. But it wasn't "democracy" that got us where we are. It was Israel's showing signs of weakness, period. They withdrew and into the vaccum of course, the terrorists moved.
This article started out badly by endorsing the hypothesis invented by Al Gore. But then it got worse.
***Israel was not carved out of Arab lands. Rather, the Jewish homeland was partioned to give more land to Arabs. ***
Actually, Israel was carved out of Ottoman Turkish lands,
which was origionally Byzantine Greek lands,
which was Latin French Crusader lands,
which was Seljuk Turkish lands,
which was Arab lands,
which was Roman lands,
which was Selucid Greek lands,
which was Greek lands under Alexander,
which was Persian lands
which was Babylonian lands
which was Jewish lands
which was cananite lands who were completely destroyed.
So we came full circle and the Jews have it again.
"Arab land"? Pre 1948 there were upwards of a million jews scattered throughout the middle east. Was their land, the property they owned and the houses and businesses situated thereon Arab land? Did the hundreds of thousands Arabs who began flocking to present day Israel since the late 1800s/early 1900s to reap the benefits of a small but burgeoning jewish created economy and desert which they made bloom all of a sudden become "Arab land"?
The author's first cited authority is Richard Cohen...that speaks volumes. New Yorker Magazine...hahahaha
it gets much worse, yes. I should have added a BRAAARCH! alert. Or whatever.
Some factual errors.
Syria and Hamas (and most of the Palestinians) are Sunni
Actually, the Syrian regime is controlled by Shi'ites. A splinter group that even other Shi'ites consider weird.
is there any Hillaryesque Democrat who would cheer retroactively about our Christian nation and its Army of the West defending white settlers by exterminating Native Americans?
For a group that was exterminated, there seem to be quite a few of them around.
I contend that words like "exterminate" should not be used casually.
bump
One wants to believe? It should be obvious that if Israel targeted civilians there'd be tens of thousands of them dead by now.
The Left's deep hatred for both America and Israel rivals that of the Jihadis.
The Haters are either trying to hedge their bets with the head sawyers or want in on that crazed barbarian, polygamy, boy sex action.
NPR? Figures.
"Thus another of the inconvenient truths: It’s essentially impossible to conduct a frank, good-faith public debate in the U.S. about U.S. policy toward Israel and the Palestinians"
More lefty self-imposed censorship. When has it not been talked about over and over and over?
That makes my eyes cross, and not only because it's poorly written...What nonsense, and rather snide if you can grasp it.
Palestine included Israel, the disputed territories and what is now called Jordan.
That was partioned to create Palistine, and Trans-Jordan.
That was again partioned, and the divided Palistine was offered to the Arabs and the Jews. The Jews accepted. The Arabs invaded (and lost). The Arabs are not good at war, but refuse to make peace. By contrast, the Jews seem to be good at both, and so the Arabs are jealous.
Actually Israel was not carved out of Arab lands.
Nor was it created from Ottoman Turk lands. Rather, the British had control of Israel, the disputed territories, and what is now Jordan. Britain also had a protectorate over Lower Mesopotania, Kuwait, and France had a protectorate over Lebanon and Syria.
It was from those League of Nations, and later UN Sanctioned administrations, that Jordan, and Israel were created. But that was what the palistinian administration was supposed to do: create nations from what were British Protectorates.
Israel is a successful nation. Everywhere else in the region is troubled.
Funny how no one in late 19th Century USA worried about the American Indian STREET and how our war may affect our enemies' attitudes. Neither did Sherman worry about the "Confederate Street" as he marched to the sea, neither did Truman worry about the Japanese STREET prior to dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And funny how none of these "Streets" came back to bother us again after the wars were over.
Today we lament what happened to the American Indians as we burn $3/gallon gas riding to their casinos. Say what you like, but our ancestors understood the cruel nature of war and unapologetically sought victory. Today we seek enough movement to realign things so that a diplomatic solution can be arrived at.
The kill ratio in Lebanon and Israel last week was running ten-to-one in Israel’s favor—and much higher than that if you count only civilians.
Notice that this news is presented as a bad thing. Conversely, even though we support Israel in this war, according to this author's rationale, it would be better if the Israelis suffered more losses.
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.