US + allies = Nuevo Imperialism: “In the name of [world] peace.” Libya, a case in point.

16 Apr

The “Nuevo-Imperialism!” Libya, a sovereign state, and a member in good standing of the United Nations, never requested external help to change its regime. The Twenty-first Century Nuevo-Imperialists took that role upon themselves, a dangerous behavior that may return the global community to hinder-years when such an unacceptable behavior was the norm for political powers of the time.

The United Nations organization does not have authority to authorize the use of force, its Security Council may have some marginal, and very limited authority to approve some military action. The Security Council authority is only a “back door,” authority; in the recent case of Libya it used its authority to approve the “protection of civilians,” a vague and very unprecise action.

Since the United States and its allies are calling for a change of regime in Libya, and because their actions are designed towards that objectives, their bombing of Libya is clearly illegal.

Additionally, had the “rebels” in Libya asked for United States, The United States Security Council, or Nato’s help, the situation might have been different. But the Libyan rebels have no face, no identity, they are neither homogeneous, nor the representatives of the Libyan people, and therefore had no legitimate authority to formally request, or receive international help for their largely undefined goals.

US and Nato activities in Libya are shades of French, Dutch, and British imperialism of old. The United States and their allies seem to feel that they have the right to determine the rights and wrongs of political regimes. George W. Bush, with Tony Blair in Iraq, followed into Afghanistan, neither were at the request of the sovereign, were a beginning of today’s “Nuevo imperialism,” which seem to guide the international behavior of the United States and it allies. No international law, norm, or rules of acceptable behavior apply to the new imperialism of the Western powers in today’s world…

The Zyonism creator and blog author: Dan Goor

28 Jan

Zyonism: Introduction and “mission statement:”

Zyonism, is successor to Zionism, a movement that was designed to, and then succeeded, in establishing a Jewish State in Palestine. Now that Israel is fait accompli, enhancing its standing as a viable and substantial participant in the global community, is the mission undertaken by Zyonism!

Zyonism will continue efforts to enhance the position of the State of Israel in twenty-first Century global politics; its objectives are to analyze and explore solutions to issues that affect Israel and its allies around the world.

Inasmuch as Israel, in spite of its small size, influences a non-trivial segment of international relations; Israel’s actions, as is its mere existence, represent a pivotal element in inter-nations dialogue regarding the future of a peaceful world. The fact that the word Zyonism (or Zionism) is enough to trigger rage among Arab, and other, Muslim nations, will be dealt with. A review of the matter will be done with candor, and will be utilized to explore means through which to neutralize this unfortunate, and unfounded, anger of many generations.

The Zyonism blog will also offer an insight beyond that demonstrated by the West in general, and by the Obama Administration, in particular; an insight into the likes of Iran, Libya, and Syria (to name but just a few of the more radical Islamic regimes around the world.) Having studies, and then gaining extensive practrical experience with the three principal monotheist religions, and with frequent exposure to Mid East countries, Dan Goor will offer an understanding of today’s global conflict, not previously exposed while avoiding political sensitivities. Avoiding “political correctness,” Zyonism will call a spade a spade, it will attempt to do so with total disregard to political, or national, sensitivities.

In addition to dealing with the broad picture, Zyonism will explore means for aiding some of the victims of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict; those non-combatants who suffered needlessly because of current situation.

About Dan Goor; founder of Zyonism:

Dan Goor

Dan Goor is a Physicist, author, and a Political Scientist. Dan Goor believes that there are no legitimately pure left or pure right in politics, they are all, he believes, hybrids. In many ways Goor is very liberal, in others he is quite conservative; his beliefs are based on specific issues, and on specific cases.

As a person who witnessed, participated, and therefor understands terrorist acts first hand, Goor has an in-depth understanding of ideology and religion driven terrorism (which in some cases, based on circumstances, some consider “freedom-fighting.”)

In a theses towards a Masters of Arts in Law and Diplomacy (MALD) Goor explains in some depth the working of religion driven political terrorism, an area that he not only studied, but one in which he has first hand knowledge; knowledge he acquired prior to Israel’s War of Independence.

In the Seventies, Dan Goor established and managed a computer sales and service operation in Iran, it was an Iranian company that functioned independently, but was legally a subsidiary of Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC.) Unlike most operatives in Iran at the time, Goor acquired a work permit, and was involved with all facets of the Iranian company. A distributor hired by Goor was partially owned by a son of the Shah’s twin sister, allowing Goor access to many people in high places, and to gain a significant insight into the Iranian culture of the time. Dan Goor left Iran a few months before the Shah left for America, Goor left to never return, he suggested to DEC that it terminate all operation in the country because the turmoil that he uniquely foresaw coming…. 

Dan Goor is deeply concerned by the apparent lack of loyalties to allies demonstrated by the Obama’s Administration. Alarmed by prospects of United States losing its position of authority in the Twenty-first Century, Goor will attempt to analyze those Administration actions that drives the United States away from its allies.

Of particular concern to Goor is Obama’s distancing himself from the State of Israel, the only dependable and stable ally that the United States has in the Middle East. Towards an end of curbing the growth in the chasm-of-trust that the Obama Administration created with Israel, Dan Goor will expose his readers to problems that the new, and very young American President, has caused in United States relations with many of its [historical] allies.

Not staying with allies, appears to be a trait that goes beyond that of the United States, President Obama, in his personal life, seems to also put expediency before commitments, and loyalty. The Reverend Wright, and Bill Ayer, are but two examples of that characteristic of the President. In the case of friends, it can be viewed as a character flaw, and should be dealt with accordingly; on the international arena, however, such a trait could cause severe rapture in United States foreign policy, its relations with allies, and its credibility.

Returning to who Dan Goor is, one may wish to learn that in addition to being an inventor with over thirty patents, Dan Goor is a Political Scientist with keen interest in current events. Having transferred technology to a number of “third world” countries. Through exposure, academic studies, and extensive reading, Dan Goor developed an understanding of other cultures, and learned to recognize sensitivities of other people.

His work, his studies, and the environment in which he grew-up, prompted Dan Goor to study the roots of those he fears that could have an adverse effects on his world. To that end he studies the Koran, and attended Graduate School at a fundamentalist Christian University. With a Jewish upbringing, Dan Goor has a non-trivial level of understanding of those who follow the three leading Monotheist religions.

Believing that more innocent human life has been lost through the ages in the name of religion (the Holocaust, and Islamic Jihad, to name two of the most significant culprits,) Dan Goor has studied the way various countries deal with the threat of religious driven terror. As the result of his life-long examination of religious conflict, Dan Goor is uniquely aware of some of the most effective ways to deal with such threats, and the causes of said threats.

Goor worked and studied in many countries, including some in the Middle East, Asia, Europe, and the United States. With his wife, Euphemia Patricia (Pat) Goor, Dan now lives in Colorado Springs, while he and Pat also spend about half their time in Tel-Aviv Israel.

Dan Goor earned two Masters degrees from a Harvard affiliated school (the Fletcher School,) and a degree in Physics from Colorado State University; he is also a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Sloan Fellow. Additionally, Goor studied Physics and religion at Abilene Christian University, and completed many advanced industrial training courses.

Dan Goor’s blogs ( ; ;;;😉 are not published on a regular schedule, they are generally triggered by events, and the author’s mood.

Please view: Zyonism “mission statement,” that continues in next write-up.

Zionism, the rallying word behind Islamic rage! Zyonism, in search of solutions through understanding.

24 Jan

Zyonism: Introduction and “mission statement:”

Zyonism, is successor to Zionism, a movement that was designed to, and then succeeded, in establishing a Jewish State in Palestine. Now that Israel is fait accompli, enhancing its standing as a viable and substantial participant in the global community, is the mission undertaken by Zyonism!

Zyonism will continue efforts to enhance the position of the State of Israel in twenty-first Century global politics; its objectives are to analyze and explore solutions to issues that affect Israel and its allies around the world.

Inasmuch as Israel, in spite of its small size, influences a non-trivial part of international relations, its actions, as is its mere existence, represent a pivotal element in inter-nations dialogue regarding the future of a peaceful world. The fact that the word Zyonism is enough to trigger rage among Arab, and other, Muslim nations, will be dealt with. A review of the matter will be assessed with candor, and will be utilized in exploring means through which to neutralize this unfounded anger of many generations.

Israel’s historic mission to the world, a mission that was first expressed in the  Old Testament , is of utmost significance to all those who belive in god, particularly to members of the three principal monotheist religions. In spite of having differing views regarding the intended Divine role of the Jewish people, and of the State of Israel, all believers realize that the Jewish people have a unique role.

The Zyonism blog will review those many and complex relationships between Israel and other nations, it will attempt to propose solutions where problems exist.  The blog will consider all views regarding International relations, both pros and cons, regarding Israel’s role in today’s world. A particular attention will be given to Iran’s threat to the global community. Israel’s role as the most viable deterrent to Iran’s danger, will be evaluated analyzed. 

Understanding that the mere fact that Israel exists irritates Arabs, and that its existence triggers rage in the Islamic World, should help Zyonism assess causes and potential solutions to the conflict between Islam and the West.

The conflict that started with the fact that Ishmael’s birthrights were “stolen,” a conflict that moved forward to the Koran where Allah resents the facts that the Jewish people would not accept him over their god, is not something that can be resolved without a great deal of understanding, sympathy, and effort. A conflict of thousands of years cannot be resolved overnight. The dispute between Islam and the non-Islamic monotheist religions, however, can reach resolution providing reasonable members of these religions deal reasonably with one another; Zyonism will attempt to identify potential solutions to the problem.

For additional publications sympathetic to causes of the Zyoinsm blog, please go to:

ZIONISM/Zyonism, an all inclusive movement; not racism!

13 Apr

Zionism is all inclusive, Zionism is anything BUT racism!
An anti-Zionism Jew is an antisemite, it is Jew is an oxymoron; just as an antisemite is an anti-Zionist, there is no separation, it’s like a woman and her womb.
Zionism is a movement that was charged with establishing the Jewish State of Israel and then nurture it into a first class nation member of the global community. The first mission is fait accompli, the second is ongoing and very successful.
Looking out of the window at a park in Tel-Aviv/Yafo Israel, scores of people are enjoying a beautiful sunny Pesach (Passover) day, a few large groups of orientals, with an official looking man in religious garb blessing the individuals, and holding prayer with the groups. There are Arab Muslims with their families, and typical Israelis, some wearing scull-caps, some don’t. Earlier, a bus driver, at the bus stop, was saying his Muslim prayers before leaving the station.
This very heterogeneous crowd would land itself to John F. Kennedy’s description of America as a “melting pot,” but in a much more pragmatic manner than one finds in the US.
There are lily-white European appearing people, yellow skinned orientals, blacks, and hues and shades of the skin of many others, yet no physical separation.
Two blocks away from the park there is a shuk. It is an old traditional shuk operated by a mixture of vendors. Like the park, it is a mixture of ethnicities. There are Jewish, both European and Sephardi shopkeepers, Druze, Arabs, both Muslim and Christians, and even a few orientals; a true melting-pot in practice, not a theory.
In 1948 there were about 850,000 Jews living, and generally prospering in Arab nations of the Middle East. There are essentially no Jews in those countries now, they were driven out in 1948, without compensation for their properties, becoming the epitome of Apartheid states… In contrast, Israel, the Zionism created Jewish- state, boasts of some 20% of its population of Muslim who enjoy a quality of life superior to their brethren in the Arab nations.
Upon driving the Jews out of their countries in 1948, the Arab nations started what proved to be a successful propaganda campaign against Israel, it was able to label Zionism “evil,” and the cause of Palestinian “victims,” those who seven Arab states order out of Israel in 1948 so that they could destroy Israel without causing [Muslim] “collateral” damage. The Arab nations resorted to using Goebells techniques of repeating a lie enough time and people accept it as reality. The Arabs were able to convince many that Zionism was indeed the cause of Middle East strife because of their “Palestinians” victims; it is time to set the record straight. About 70,000 Arabs left “Palestine” at the urging of the seven Arab nations (Transjordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia) which planned to attack Israel. Those leaving were promised a quick return with the incentive of spoils of war, the Jewish properties, and wealth, that they will be able to claim; but history foiled it all, the Israeli Zionists defeated the combined forces assembled by the seven Arab nations, and the “Palestinians” became “refugees.”
In 1948 seven Arab nations kicked 850,000 Jews out of their countries, without any compensation…In 1948 at the urging of the seven Arab nations, 700,000 Arabs left Israel to become refugees that no Arab country was willing to absorb or help materially in a meaningful manner.
The only way that Zionism can be considered evil is based on Arab propaganda. Zionism, Israel, and the Jewish people NEVER took away Arab territory except enough to make its borders defensible, and that only as the result of wars they engaged in to protect itself. Never in history was a nation required to return territory it acquired in a defensive war; Israel did so with the Sinai in order to demonstrate good faith, and arrange for peace.
If anybody is a victim in the Middle East conflict it is Zionism, and its creation, Israel.
* Israel is the only country in history that the family of nations is forcing to designate a capital a city, not of its own choice. This particularly disturbing since Israel’s ancestral capital of Jerusalem had uninterrupted Jewish occupancy for over 3000 years.
* Israel is the only nation in history that was required to return land that it liberated as the result of defensive wars.
* Israel is the only country in the Middle East where all monotheist religions can be practiced with tranquility.
Let me close by suggesting that in spite of Zionism’s creation, Israel is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East, a shelter for whoever wishes to come to it, and a refuge to those who in the past were rejected by the world; Zionism, and Israel, are falsely accused of Apartheid, which is the opposite of what it is. Those in the world who push for BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) are misguided, much of economic damage they cause is to Arab Israelis, and Arab Palestinians who generally make their living in those industries DBS covers. If you wish to punish someone for the lack of peace between Arabs and Israel, please go to the source. Until both the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas remove clauses in their Arabic (operational) mission statement that call for the destruction of mIsrael, they are the culprits; Israel is ready for peace, but peace must be a mutual act of all warring parties, and the “Palestinians” Arabs do not seem ready for such an arrangement, they want to destroy Israel, and they don’t deny it.

ISRAEL, as the Jewish state was to include Judea and Samaria; the “Brits” messed that up!

4 Dec

Price Fiesal, the most important spokesperson for the Arab world at the time, in 1918 stated: “Palestine to the Jews, Arabia to the Arabs!” The British holders of a League of Nations mandate on the area, in order to appease the oil rich Arab nations took upon themselves to violet the Mandate and made a mess of things.

The British while holding the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, without ANY legal authority split Trans Jordan (now Jordan) from the part of Palestine that was designated to shared between the Arab and Jews; Judea and Samaria were clearly to be a part of the Jewish state.
Prince Feisal, the most important Arab voice of the time, in 1918 said: “Palestine to the Jews, Arabia to the Arabs.”
As usual the British authorities screwed up a number of Middle Eastern nation that they had temporary stewardship over. For example the eight year Iran Iraq war, and the India Pakistan wars were in large part due to botched boundaries by British authorities.
There is little or no doubt that the international community intended Judea, and Samaria were intended to be a part of the Jewish state, now called Israel.

While Barack Obama is President; will Islamic Caliphate(s) emerge?

4 Sep

Will Islam dominate the world as Allah edicts?
Since the Koran demands from it followers that they should make all people accept Allah, and that must do so at any cost, any action towards such eventuality would be determined by the Islamic-World.
It is important to realize that the Islamic world is not homogeneous, the one and a half billion Muslims are divided into two main sects, with numerous sub groups that will not be dealt with in this paper. The two major sects are: The Sunnis, with about 80% of Islam, and Shiite that are made up of the other 20%.
Starting with the Shiite, which includes Iran, the largest and most powerful nation, but one that is uniquely is not Arab. When the United States left Iraq before that Shiite nation was able to stabilize itself, and shore up the military’s middle section, the general staff, and the non-commissioned ranks were nearly set. The vacuum that the United States left before completely build that nation, and shore up the military gave openings to Iraq to exert its influence, and for Sunni groups based on al Qaeda, and other Saudi financed elements, to start carving Iraq and join some of it with Syria as a foundation for a new Sunni Caliphate.
The Shiite led by Iran, and falling under Russia’s sphere of influence, are engaged in the following activities: Support of Assad in Syria, direct its surrogates, Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran is also controlling a number of other Jihad groups in the region. With Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and with Russia technical support, its represents a serious threat to Sunni states in the region. The threat it so severe that the Saudis apparently gave Israel tacit approval to use its airspace on route to so away with Iran’s nuclear works.
While the Sunnis are establishing a Caliphate in Syria, Iran’s Shiite Caliphate will likely be in Tehran with the Ayatollah Ali Khamennei its leader.
Moving on to the Sunni elements which are large, powerful, but largely divided.
Let me start with the second largest Middle Eastern Sunni nation, Turkey, a sleeping giant! As one of the main players Turkey, after some years of leaning towards secular Islam, is currently under President Recept Tyyip Erdogan started to push the country towards becoming more orthodox Islamic country with an influence on the Islamic- World. Among other thing, Erdogan voiced the view that “there are no moderate Muslims.”
Another interesting movement from Turkey is a view about the world, particularly about Christianity. Turkey’ Minister of Environment and Urbanism, Erdogan Bayraktar, declared to the world that Muslims do not consider Christianity as a religion; he describes it as a culture.
“There are 2.5 billion Christians in the world,” Bayraktar said. “Christianity is no longer a religion. It’s a culture now. But that is not what a religion is like. A religion teaches; it is a form of life that gives one peace and happiness. That is what they want to turn [Islam] into as well.” In other words, he is telling his audience to be on guard against those who try to water down, or should we say moderate, the teachings of Islam. Those teachings, including, presumably, the teachings of jihad warfare against unbelievers and their subjugation under the rule of Islamic law.
Coming from an official of the ostensibly secular regime in Turkey, this is a noteworthy statement: he is essentially saying that Turkish secularism, which restricts key aspects of Islam, must be opposed.
The Turkish view is quite moderate compared to the major Sunni movement of the Middle East, the Islamic State [of] Iraq [&] Syria/Levant (ISIS/L). The Turkish would like to lead a Sunni movement that can grow with little conflict. Contrary to the Turkish view, ISIS/L seems to desire to acquire world leadership by force, or in any way necessary.
For the United States with allies to be able to withstand the various Islamic movement would require either an overwhelming for, including boots on the ground, or an extremely effective campaign of pitting Shiite against Sunni. Since the hatred one holds for the other, people skilled with negotiation, who understand the region, and Islam,

No wonder 72% of Muslims in US approve of Obama! Israel under attack while The Obama Administration backs the attackers.

11 Jul

Hundreds of rockets are being shot at Israel by Hamas from the Gaza strip while President Obama’s emissary suggest that Israel must deal with those bound to destroy it; what a travesty.
“Philip Gordon, the White House coordinator for the Middle East and a special assistant to President Barack Obama, gave the keynote address at the Haaretz Conference on Peace in Tel Aviv yesterday. Yet rather than use the opportunity to focus on American support for Israel’s right to self-defense at a time when the very city he was speaking in was being targeted by Hamas rockets, Gordon centered his remarks on harsh criticism of the Israeli government and lavished praise on the Palestinian leader who had embraced unity with the people currently shooting at Tel Aviv and scores of other Israeli cities, towns, and villages.”
Isn’t it time for Barack Obama to support Israel, the only US ally in the Middle East? The situation is such that war is likely to break out at any time while President Obama is in Texas  enjoying BBQ at fund-raiser, does he have no shame?

Is the Putin v Obama conflict a twenty-first century David v Goliath replay?

15 May

Barack Hussein Obama, an athletically built man of 6’1”, presides over a robust nation, the most powerful country on earth, is being challenged by Vladimir Putin, a man who is from six to eight inches shorter than is President Obama, also athletically built, but the country he presides over is economically far behind many other countries in the world. This is clearly a case of Obama, the Goliath, versus Putin the David on the global stage.
There are many issues the two men are at odds about, not the least of which is what appears to be Vladimir’s Putin’s desire to expand Russia’s sphere of influence around the world. In addition for expanding in Eastern Asia, Putin’s Russia is actively pursuing virtual control over the Shiite Middle East, a move that President Obama does not seem to understand, a move that causes President Obama severe discomfort because he seems to be intimidated by anything Muslim.
Problems between Obama and Putin are significant, due to their personas, however, President Putin, the smaller, the “David” of the two, has an edge. In spite of Barack Obama’s experience in the rough streets of Chicago, he, President Obama, believes in playing by the Queensbury Rules while Putin continues to remain true his KGB training and under the motto of “the end justifies the means!”
Barack Obama is a capitulater as he displayed on numerous occasions since he became President. Two glaring examples are the fact that his flagship legislation, the Obamacare health law, was signed into law without its backbone, the public option, an enormous capitulation; and the fact that President Obama allowed the Bush tax cut for the rich to remain, even enlarges its scope, in spite of it being totally contrary to President Obama’s beliefs, and to his agenda. On the other side of the conflict, President Putin, from afar, does not seem to ever capitulate.
In direct confrontation between Obama and Putin, the most glaring example, setting the table, if you will. After President Obama gave an ultimatum to Bashar Assad of Syria regarding his (Assad’s) chemical weapons, President Putin stepped in to protect his client Assad, had President Obama capitulate on his red-line, and took over negotiations with Syria.
Followed were the now historical event in Crimea where President Putin demonstrated his “diplomatic” skills, no shots in anger, and Russia’s territory increase. The United States and its allies imposed sanctions on Russia’s leaders as punishment, how naïve, did they not realize that Russia’s leader, and, of course, Putin, would make provisions for such eventuality.
The United States also made noise as if it would consider supplying Europe with the gas and oil that it is getting from Russia, little did it realize that China is standing by to acquire any surplus petroleum products that Russia may have; just as it now buying Russian corn to replace US corn.
Since space is short me move on. Responding to US sanctions and other warnings, President mentioned one of his Aces that he kept in the hole: Participation in the International space station that he controls. Just think of the defense, communication, and exploration implication such a move has; a possible trump…
It appears that Putin, the David seems to have a sling-shot with a deadly missile that can penetrate any shield that the giant Obama may deploy; let us hope for the best.

Yesterday, April 12. 2014, Assad’s troops used “chemicals,” so what?

13 Apr

Assad crossed President Obama’s “red-line,” and no word from Washington.
Yesterday stern warning from the White House to Vladimir Putin, should he be concerned?
Putin “relieved” Obama from the duty of disarming Assad off his chemicals, should President Obama call and challenge his Russian for yesterday usage of chemicals by Assad?
George W. Bush was disliked, but feared and respected internationally; it seems that Barack Obama overcame the dislike, but neither he, or the United States while he is President seems either feared, or respected, which one is better? NEITHER!

Shared with:

Should Israel yield to US pressure to make peace with someone who vows to destroy it?

4 Apr

The operational charter of the Palestinians (Fatah and Hamas):

“Our struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished, and Palestine is completely liberated.”

Should Israel comply with US wishes to seek peace with those who vow to destroy it?

Is President Obama legacy more important than the survival of the Jewish people in Israel?

Shared with:

US Middle East, and other foreign policy, in shambles:

3 Apr

The United States never did have a very enlightened policy in the Middle East, but the Barack Obama Administration treatment of the region is the epitome of failures.
The US under Obama encouraged and helped in ousting Mubarak, and then, perhaps unwittingly, supported the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood. The rest of the mess in Egypt is well known.
Under Hillary Clinton’s inept guidance, the United States “led from behind” at Arab Springs, a move towards enhancing Sharia law in North Africa, a move she mistook as on for democratization.
Then Mrs. Clinton declared Assad a “true reformer” and did not have the United States support a legitimate rebellion allowing it to turn into a real religious civil war in Syria. The war in Syria caused some 5,000,000 refugees to mostly enter Jordan and Lebanon, to never return to Syria, and to likely completely change the geo-politics of the region.
The war in Syria, as is the mess in Egypt, is very likely to reduce the minimal possibility of a “two-state” solution from faltering, to failing. The situation in the area would likely get the West Bank to be annexed to Jordan, Gaza to Egypt, while the Golan to remain, and the Bekaa Valley will become a part of Israel.
One should note that in the three years of the Syrian rebellion more than 100,000 Arab Syrians were killed, and Five million refugees were made to flee the country of Syria; in both areas the numbers are scored higher than the total deaths of Arabs in the one hundred year old Jewish Arab conflict is the area!
Yes, US foreign policy as led by Lady Hillary, Sir John, and King Barack did not make the United States proud with their actions regarding the Middle East.

Discussing Pollard a mistake by both US and Israel; trying to buy peace, a travesty!

2 Apr

The Palestinian authority (PA) received billions for the United for “tourism,” or in reality, so that they will agree to participate in the “peace talks!” On the other side of the equation, the Israelis must commit to release some very violent prisoners which is an act not popular by the Israeli public. The Obama Administration seems to be considering the release of Jhonathan Pollard, as an incentive for the Prisoners release, and which would ease the pain with the Israel populous.
Each side is essentially being “bribed” by the Obama Administration to participate in the “peace talks,” an event that could add favorably to an otherwise lack luster legacy that the President is assembling.
A prisoners release, freeing Pollard, and other minor discussion, are not items that will bring an Israeli-Palestinian peace any closer.
In order to get any semblance of peace, the hard issue must be cleared up front since there are a number are irrevocable items. For example, Israel must keep Jerusalem as its capital, the Palestinians would not accept that notion without a serious fight. The Palestinian would like their refugees to return, not a notion that Israel will accept. Israel must have its Jewish identity while the Palestinians do not like the idea.
If anyone is serious about peace one must solve the hard issues upfront and leave the “window-dressing” of Pollard and some prisoners release for another time.
Shared with:

The anti Israel BDS: A substanially unfounded Anti-Semitic effort! Boycotting the only democracy in the Middle East is like “cutting your nose to spite your face!”

28 Feb

The anti Israel: Boycott Divestment Sanctions (DBS) activity, is based on untruths from its foundation!
Let me start by saying that the are no such things as “occupied territories!”
Throughout human history there never were a nation that conquered land, especially in a defensive war, that had to give it back; why should Israel be required to do so?
Those territories within Israel that BDS and others call “occupied” are legitimate Israeli territory, they will be returned to the Arabs when, or rather if, there is a sovereign Arab Palestine, which is not fait-accompli, and may never be.
As long as the Palestinian Authority (in its Arabic charter,) and Hamas in all its formal document, call for the destruction of Israel, as they presently do, there will not be an Arab Palestine.
Unless Arabs attitudes towards Israel’s sovereignty, and viability, the lands Israel won on war will remain hers.
Israel, for example, in good faith, and in a unique case in history, in order to demonstrate its desire for peace, through its largess returned the oil rich Sinai to Egypt.
Israel is not a ruthless occupier, on the contrary, it is a responsible care-taker. However until such time as it has negotiation partners who are willing to accept its sovereignty, and its right to exist as a Jewish State, it is a legitimate care-taker of the territory it won in war.
Israel only required to give up when a “two state solution” is in place, and without a responsible negotiating partner that will likely never happen…