Peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan suggest otherwise.
All it demonstrates is both Mubarak and King Hussein are secular strongmen whose whims flow with the political winds. If the USA loses influence in the Middle East and suddenly stopped paying the jizya to them, watch how fast those Hudnas get dumped, as both strongmen scrambles to form new alliances. Not to mention that it is not like both countries are open to Israeli tourists and commerce.
By the way, what kind of price did Mubarak’s predecessor pay for the Hudna he made with Israel? The truth is he was a dead man walking the minute he inked that deal.
Moreover, those Hudnas not worth the paper they are written on will never stop the so-called Palestinians, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran, not to mention all the other Muslim regimes behind the scenes, from pursuing genocidal jihad against Israel. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, they are useless. Hence, you can ignore reality and the greater global jihad at your own peril if you prefer to delude yourself that way, but don’t be surprised when your supposed solutions inevitably blowup in your face. You want to understand the Middle East, study and learn Islam because Islam dictates everything that occurs in the Middle East.
Anyway, according to you, what will creating another terrorist state in the West Bank accomplish and how will it result in permanent and lasting peace, because if it doesn’t result in permanent and lasting peace, then why even pursue it?
There is a theological aspect to the Hamas issue, as Hamas anchors its rejectionism in religion. Hamas is not likey to accept compromise and, if the peace process is to include the Gaza Strip, that matter will need to be resolved. Otherwise, Hamas will obstruct peace.
Actually, the so-called PA faction is theological too, however, they were trained to hide and couch their jihad as a nationalist secular movement by the KGB, and this has more than been documented. Anyway, how is resolving the Hamas problem going to ever result in peace? What about Hezbollah, Syria, and the ruling mullahs of Iran? Do you think that after Iran gets nukes they are going to be more accommodating towards the Israelis? Like I said, if a two state solution, which is really an absurd farce, isn’t going to result in permanent peace, then why even pursue it. Just to prove to the Islamic world how blinded by political correctness we in the West are in order to embolden them even further?
No one suggested that Islamist radicals are not waging war against the U.S., Israel, West.
I’m afraid it is more than just a tiny minority of Islamic radicals that is waging jihad against Israel, the West, and indeed all unbelievers.
Your error is assuming that all Muslims are doing so.
All devout Muslims. Your error is not studying and learning Islam. You are either a slave of Allah or you are the infidel. Islam accepts nothing but total undivided submission.
That simply has no basis in fact.
What do you mean, there are literally libraries of documentation that prove otherwise?
There are different schools, nuances in thought, a wide range of cultural/historical experiences, etc., all at play, each of which influences perspectives.
I never said Muslims are monolithic and if anyone suggest otherwise, you tell them they don’t know what they are talking about. Of course, there are many differences within the ummah, however, the jihad ideology, which, by the way, is the sixth pillar of Islam, couldn’t be any more mainstream within Islam, as it is taught and advocated by all sects and divisions within Islam and by every school of Islamic jurisprudence. Hence, while the majority of Muslims in the world may or may not agree with OBL, because they may disagree with his strategy and tactics, that majority of Muslim nonetheless does share his same goal, a world where Islam and Sharia reigns supreme.
There are radical revolutionary movements. But there are pragmatic ones, as well.
Yep, sort of like there are some hot jihadists, i.e., AQ and Iran, and there are some cold jihadists, i.e., the House of Saud and the Gulf states. The only difference between the two different competing factions is the strategy and tactics preferred. However, both groups agree on the same exact goals and both groups will and do cooperate on occasion.
Salafists and Sufis, among others, do not think alike in terms of worldviews, goals, aspirations, flexibility, etc.
One of the biggest myths I see espoused by the Left is that the Sufis are peaceful non-violent Muslims. However, if you look back in history you find that some of the most violent jihadists of all time in history were Sufis. Sufis are mystics; it doesn’t mean they aren’t jihadists, as all sects embrace jihad as Islam’s sixth pillar.
I highly doubt Israel's people believe those two agreements are worthless or that the interval of tranquility they have brought is meaningless.
Please, Jordan and Egypt were both too weak to wage hot jihad against Israel, as the price would have cost far too high for both of them. Hence, why not finagle a clueless USA to pay jizya to them. I mean the Hudna with Jordan in 1994 was totally unnecessary and in reality very stupid. Of course, it was done in the spirit of Oslo, which was nothing but a big pitfall for Israel, as today Israel is far worse off because of it. Anyway, those Hudas will last only as long as it is convenient for either of them and as long as the jizya keeps coming in. However, if the Muslim Brotherhood takes over Egypt, all bets are off. Nevertheless, at least for the time being, it is Israel's military superiority that maintains the peace more than anything else or a piece of paper not worth the ink used to print it.
The rewards to all parties have been significant and tangible.
Yep, it was a windfall for all of them thanks to billions of dollars in US tax dollars.
The difference in opinion concerns how to limit the risk of that development.
There is only one way, oust the Mullahs and destroy the nuclear program. Anything else will mean disaster.
But there is no urgent need for such an operation today, tomorrow, or next week.
More “just in time” diplomacy…yeah right. Meanwhile, Iran keeps hardening their nuclear facilities and acquiring more and more advance defense systems.
Difficult does not mean impossible
So are you suggesting that creating another Sharia state in the West Bank would cause Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran to all simultaneously end their endless genocidal jihads? Yeah right.
Even if agreement is not reached, and formidable obstacles exist, perhaps some incremental progress can be made.
The peace process is very destructive for Israel and exceedingly counterproductive to our own interests.
Over time, incremental progress can lead to a building of trust/nurturing of a new coexistence narrative/willingness to compromise.
Yeah…I have a bridge for sale. There has never been a single time in history where infidels made a long and lasting peace with Muslims except by rendering them too weak to pursue jihad.
In turn, that experience could allow for a final settlement to be reached.
Which is literally impossible. Indeed, I can promise you that in your lifetime there will never be peace between the Palestinian proxies and Israel, much less Israel and the remainder of the Islamic world.
Egypt's peace agreement didn't happen in a matter of days. Slow and persistent diplomacy led by Henry Kissinger beginning at the end of the 1973 war paved the road for President Sadat's dramatic visit to Israel, the Camp David Agreement of 1978, and peace treaty of March 1979. Numerous setbacks occurred along the way.
Funny, that’s not the way that I recall it. Of course, the story has been greatly embellished over the years to accentuate certain people’s careers. Too bad Sadat had to pay the ultimate price though, which was inevitable, but he did last longer than I thought he would.
Increasing stability in the Middle East is in the U.S. national interest
I can promise you that weakening Israel is not the way to create stability in the Middle East.
Helping reduce threats confronting Israel, a key strategic ally, is in the interest of the U.S.
Excuse me but how is being a willing dupe for Muslims to weaken Israel for their benefit in our national interests, or in Israel’s interests, for that matter?
Increased stability benefits the U.S. and it makes eminent sense for the U.S.
I couldn’t agree with you more, but not by being willing dupes for Muslim interests and to the detriment of both Israel and US interests. Please explain why it isn’t better just to acknowledge that the peace process is taqiyya and nothing but a scam used to weaken Israel and to harm American interests? Unless you believe the US playing the part of the useful idiot is somehow beneficial.
The idea that the U.S. is involved out of some naive and idealistic altruism is ridiculous.
Come on…the USA has been little more than a useful idiot for the past 40 plus years. It goes far beyond naivety and gullibility.
--continued