Skip to comments.(Ehud) Barak: What did We Get for Disengagement? 10,000 Missile Strikes
Posted on 12/11/2011 11:47:57 AM PST by Eleutheria5
Defense Minister Ehud Barak alluded to the 2005 Disengagement from Gaza Sunday as he warned that Israel would strike back at terrorists there. "Since Friday, about 36 missiles have been fired from Gaza at Israeli communities," he said in a speech at the World Policy Conference in Vienna. "Israel will know how to defend itself and will not let this situation continue. [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon evacuated the Gaza Strip and took out every last soldier and civilian, gave instructions to tear down all buildings, even synagogues, so as not to supply any excuse to the Palestinians. And what happened? Hamas fired over 10,000 rockets at Israel."
Regarding the peace treaty with Egypt, Barak said: "The geopolitical tumult throughout the Arab world is dramatic and its end is difficult to forecast. We hope that despite the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood in the first round [of the elections in Egypt], reason will triumph along with the economic needs and peace between the two countries will be preserved."
Regarding Iran, Barak called for worldwide "devastating sanctions" to stop the Islamic republic's nuclear weapons program.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Sharon did just the opposite of what he should have done. That is, pushed the Gazans into Egypt, then plowed Gaza flat.
If necessary, keep plowing until Gaza is 200 feet below sea level, then let in the sea. I’m sure that the dirt could be put to some useful purpose.
There were some mitnahalim in Ghaza, putting the land to excellent use and benefiting everyone, including the Arabs. He should have annexed it and brought in more “settlers,” and made it into a model of modern, scientific agricultural prosperity. Instead, he forcibly removed Ghaza’s most productive residents, and left the Arabs there to the tender “mercies” of the PLO and later Hamas. Bulldoze it into the sea? Never. Bring back Gush Katif. It’s not too late.
Except it would be impossible to do if Palestinians were still there. Plus, never underestimate the self-imposed guilt trip of the Israelis. Far too many of them relish being hated and attacked to want to end the strife.
After 1967, it should have been done before the UN could even organize for a Security Council resolution. Funny thing about Palis: They are fatalists. They believe in submitting to the inevitable will of Allah. On the other hand, long term, they believe that they are inevitable, and that one day the 12th Imam will reveal himself and wreak a mighty vengeance among the infidels, Jooos! will get dimed on by the rocks they hide behind, etc. When you make it clear to them that you are inevitable, they will be quite docile and malleable, and start noticing all those Koranic passages in Surahs five and 17 that speak of the return of the Jooos! to their land. When you start giving ground before them, however, they become convinced that their day has at last arrived. Begin giving back the Sinai not only allowed smuggling of weapons and terrorists into Ghaza. It convinced the Palis that we were not inevitable, and therefore that their day has come at last. It is extremely doable, however, especially with the Palis, so long as you push the right buttons and keep off the wrong ones. Starting in ‘78, we were pushing the wrong buttons. Starting tomorrow, if we push the right ones (accept us; we are the inevitable will of Allah, prophesied in the Koran, and we’ll kick your ass in but good if you mess with us), we can annex to our heart’s content. Gingrich is right now pushing those good buttons. Ehud has through blind idiocy accidentally also pushed a few as well with this statement. But next we have to absolutely crush Hamas, or it all means nothing.
During the Cold War, the Russians realized they couldn’t reward their top scientists with wealth, so they used a different technique, that also worked.
It began by impoverishing their scientists, and rewarding them for their work with basic necessities. A really good idea or invention might be worth an extra potato at meal time, or maybe an extra blanket to sleep under.
Israelis have a thousand, ten thousand joys in life, and they are willing to offer all of these to the Muslims in exchange for peace.
But there is only one tangible thing in life that the Muslims religiously want. It is the only way they can demonstrate that they are “good Muslims”. They want land. All land. Every centimeter of it. It must all become Muslim land. For a Muslim to lose “Muslim land” is a both a personal and religious shame. The least he can do is keep what land he has. To succeed he must get more.
And Muslims are very honest about this, if little else.
But it is the one thing Israel cannot give. All of its land. And this perplexes the Israelis, because they cannot believe that there is absolutely nothing the Muslims want beyond land. They don’t care if their children starve and die, if their lives are miserable and filthy, etc. They don’t care.
So this is the impasse. But back to Russia, the Israeli approach is the wrong approach. Instead of offering to give, what Israel must do is to take.
Israel creates a new policy. Every time Muslims attack us, we will take some of their land. Maybe not much, but that land will no longer be Muslim land, forever. And if they keep attacking us, they will lose more and more land, until they have no land left and are pushed out.
This is not an easy policy. Once the first sliver of land is taken, the Muslims will scream like a hot iron has been applied to the soles of their feet. They will scream and cry and curse and threaten. Even worse than the usual.
And the international community will say to Israel, “Why don’t you give them their little sliver of land back? It is a nothing.”
But Israel must be absolutely firm. Once the land is gone, it is gone forever. And once again the message goes out that the next time Israel is attack, Muslims will lose more land. Land for peace. Give us peace, or we’ll take your land.
Hitting home, the Muslims will have hysterics like they have never had before. And the international community will call Israel lots of names for being stubborn and “oppressive”, over a little patch of empty desert.
But if Israel ever, ever gives any land back, the Muslims will attack Israel with everything they’ve got.
Yet if Israel is persistent, then the Muslim leaders will forbid more attacks, for real, and if any radical tries it, they will kill him. Because it is their land at stake.
Yet even if Israel kicks out all the Muslims, they will never, ever shut up about getting back “their land”. But then again, they never shut up right now.
You’re onto something. This is what I mean by being inevitable. It’s like dealing with a four-year-old’s temper tantrums. Give in, and you’ll have worse and worse temper tantrums. He will be utterly traumatized that he isn’t getting his way, so it will be harder to be firm. But once you are persistently firm, and the tantrums don’t work, they stop. The international community is like the overindulgent parent who works at cross-purposes with the other parent and always gives in to the tantrums. At some point, there must be a showdown. That might be what Gog and Magog’s war is about.
The Palis keep firing rockets into Israel, then close down the borders with Israel. More rockets, cut off all food and water and supplies. Let the Palis try to bring supplies in by sea or from Egypt. More rockets, the level a 1,000 yard strip forward of the current border. Advance Israel's border to the new border and bulldoze everything within the 1,000 yard strip.
Note that the Gaza territory has just shrunk by 1,000 yards and Israel's has expanded by 1,000 yards. When the Palis do it again, shrink their border by 1,000 yards. Every time the Palis fire rockets into Israel, shrink the Palis homeland by 1,000 yards and bulldoze the land flat.
Eventually, the Palis will be feeling the squeeze and they will start getting psycho towards the Israelis and each other. The Israelis need to keep the relentless pressure on the Palis. The various factions will start fighting each other and killing themselves. The Israels keep the pressure on and the surviving Palis will have to leave by sea for anywhere willing to accept them or go to Egypt or die. Once Gaza's cleared out, Israel annexes it and starts new settlements there. The Palis in the West Bank are next.
Eventually, the Palis are forced into Jordan or they kill each other off. Israel annexes the West Bank and the Palestinians can raise hell with Egyptians or Jordanians. neither Egyptians or Jordanians like Palis. These Pali morons are screwed.
I keep reading posts like these, but can’t get into it. They are occupying our land. I care more for the land they occupy than I dislike them for firing rockets at us. Preserving and resettling that land is a bigger priority than annihilating Muzzies.
Furthermore, we’re sort of related, culturally, genetically, every which way. And I know of a better way of dealing with them, a way that has a great hope of some peace. I see it practiced here in the greater Hebron metropolitan area. It involves person-to-person contact and good manners. Muslims collectively are an extension of Islam, a people bent on world conquest and genocide. But many Muslims would just as soon not be bothered with all that crap; they have a family to support and they’ll conform if they have no other alternative; they will rip two IDF soldiers to pieces if they venture into Ramalleh and seek refuge in the police station and get knocked unconscious, stabbed and thrown out a window. But they don’t live for that. They live for their family, and are conforming to protect them from reprisals. They work construction here in Remat Mamre, and they see that if one of them is down there on the ground praying towards Mecca, and a Jooo! walking down the makeshift asphalt path, seeing him genuflecting politely moves aside so as not to disturb, this is the real diplomacy, and I’ve seen that it’s appreciated. A good morning to those you pass, be they Arab, Jew or Christian, is likewise diplomacy.
What those overstuffed bozos do in the UN and Geneva, or Oslo, or wherever, compared to this micro-diplomacy, is nothing but a circle jerk with nefarious motives.
Peace with Arabs is possible to a limited extent. You just have to learn how to deal, and stay around each other enough that they get used to you. That’s why Gush Katif must be restored, and Ghaza must be reoccupied. That’s why the “West Bank” must never be made Judenrein and all the demolitions must be fought. To give an uneasy, but workable peace a chance.
Klavan’s One-State Solution: Give the Middle East to the Jews
Thanks Eleutheria5. Disengagement is the consequence of Oslo and other “agreements”. Israel can’t reoccupy Gaza — unless it gets serious about expelling its Muzzie population. Same goes for Judah and Samaria.
Minor note: That wasn’t B.F. Skinner, but John B. Calhoun’s “mouse universe” experiment.
Please explain to me how one negotiates with organizations or peoples who have the extermination of Israel and the Jews written into their official documents and DNA? It is simply not possible. The only thing the Muslims understand is raw, overwhelming power to turn them into dust. Then, they will give grudging respect, but they will never give up trying to probe for weaknesses and exploit lack of resolve.
Unless and until Islam goes through something akin to the Christian's Reformation and militant, radical Islam is soundly defeated, nothing will change. Change only becomes possible when the Arabs cannot keep perpetuating the myth they can win against the Jews. The Arabs must be resoundingly and completely DEFEATED with no doubt about it. Total and irrevocable defeat of the Arabs and Islam. Until then, nothing can change.
Neither Iran or Syria have any second thoughts about using WMD on Israel. To these foes, the extermination of Israel becomes an end in itself. What they cannot understand is if Israel were to disappear tomorrow, the Middle East — with all its problems — would still exist. The Arabs are still the conglomeration of disfunctional, backward, and psychotic tribes they are. They will go back to slaughtering each other if they cannot slaughter Infidels.
I’ll take your word for it. Memory of Psych 101 isn’t always reliable after 50 years.
“What they cannot understand is if Israel were to disappear tomorrow, the Middle East with all its problems would still exist. The Arabs are still the conglomeration of disfunctional, backward, and psychotic tribes they are. They will go back to slaughtering each other if they cannot slaughter Infidels.”
Actually, they understand that full well. It makes no difference, however. This is part of the psychosis.
Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
Man I love it when they blow up them tunnels, saves on burials, and i do wonder if some mosque in Egypt’s floor just fell in.
Yes, it makes that low rumble in the distance sound musical.
They don't understand concession. They don't understand compassion. They don't understand rule of law.
Give them something they can understand.
Surprisingly, it goes quite deep, and somewhat confuses westerners, because they are unfamiliar with what could be called the “Asian way”.
In the west, the individual is the paramount figure, going back to the warriors of the Germanic tribes whose practices evolved into Common Law. But in Asia, the individual is relatively unimportant, or less important behind their family, their village, their extended family, etc., in a hierarchy up to the ‘great leader’, whoever it was. But even the ‘great leader’ had to obey the eastern philosophies, to which he was subordinate.
And Islam is one such philosophy. So in practice, it is not the effort of an individual to save their soul with faith, but a collective effort to obey “the system”.
In practice, for example, in feudal Japan, if an individual offended the emperor, it was seen as proper for the emperor to order his entire village destroyed, along with its people.
In modern times, a good example is “Russian humanitarianism” in Afghanistan. They had used a technique employed by America since the Indian wars, of taking women and children who supported fighters, and putting them in protective custody in camps, where they would have food and shelter, but could no longer support their men.
But the Russians did not have enough soldiers to guard such a restive group, so they proposed digging a slit trench, lining it with plastic, then putting water and weakened blister agent in it.
Then all the camp occupants would have to walk the length of the trench, resulting in the skin peeling from their feet, and their no longer being able to walk for some months. “This is a humanitarian act, because our only other alternative would be to kill them,” stated the Russians.
As you might imagine, most everybody else thought that this would be unacceptable, for some reason. But the west was horrified. In Asia the *concept* was at least understood, if not approved of.
But going back to Islam... Mohammed may some blunders when crafting his idea. The worst of these was that while he truly tried to make Islam more civilized and modern than the tribalism of the period, even demanding the adoption of the most advanced technology of the period, he did not suggest that Islam, or technology, should continue to evolve.
Nor did he make any distinction other than “might makes right”, for what is the substance of good government or leadership. Thus if a benevolent and popular leader was usurped by a vicious and stupid one, it was because the latter was favored by Allah.
As far as the Muslim on the street goes, however, following the “pillars” of Islam just means an ‘average’ grade in the religion. The only way to demonstrate that a Muslim is better than average is to obtain more land for Islam.
That’s it. He can be cruddy to his family, hateful, cruel, and downright evil, but if he puts more land “under the flag of Islam”, he is called “good”.
In past, at least one Muslim leader is alleged to have destroyed tens of thousands of Christian churches, either slaughtering or forcibly converting the Christians to Islam. He is lauded as one of the greatest Muslims of all time.
So, the bottom line is that when dealing with Asians raised in the “Asian way”, they have different ground rules and respond to different stimuli. And while this doesn’t mean you have to be an utter brutalitarian, if you use persuasion and coercion that they understand, you will have much greater success.
And this is why I proposed that the solution to the Palestinian problem, from the Israeli point of view, is not to offer them good things in exchange for peace; or to offer to return things taken away, *especially* land, at *any* time.
But, when they attack, to take away some of their land, and when they protest, say to them “stop attacking us, or we will take more of your land.”
Then, as can be expected, when they offer peace (lying of course), in exchange for getting their taken land back, the Israelis need to be rock solid firm. “No. Peace first, or we take more land. And once gone, it will never, ever, ever be returned. It will no longer, ever, be Muslim land again.”
And they will lose their marbles, because losing Muslim land to infidels is the worst possible thing a Muslim can do. All other Muslims will despise them, and they will have failed their god.
The mindset you describe does explain the unwillingness to concede any inch of land in Palestine, regardless of the unjustness of the claim or the suffering caused to one's own people.
I've attributed that approach to Islamic "fundamentalist" religious bigotry, to Arab cultural chauvinism, imperialism, and racism, and to tribalism. All qualities of a society that hasn't evolved much in recent centuries.
I never considered the influence of an overarching Eastern world view. Food for thought.
In any case, appeasement and appeals to decency have achieved nothing. Some Skinnerian negative reinforcement is worth a try.
Thanks for posting!