Haaretz Publishes Prof Raphael Israeli Article

“…it is immoral to return to an aggressor the positions from which he might renew his aggression!”

Obama as anti-Semite

Haaretz? Surprise, surprise:

West Bank settlements are good for peace

One of the axioms of the “peace process” is that the settlements are “an obstacle to peace,” as if removing them would instantly bring peace on earth. It’s well known, however, that before 1967 there were no settlements, and no peace – unless, of course, you consider the communities within Israel “settlements,” since the Arabs considered them occupied territory. The greatest contribution of the settlements, then, is that they took the place of Israeli towns as occupied territory, except perhaps for Hamas and considerable parts of the Arab world. Therefore, the formula that removing settlements equals peace is laughable and baseless.

Links:

The Arabs’ total-denial approach to Israel never depended on settlement on a particular parcel of land. They are bothered by Jewish settlement in Israel in general. It’s enough to browse through the books of the “moderate” Palestinian Authority to see that Haifa, Jaffa and even Tel Aviv are considered Palestinian cities, while Hamas believes the Wakf land of all Palestine should be expropriated from the Jewish state, which doesn’t have the right to land on either side of the Green Line.

In 2000, Yasser Arafat was offered an Israeli withdrawal from 95% of the territories in exchange for agreeing to end the conflict. He refused, because he didn’t consider this a full withdrawal from Palestinian land. Although Israel made yet another step in leaving the Gaza Strip, not only freezing construction there but evicting the settlers, all it got in return was more war and destruction, a far cry from the peace that removing this “obstacle” was supposed to create. In other words, not only did the Arabs not consider Israel’s older settlements different from the new ones that “endanger peace,” but the eviction of the latter drove them to begin attacking the former.

We know now that one thing that motivated Anwar Sadat to come to Jerusalem was his fear that unless settlements in the Rafah area and Sinai were uprooted, they would grow into large cities that no peace agreement could remove.

The Syrians and Palestinians, on the other hand, believed they had nothing to lose if they maintained their refusal to negotiate, since their land would wait for them, frozen in time, until they could graciously take it back from Israel and then attack again from these positions. They can’t comprehend that they have lost their lands because of their aggression, and that it is immoral to return to an aggressor the positions from which he might renew his aggression, since letting him escape without harm only encourages him to attack again. There can be deterrence only once the aggressor has paid a price that dissuades him from attacking at whim. This is what happened to Germany.

So until there is a permanent status agreement, only Jewish settlement activity can be enough of an incentive to make the Arabs, like Sadat, hurry up and seek peace, because their losses will multiply the longer they wait. We know from the Gaza example that the Arabs’ goal was not to remove Israel from precious land, but to uproot Jews and fight them from the land they left. It is better, then, to keep with the peace-building construction in communities beyond our borders, and only when we see genuine signs of a culture of peace and good neighborliness next door to talk about evacuation – with due consideration to the new reality on the ground, which will change all the more if the Arabs don’t rush toward an agreement.

The author is a professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

13 thoughts on “Haaretz Publishes Prof Raphael Israeli Article”

  1. The blog-owner has already identified a number of times that he believes in the State of Israel and with his continuous and illogical bashing of anything to do with Islam – remember that he supports and tells us Muslims that Wahhabism and Salafism is correct and moderates are heretics.

    So we know of course that he supports the growing expansion into the West Bank as justified and moral and from that we can also assume that he supports in fact the full annexation of the West Bank as following this line – Palestinians are just Arabs and Muslims and they can be dispersed into other Muslim Arab countries.

    The usual hard-line right-winger and certainly Likud supporter has no interest in peace at all and though they may not support ultra-orthodox zealots whom think that all of the region is a part of a greater Isreal that God gave them – and their justification – they will follow the same line because it simply gives them more space and control over the region.

    This line of course fails and is dangerous for many, many reasons. That God gave them Israel is not accepted by anyone other than the more orthodox Jews (and maybe some radical evangalists). The second is that if they like it or not, they are not alone, there are millions of people living in this area and they are neither Jews nor Israelis.

    There are only three issues that are critical to the Peace Process and the rest are side issues or can be easily fixed, but not these three.

    The first one is the right to Israel’s Existance and waging war against it.
    The second is the subject of Al Qods (Jerusalem), and
    The third being the subject of settlements.

    The first one is a political – emotive issue and must be seen as that.
    The second is the real difficult one.
    The third one is a subject of radicalism, both political and religious and is an issue amongst the Israelis themselves but has implications on the first and second points.

    The current Israeli government simply has an agenda to maximise the number of settlements for a land grab. Otherwise they will find every excuse to build with the promiss of “afterwards having a freeze” and then do it again and again. It is like nuclear brinkmanship but with land. The problem is that since there a millions of people who’s land is being taken away, it is unacceptable. They have no national identity as they are under occupation or threat there of, they are poor and have embargoes and violence, so the only identity they have is their land.

    The matter for them is now theft and the radicals amongst them will use that as a point to make to justify the violence (point 1). I wonder if Tippy Libvni understood that.

    1. Solker:

      Who doesn’t support Israel against 300 million mad fanatical Arab Moslems in the area, who want to destroy her?

      “illogical bashing of Islam?”

      I’m afraid 1400 years of conquest, destruction and oppression leads one to logical conclusions, very obvious logical conclusions cult members like yourself somehow are unable to make.

      Wahabism & Salafism? I don’t care for any particular flavor of Islam, not even the ‘mystical’ Sufi variety that has managed to wipe out all unbelievers in formerly Christian Turkey. Its all the same genocidal lunacy, the same murderous, fanatical frenzy and the obsession with killing or getting rid of everyone who doesn’t submit to the cult. The genocide on the Armenians and the Greeks tells the same story and your genocidal book, the Koran, logically confirms the modus operandi. I don’t see any difference between Tayyip Erdogan and Ahmadinejad, the Saudi king or the little plucky king of Jordan. What do you think makes their Islam different from yours, Solk?

      “So we know of course that he supports the growing expansion into the West …”

      No, of course not. I oppose the growing Moslem problem in the West and want to see it reversed.

      ” He supports the full annexation of the West … ” what? I don’t know anything about a bank in the West.

      Ah, wait a minute: do you mean Judea and Samaria? Ask yourself why its called Judea & Samaria. Its part of Israel and always will be.

      Why is the biblical homeland of the Jews occupied by Arab Muslims, Solker? The Pals are indeed just (hostile) Arabs and Muslims and they can be dispersed into other Muslim Arab countries. ( correction: should have been dispersed into other Mohammedan occupied countries long ago)

      Perhaps you could explain to our readers why Jerusalem is mentioned 800 times in the Jewish scriptures and not once in the Koran?

  2. So is this why any criticism of Israel is automatically an anti-Semitic accussation by you blog-owner? Don’t snip this one, i is about as relevant as anything.

  3. For the record and to make it clear. I support the Two State Solution, I recognise the State of Israel and I believe if peace is made, within a 15 year time frame, most of the BS between Arabs and Israel will be forgotten by the newer generation and economics will become more important.

    Having this peace though is not going to happen until radicalism in all its forms (both Muslim and non-Muslim) and all areas – including in Israeli politics – is dealt with supressed.

  4. * For the record and to make it clear. I support the Two State Solution, I recognise the State of Israel and I believe if peace is made, within a 15 year time frame, most of the BS between Arabs and Israel will be forgotten by the newer generation and economics will become more important.

    For the record and to make it clear. I reject the Two State Solution, I
    recognise Jesus Christ as the Messiah, and reject the counterfeit
    messiah (Beast 666) who will bring a (false) peace to the Middle East
    and subsequently renege on the treaty (as a good muslim might),
    and seek to destroy Israel.

  5. * The second is the subject of Al Qods (Jerusalem)

    * The second is the real difficult one.

    You won’t solve it, Solkhar. Your false prophet won’t solve it, Solkhar.
    “Allah” won’t solve it, Solkhar.

    Jerusalem will be trodden down by the gentiles, until the time of the
    gentiles be fulfilled. Then, Messiah Jesus will return, and solve the
    problem.

  6. “Take the guns from muslims, and there will be no fighting. Take the guns from Israel, and there will be no Israel”.

  7. remember that he supports and tells us Muslims that Wahhabism and Salafism is correct and moderates are heretics.

    No he doesn’t, that was in fact stated by Hass Dellal (head of the ‘Multicultural Foundation’) –

    Other terms to be avoided included … ‘moderate Muslim’, which suggested to Muslims they were inadequate in their faith.”

    Islam: The religion of lies and deception.

  8. * Islam: The religion of lies and deception.

    Solkhar / DHH purports to be a former diplomat and current (muslim) expert in anti-terrorism financing, and practices the islamic art of lies
    and deception to the best of his ability. He surely is no “moderate
    muslim” – a wolf in wolf’s burka.

  9. “Ask yourself why its called Judea & Samaria. Its part of Israel and always will be. ”

    Thus you have it, the beginnings of the hypocrisy that explains this blog. Israel exists because “God” gave it to them, those in its way will be either destroyed or simply “do not exist” even though there are millions of people there. But most of all, they can claim “God gives them permission to do so” but if a Muslim says “God gave them permission” they are evil.

    Your agenda is very clear now and that is why I think it is understood that it is basically a politically inspired BS blog-site and that the contents are very questionable.

    As for claims to the West Bank as a religous one, Chrisitans (other than a few very strange evangalists) will all say that claims of Jews expired when Christ turned up and even more so when Mohammed did.

    In Surah 17 it talks about the Promissed Land:

    017.104 “And We said unto the Children of Israel after him: Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations. ”

    017.105 “With truth have We sent it down, and with truth hath it descended. And We have sent thee as naught else save a bearer of good tidings and a warner. ”

    017.106 ” And (it is) a Qur’an that We have divided, that thou mayst recite it unto mankind at intervals, and We have revealed it by (successive) revelation.

    (note in this last verse that all religious texts from God are referred to in Arabic as “Qur’an”. Thus in Islam, the Torah and the Bible are just previous versions of the Qur’an or “The Book”.

    There are more interesting and relevant versus to Israel and Jews.

    061.006 “And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One. Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic. ”

    For your highlighted desparate question of : Perhaps you could explain to our readers why Jerusalem is mentioned 800 times in the Jewish scriptures and not once in the Koran (Qur’an)?

    That is incredibily easy to understand, since it was mentioned 800 times in Jewish texts and we believe in Abraham, then there was no need to mention more. David and Soloman are mentioned many times in the Qur’an confirming that. It would be the same with references to the Bible but it has been revamped, altered, then those versions of versions translated so many times that it lost most of its quotability.

    002.047 “O Children of Israel! Remember My favour wherewith I favoured you and how I preferred you to (all) creatures.”

    002.063 “And (remember, O Children of Israel) when We made a covenant with you and caused the mount to tower above you, (saying): Hold fast that which We have given you, and remember that which is therein, that ye may ward off (evil). ”

    002.083 “And (remember) when We made a covenant with the Children of Israel, (saying): Worship none save Allah (only), and be good to parents and to kindred and to orphans and the needy, and speak kindly to mankind; and establish worship and pay the poor-due. Then, after that, ye slid back, save a few of you, being averse. ”

    005.012 “Allah made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We raised among them twelve chieftains, and Allah said: Lo! I am with you. If ye establish worship and pay the poor-due, and believe in My messengers and support them, and lend unto Allah a kindly loan, surely I shall remit your sins, and surely I shall bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow. Whoso among you disbelieveth after this will go astray from a plain road. “

    1. Thanks for posting this, Solker.

      Not that I haven’t seen it before. It does indeed prove that the Koran makes tall claims based on the delirious fantasies of your megalomanic prophet pretender:

      “all religious texts from God are referred to in Arabic as “Qur’an”. Thus in Islam, the Torah and the Bible are just previous versions of the Qur’an or “The Book””-

      This is in fact the claim that Islam supercedes everything that came before it. The mishmash above is an insult to Jews and Christians, it makes no sense at all. If it proves anything, it proves that Muhammad, (did it indeed stem from him or did a goat spit it out?) was laughed at by 7th century Jews whom he targeted for conversion.

      It also proves, that Mohammedanism is not, and has never been ‘Abrahamic’. The simplistic accusation that Jews and Christians have “corrupted” their books in order to deny the prophet of Islam his place in the world is idiotic. In Islam, nothing adds up, not even the calculations on how to divide an inheritance. The despotism, the tyranny and the warped claims that cater to the whims of the prophet sends a completely different message (which is one of destruction, hatred and permanent warfare)

      Islam is indeed ‘different…’

  10. The explanation of the existence of this blog is rooted in the behavior of some muslims. Using middle east politics as an excuse is a rather cynical bid to justify very bad behavior. And please don’t claim that Christians claim that the rights of Jerusalem do not extend to also to Jews. This is not correct. If muslims wish to claim this, then they are on their own. They will get no support from the majority Christian community. Jesus said “son of G_d,” not son of allah – there is a huge difference in what the quran has implied and what Jesus almost certainly meant. allah did not exist then, however it appears that did not prevent mohammed (or whomever wrote the surah) from deliberately misrepresenting the words of others.

  11. Kaw,

    “Jesus said “son of G_d,” not son of allah – there is a huge difference in what the quran has implied and what Jesus almost certainly meant. ”

    That is a matter of opinion. God and Allah are the same thing, it has been clear from the very beginning in Islam that Allah is just the arabic term for God and that it is the same Abrahimic God.

    As for what Jesus/Issa meant, that is up to speculation, opinion and faith. As the Bible has been modified, versions, translations etc, it is very unlikely other than the recent aramaic version that has been found, that any real correct understandings of literal Jesus/Issa exists. Considering that Muslims believe that the Qur’an is a continuation of the Torah/Bible and that the original version of the Qur’an still exists, that is it for Muslims, the correct intepretation. Anyhow, it is a subect of faith and opinion. You hav expressed yours.

    You will also find hate-mongering agendas (which has in fact been the aim all the time from this blog-owner) who will refuse to debate but only will provide propoganda on such issues. Like above, he claims by misinterpreting Arabic and Qur’anic language that Islam claims to predate Judaism and Christianity which of course is illogical and pure BS (on his part). Simply put the Books handed down by God/Allah are called in Arabic “Al Qur’an” just like any one who correctly believes in God/Allah is a Muslim, thus you will see terms such as Jesus or Moses being the best of Muslims.

    Simply put, the subject is a matter of faith. The Catholic Church does not accept or believe in Islam or the Prophethood of Mohammed but does recognise Islam as a religion and that it worships the same God. So does the Protestant Church and so does the Chief Rabbai of Israel, the United States and of France. So does the heads of the Orthodox Churches of both Russia and Greece.

    But the blog-owner will not go into the subject and must deny because he believes in the non-existance of Islam so that the West Bank becomes part of a greater Isreal (as he stated in now three different threads).

Comments are closed.