Evidence for God from Science

By Caroline Glick
CarolineGlick.com

So much for US President Barack Obama's famed powers of persuasion. At the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference which opened this week, the Obama administration managed to lose control over the agenda before the conference even started.

Obama administration officials said they intended to use the conference as a platform to mount international pressure on Iran to stop its illicit nuclear proliferation activities. But even before the conference began, with a little prodding from Egypt, the administration agreed that instead of focusing on Iran, the conference would adopt Iran's chosen agenda: attacking Israel for its alleged nuclear arsenal.

Last week the Wall Street Journal reported that US officials were conducting negotiations with Egypt about Egypt's demand that the NPT review conference call for sanctions against Israel for refusing to join the NPT as a non-nuclear state. The Journal quoted a senior administration official involved in the discussions saying, "We've made a proposal to them [Egypt] that goes beyond what the U.S. has been willing to do before."

Among other possibilities, that proposal may have included a US agreement to appoint a UN envoy responsible for organizing a UN conference calling for the Greater Middle East to become a nuclear-free zone. In diplomatese, "Middle East nuclear-free zone" is a well-accepted euphemism for stripping Israel of its purported nuclear capability while turning a blind eye to Iranian, Syrian and other Islamic nuclear weapons programs. Egypt's demand, which it convinced more than a hundred members of the Non-Aligned bloc to sign onto, is for Israel to open its nuclear installations to international inspectors as a first step towards unilateral nuclear disarmament.

On Wednesday the US joined the other four permanent members of the Security Council in signing a statement calling for a nuclear-free Middle East and urging Israel, Pakistan and India to accede to the NPT as non-nuclear states. Following the US's lead, on Thursday Yukiya Amano, the new Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency wrote a letter to IAEA member states asking for their suggestions for how to convince Israel to sign the NPT.

So as Iran - an NPT signatory - makes a mockery of the treaty by building nuclear weapons in contempt of its treaty obligations, the US has actively supported Iran's bid to use the NPT review conference as yet another UN forum for bashing Israel.

It bears recalling that the primary goal of the NPT is to prevent nuclear proliferation. From the amount of attention Israel is receiving at the NPT review conference, you could easily get the impression that Israel's purported nuclear arsenal is the gravest proliferation threat in the world today. But history shows that this is nonsense.

Israel's alleged nuclear arsenal, which it has reportedly fielded for four decades, has not led to a regional nuclear arms race. Notwithstanding their protestations to the contrary, Israel's neighbors fully recognize that the purpose of Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal is to guarantee Israel's survival and consequently only threatens those who would attack the Jewish state with the intention of annihilating it. This is why although it is four decades old; Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal has never caused a regional nuclear arms race. It has never harmed or called into question the relevance or usefulness of the NPT's international non-proliferation agenda. Moreover, as a non-signatory to the NPT, Israel has the right to develop a nuclear program.

Iran on the other hand gave up that right when it joined the NPT regime. So too, in sharp contrast to Israel's alleged program, it is clear that Iran's nuclear project is aggressive rather than defensive. Consequently, it is universally recognized that if Iran becomes a nuclear power, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other states will begin developing their own nuclear arsenals in short order. That is, it is absolutely clear that if the NPT is to have any relevance in the coming years, if there is to be any hope that counter-proliferation regimes can be useful; preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons must be its signatories' chief aim.

But due to the Obama administration's diplomatic fecklessness and ideological blinders, administration officials were incapable of making these points. And so, instead through its actions, the administration has advanced the cause of nuclear proliferation. The US has now joined the ranks of fools who claim that nuclear weapons in the hands of states like the US and Israel are as problematic as nuclear weapons in the hands of states like Iran and North Korea.

But then, in the end it makes no difference that the US has followed Iran's lead at the NPT conference. Even if the administration had managed to make Iran's nuclear weapons program the focus of debate, it wouldn't have mattered because diplomacy is no longer a relevant tool for preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Appeasement has failed. Sanctions are dead in the water in the Security Council.

And even if the Security Council passes a sanctions resolution, they will have no impact on Iran's behavior. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made that much clear in his speech on Monday and in subsequent remarks to the media. As he put it, "While we do not welcome sanctions, we do not fear them either. Sanctions cannot stop the Iranian nation."

What all of this demonstrates is that the diplomatic track - from appeasement to sanctions - is irrelevant for contending with Iran's nuclear program. The only way to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear bombs is to use military force to destroy or severely damage its nuclear installations.

And this of course is something Obama will not do. His begging-to-shake-hands policy towards Iran on the one hand and his iron fist policy towards Israel on the other makes it absolutely clear that Obama will do nothing to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Rather than correct his abysmal failures, Obama seeks to hide them by minimizing the seriousness of the threat.

In remarks to the media this week, a White House official downplayed the Iranian threat. He told the Financial Times that Iran's "nuclear clock has slowed down. They are not making dramatic technical progress given the difficulties they are facing in their [uranium] enrichment program and the fact that their efforts to build secret facilities have been disclosed."

The fact that the US's published intelligence estimates of Iran's nuclear program contradict this claim didn't seem to faze the official.

The US's abdication of its responsibility as the leader of the free world to prevent the most dangerous regimes from acquiring the most dangerous weapons means that the responsibility for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has fallen on Israel's shoulders. Only Israel has the means and the will to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. And the message the NPT follies convey is that Israel must develop contingency plans for attacking Iran as quickly as possible.

Daily reports of weapons build-ups and military exercises in Iran and among Iran's clients Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas expose the contours of their war plans.

Syria and Iran have armed Hizbullah with some 40,000 missiles and rockets, including hundreds of Scud missiles and guided surface-to-surface solid fuel M600 missiles with a 250 km range and this week Hizbullah threatened to attack Israel with non-conventional weapons. Syria itself has a formidable chemical and biological arsenal as well as a massive artillery and missile force at its disposal.

As for Hamas, since Operation Cast Lead Iran's Palestinian proxy Hamas has expanded its own missile arsenal. Today it reportedly has projectiles capable of reaching Tel Aviv and beyond.

As for Iran, as its seemingly endless military exercises make clear, the mullocracy has the capacity to use conventional weapons to imperil global oil shipments from the Persian Gulf. So too, this week's report that Osama Bin Laden may have decamped to Iran in 2003 merely served to underline Iran's ability to utilize jihadist terror forces throughout the world.

From the open preparations for war that Iran and its clients have undertaken, it is clear that if they initiate the next round of fighting they will fight a four front war against Israel. That war will be dominated by missile attacks against the entire country aimed at breaking the will of the Israeli people while forcing the IDF to divert vital resources away from Israel's primary target - Iran's nuclear installations - to contend with Iran's proxies' missile stores.

As they consider Israel's options going forward, Israel's political and military leaders have to take two considerations into account. First, the side that initiates the conflict will be the side that controls the battle space. And second, there is a real possibility that the Obama administration will refuse to resupply Israel with vital weapons systems in the course of the war. The fact that Israel will be roundly condemned by the UN and its component parts is a certainty regardless of who initiates the conflict and therefore is irrelevant for operational planning.

Armed with these understandings, it is apparent that Israeli contingency plans for war must have limited goals and should be guided by the overarching aim of beginning and ending the war quickly. Luckily, Israel excels at limited, swift campaigns.

Responding to one of Syrian President Bashar Assad's recent threats, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman promised last month that if Assad attacks Israel, Israel will bring down his regime. While bringing about the utter defeat of Iran's regional proxies is a reasonable goal, it cannot be Israel's goal in the coming war.

In the coming war, Israel will have only one goal: to destroy or seriously damage Iran's nuclear installations. Every resource turned against Iran's proxies must be aimed at facilitating that goal. That is, the only thing Israel should seek to accomplish in contending with Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas is to prevent them from diverting Israeli resources away from attacking Iran's nuclear installations.

This means that Israel must launch a preemptive strike against Hizbullah's missiles and missile launchers, Syria's missiles, artillery and launchers, and Hamas's missiles and launchers. As for their short-range rockets, Israel should do its best to intercept them and otherwise hunker down to weather the storm of Katyushas and Qassams. Life on the homefront won't be easy. But it won't be impossible either, as we saw in 2006.

Almost every assessment of a possible Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear installations has assumed that Israel will use its air force to strike. All that can be said of that analysis is that, just as there is more than one way to skin a cat, so there is more than one way to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. An Israeli strike should utilize all of them to keep the Iranians off balance and on the defensive.

These are dangerous times. Iran, which seeks to position itself as a regional superpower, has been emboldened by the Obama administration's abdication of US global leadership. Only Israel can prevent Iran from endangering the world. But time is of the essence.

cslewislover wrote:Any country that has neighbors that continually say that they will destroy that country, can't be blamed for wanting to defend itself, for wanting to survive. What a hard choice Israel has. Is there any good reason for the UN to exist any longer? I've read of many cases where they don't help when things get tough, and it doesn't seem like other programs are being carried out as originally intended, but then I don't have time to keep up with what all the UN is doing.

Telstra Robs wrote: Lewis, the behaviour of the Arab states surrounding Israel is caused by the behaviour of Israel.

Israel conquered large portions of Palestinian territory, territory the British Mandate of Palestine did not award it. This would be forgivable, even alright IF Israel gave the Palestinians in the conquered territories citizenship and allowed them to become functioning members of Israeli society. Instead, Israel builds houses on their land and moves people onto their land, as if they're trying to push the Palestinians out. They've closed the boarders to the Gaza Strip (the modern equivalent of Philistine). The Palestinians in Gaza cannot get access to any resources because of boarder closures by the Egyptians and the Israelis, so they have to bring them through lifts to underground areas.

Telstra Robs wrote:Israel has behaved appallingly to the Palestinians. You claim they cannot be forgiven for their actions, but you must look at the other side of the coin before making such a statement.

Telstra Robs wrote:This is the source of tension in the region. In both 2002 and 2007, Saudi Arabia extended a peace treaty to Israel, with the condition that Israel leave the occupied territories and reduce its boarders to what they were before the 1967 war. Israel did not make a reply either time.

Israel is so paranoid about losing its national identity as a Jewish Homeland that it refuses to leave conquered territories or offer those in conquered territories citizenship.

Telstra Robs wrote:Believe you me, I am certainly against the behaviour of the Arab League. But you must look at the evil of both sides and understand the motives. If you did something bad, you would not want people to think of you as a crazy madman who did it without motive, would you?

Telstra Robs wrote: Israel has behaved appallingly to the Palestinians. You claim they cannot be forgiven for their actions, but you must look at the other side of the coin before making such a statement.

This is the source of tension in the region. In both 2002 and 2007, Saudi Arabia extended a peace treaty to Israel, with the condition that Israel leave the occupied territories and reduce its boarders to what they were before the 1967 war. Israel did not make a reply either time.

Israel is so paranoid about losing its national identity as a Jewish Homeland that it refuses to leave conquered territories or offer those in conquered territories citizenship.

Believe you me, I am certainly against the behaviour of the Arab League. But you must look at the evil of both sides and understand the motives. If you did something bad, you would not want people to think of you as a crazy madman who did it without motive, would you?

Telstra Robs wrote: Israel has behaved appallingly to the Palestinians. You claim they cannot be forgiven for their actions, but you must look at the other side of the coin before making such a statement.

Telstra Robs wrote:You claim they cannot be forgiven for their actions, but you must look at the other side of the coin before making such a statement.

That is a bunch of malarkey... There has ALWAYS been a presence of Jews in Israel. Always.. Even after the diasporas. They are not occupiers or conquerors. The British Mandate actually promised a much larger land to Israel but the Arabs wouldn't have it. Instead they battled against Israel and the UN therefore forfeiting their land rights. This Israelis did not start any war.. In fact after the 6 day war the Israelis conquered land all the way down to the Sinai but later gave it back. They didn't have to but they did because they wanted peace.

What?? How about jobs? Israel always had full intentions of allowing Palestinians to work in Israel. And many still do today. Before that there was absolutely nothing in Israel. No jobs or anything. Just a barren wasteland. They provided jobs for them...

Paranoid? Again you are misinformed... What about the Gaza strip they gave up for the Oslo Accords? The minute Israel gave up those lands what did the Palestinians do? They used those lands to launch missiles into Israel. What would you do if you gave up your land to your neighbor and they used that land to launch missiles into your house? Would you be cautious?

The Palestinians have no intentions of settling disputes with the Israelis. They want a Palestinian state without any Israel.. That is why they won't form it because then they would have to recognize the Israelis borders.

And speaking of evil.. What kind of a nut job would dress a baby as a suicide bomber?

Oh and just so you know, all those who attacked Israel hid behind women and children so Israel could not fight back. When Israel defended itself the liberal media attacked them, for self defense. Oh sure, why should they defend themselves, why not just let them all be killed. Oh wait, that is what Iran wants!!!!!! I have no pity, or sympathy for those who attack Israel.

No the Palestinians have always, and will always, hate Israel. In fact the people of the Gaza strip, before the boarders were closed (and they should be closed!) Said that they were with the terrorist organizations, who just happen to be the ones attacking mind you, and they all want the Jews dead and gone. You think that there is any justice in what the Palestinians do? That's laughable at best. Hamas, a terrorist organization, bombed Israel over and over again while hiding behind children. They hid in hospitals full of patients. They attacked over and over again. You think this was for some land that Israel took? No it is because Israel exists, they will not be happy until Israel is gone. They hide behind the lies that they just want their land back.

cslewislover wrote:Any country that has neighbors that continually say that they will destroy that country, can't be blamed for wanting to defend itself, for wanting to survive. What a hard choice Israel has. Is there any good reason for the UN to exist any longer? I've read of many cases where they don't help when things get tough, and it doesn't seem like other programs are being carried out as originally intended, but then I don't have time to keep up with what all the UN is doing.

Gman wrote:Just an fyi... There is a lot of talk among the prophets that whenever you curse Israel there are dire consequences for it, Genesis 12:3. And it seems that the US appears to be guilty of that. So far we have seen some pretty strange things happening recently. Floods, oil spills, earthquakes, wars, volcanoes, threats, and now bees dieing in the millions....

"Data from the US Department of Agriculture show a 29 percent drop in beehives in 2009, following a 36 percent decline in 2008 and a 32 percent fall in 2007."

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... fec28e.8b1

And now maybe famines...

Coincidence?

Telstra Robs wrote: Now my friends, I will attempt to answer all of your arguments.

That is a bunch of malarkey... There has ALWAYS been a presence of Jews in Israel. Always.. Even after the diasporas. They are not occupiers or conquerors. The British Mandate actually promised a much larger land to Israel but the Arabs wouldn't have it. Instead they battled against Israel and the UN therefore forfeiting their land rights. This Israelis did not start any war.. In fact after the 6 day war the Israelis conquered land all the way down to the Sinai but later gave it back. They didn't have to but they did because they wanted peace.

First of all, it was originally inhabited by several tribes whom God told the Israelis to evict. But that's not important. Of the Israelis living in Israel at the moment, very few have descendants living in Israel past World War I. In past times, a large quantity Israelis moved out of Israel to various countries in Europe (who came back after a thousand years or so). Though it is probably not that germane, it is important to note that these people had not been in their land for over one thousand years.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Palestinians (of whom are most likely of some Israeli descent, or Philistinian, depending on the area) most likely see the Israelis as foreign Europeans (these feelings not helped by the Suez Crisis, a war between Egypt and a coalition force of Britain, France and Israel, where Britain and France got assistance from Israel in conquering the Sinai in 1956). The Palestinians are wrong in mistreating the Israelis who have returned to their land, but it is incorrect to assume that they have had eternal existence there. If that were the case, the Holocaust would not have taken place (as Hitler was killing the Jews in Europe; had they been in Israel, he would have not been able to reach them and if he did, it would have certainly been easier for the Allies to know, who didn't find out till the very end).

Telstra Robs wrote:The Six Day war in part had causes dating back to the Suez Crisis when British and French governments assisted Israel in conquering the Sinai peninsula from the Egyptians, as they feared their assets in the Suez Canal (the only canal that allows you to go from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, having to circumnavigate Africa otherwise) would be lost to the Egyptians. A British-French-Israeli force conquered the Sinai in 1956 in the said Suez Crisis.

In 1964, Israel began to divert water from Jordan, reducing crucial flow to the Hashemite Territory. In response, Arab states began to construct a dam (in their own territory) to restrict flow of the river that the Israelis were diverting to a dam in Jordan and Syria. The diversion works would have reduced Israeli water supply by 11%. In response, Israel used their military to attack the diversion works. The attacks by Israel sparked a chain of events leading to the Six Day War.

Telstra Robs wrote:

What?? How about jobs? Israel always had full intentions of allowing Palestinians to work in Israel. And many still do today. Before that there was absolutely nothing in Israel. No jobs or anything. Just a barren wasteland. They provided jobs for them...

No jobs? A barren wasteland? You cannot live in such a place. Emigration would have left it with an extremely low population when Israel conquered it. Such territories included East Jerusalem (not given to the Israelis by the UN), something with obvious value and worth before conquest and the Sinai peninsula, which includes the Suez Canal, a very, very rich and important asset.

Telstra Robs wrote:

Paranoid? Again you are misinformed... What about the Gaza strip they gave up for the Oslo Accords? The minute Israel gave up those lands what did the Palestinians do? They used those lands to launch missiles into Israel. What would you do if you gave up your land to your neighbor and they used that land to launch missiles into your house? Would you be cautious?

The Gaza strip never ever belonged to Israel. It belonged to the Philistines, and then the Palestinians. As I mentioned before, they had little food and medical supplies, ships bringing them were blocked by an Israeli blockade over an alleged weapons smuggling. If you stole that same land from your neighbour and then prevented him from eating or bringing medication to his home after giving back what you stole while you watched him starve over something that you have no proof of, does that then give him the right to launch missiles into your land?

Telstra Robs wrote:

The Palestinians have no intentions of settling disputes with the Israelis. They want a Palestinian state without any Israel.. That is why they won't form it because then they would have to recognize the Israelis borders.

And speaking of evil.. What kind of a nut job would dress a baby as a suicide bomber?

The Palestinians as well as the rest of the world have proposed two solutions to the problem. The One State solution, which suggests that Israel and Palestine unify to be one big state where Palestinians and Israelis are equal has been rejected by the Israelis. The Two State solution suggests separate states for Israel and Palestine, but Israel refuses to give up the eastern half of Jerusalem in the West Bank and without this part of Jerusalem for a capital, the Palestinians have rejected this solution. We must leave to them to figure it out.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Palestinians are not all terrorists. Many are poor people who are trying to live their lives. They don't all have Israel and most certainly wouldn't strap bombs to their babies! That is an extremely morbid thought! No matter what your religion, no matter what your hatred or anger, it takes great zeal to want to sacrifice your own child. No sane person would do that. It is a disgusting thought.

Telstra Robs wrote:Moving on to the next post.

Oh and just so you know, all those who attacked Israel hid behind women and children so Israel could not fight back. When Israel defended itself the liberal media attacked them, for self defense. Oh sure, why should they defend themselves, why not just let them all be killed. Oh wait, that is what Iran wants!!!!!! I have no pity, or sympathy for those who attack Israel.

The actions of a few who attacked Israel are heinous indeed. The actions and words of the Arab and Iranian governments, especially the hatred (which is on both sides) are things which I condemn. However, these are not the actions of all the Palestinians. Many people in this part of the world have evil thoughts towards Israel. However, many more don't. Instead of saying "that is what Iran wants", perhaps you should say "that is what the people who feel hatred for Israel and live in Iran want".

Telstra Robs wrote:

No the Palestinians have always, and will always, hate Israel. In fact the people of the Gaza strip, before the boarders were closed (and they should be closed!) Said that they were with the terrorist organizations, who just happen to be the ones attacking mind you, and they all want the Jews dead and gone. You think that there is any justice in what the Palestinians do? That's laughable at best. Hamas, a terrorist organization, bombed Israel over and over again while hiding behind children. They hid in hospitals full of patients. They attacked over and over again. You think this was for some land that Israel took? No it is because Israel exists, they will not be happy until Israel is gone. They hide behind the lies that they just want their land back.

Mate, please prove that these are lies and that they want Israel gone. There have been in the past many Arab leaders (from countries other than Palestinian ones) who have expressed such thoughts, and there are still many terrorist organisations who do. However, there have been many peace proposals (on both sides AND from third parties) which show that both sides are attempting to end this useless conflict.

Here are some examples:

- Camp David Summit (2000): Israel cedes 95% of West Bank to new Palestine State. Israel retains indefinite control over 5% of the West Bank. Palestine rejects offer as Israeli checkpoints throughout Palestinian territory do not allow free movement and Israel and that the Barak's offer stated that Arafat forgo the "Right of Return" for Palestinian refugees who fled Israel in 1948.

- Taba Summit (2001): Barak proposes offer where there would be no indefinitely Israeli controlled areas. It was considered a good starting basis for further talks. Negotiation ended when Barak's left wing party was voted out and a more conservative party was voted in.

- Road Map for Peace (by EU, UN, US and Russia): Made a proposal, rejected by the Israeli government who made 14 amendments, which were considered unacceptable by the Palestinian authorities. The proposal called for a cease in Israeli settlement construction and a cease in hostilities.

- Arab Peace Initiative (proposed by Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia): Proposed a return to United Nations pre1967 boarders and that a new Palestinian state would be created with East Jerusalem as its capitol. Rejected by Israel.

Telstra Robs wrote: Basic supplies that the Palestinians needed could not get into Gaza; food and medical supplies for example. Israel would not listen to the UN and the US would not listen to the Palestinians. Hamas began infrequently bombing Israel. In response, Israel shelled a number of targets in Gaza, such as hospitals and schools. They moved their tanks in. Innocent children were killed. No my friends, not all Palestinians are terrorists. In fact, very few are. Israel had no excuse for what they did. They were able to attack military targets and police stations which make sense, so why did they have to target the hospitals and schools? They thought someone was hiding there? Considering that they had troops in Gaza City, wouldn't it have been better to preserve human life and extract said targets with soldiers and not with bombs?

Telstra Robs wrote:First of all, it was originally inhabited by several tribes whom God told the Israelis to evict. But that's not important.

Telstra Robs wrote:Of the Israelis living in Israel at the moment, very few have descendants living in Israel past World War I. In past times, a large quantity Israelis moved out of Israel to various countries in Europe (who came back after a thousand years or so). Though it is probably not that germane, it is important to note that these people had not been in their land for over one thousand years. The Palestinians (of whom are most likely of some Israeli descent, or Philistinian, depending on the area) most likely see the Israelis as foreign Europeans (these feelings not helped by the Suez Crisis, a war between Egypt and a coalition force of Britain, France and Israel, where Britain and France got assistance from Israel in conquering the Sinai in 1956). The Palestinians are wrong in mistreating the Israelis who have returned to their land, but it is incorrect to assume that they have had eternal existence there. If that were the case, the Holocaust would not have taken place (as Hitler was killing the Jews in Europe; had they been in Israel, he would have not been able to reach them and if he did, it would have certainly been easier for the Allies to know, who didn't find out till the very end).

Telstra Robs wrote:The Six Day war in part had causes dating back to the Suez Crisis when British and French governments assisted Israel in conquering the Sinai peninsula from the Egyptians, as they feared their assets in the Suez Canal (the only canal that allows you to go from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, having to circumnavigate Africa otherwise) would be lost to the Egyptians. A British-French-Israeli force conquered the Sinai in 1956 in the said Suez Crisis.

In 1964, Israel began to divert water from Jordan, reducing crucial flow to the Hashemite Territory. In response, Arab states began to construct a dam (in their own territory) to restrict flow of the river that the Israelis were diverting to a dam in Jordan and Syria. The diversion works would have reduced Israeli water supply by 11%. In response, Israel used their military to attack the diversion works. The attacks by Israel sparked a chain of events leading to the Six Day War.

Telstra Robs wrote:No jobs? A barren wasteland? You cannot live in such a place. Emigration would have left it with an extremely low population when Israel conquered it. Such territories included East Jerusalem (not given to the Israelis by the UN), something with obvious value and worth before conquest and the Sinai peninsula, which includes the Suez Canal, a very, very rich and important asset.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Gaza strip never ever belonged to Israel. It belonged to the Philistines, and then the Palestinians. As I mentioned before, they had little food and medical supplies, ships bringing them were blocked by an Israeli blockade over an alleged weapons smuggling. If you stole that same land from your neighbour and then prevented him from eating or bringing medication to his home after giving back what you stole while you watched him starve over something that you have no proof of, does that then give him the right to launch missiles into your land?

Telstra Robs wrote:The Palestinians as well as the rest of the world have proposed two solutions to the problem. The One State solution, which suggests that Israel and Palestine unify to be one big state where Palestinians and Israelis are equal has been rejected by the Israelis. The Two State solution suggests separate states for Israel and Palestine, but Israel refuses to give up the eastern half of Jerusalem in the West Bank and without this part of Jerusalem for a capital, the Palestinians have rejected this solution. We must leave to them to figure it out.

The Palestinians are not all terrorists. Many are poor people who are trying to live their lives. They don't all have Israel and most certainly wouldn't strap bombs to their babies! That is an extremely morbid thought! No matter what your religion, no matter what your hatred or anger, it takes great zeal to want to sacrifice your own child. No sane person would do that. It is a disgusting thought.

Telstra Robs wrote:The actions of a few who attacked Israel are heinous indeed. The actions and words of the Arab and Iranian governments, especially the hatred (which is on both sides) are things which I condemn. However, these are not the actions of all the Palestinians. Many people in this part of the world have evil thoughts towards Israel. However, many more don't. Instead of saying "that is what Iran wants", perhaps you should say "that is what the people who feel hatred for Israel and live in Iran want".

Telstra Robs wrote:Bombing hospitals and schools are not the right answer. What about the Sampson Option? Perhaps that's something you should research my friend.

Dazed and Confused wrote: With God there are no coincidences, "I will curse them that curse thee". When the Germans first started to round up the Jews they enclosed them behind walls and any Jew attempting to climb over was shot. After the war some Germans were enclosed behind the Berlin wall and anyone trying to climb over was shot. Mirror image.

Some other examples of God's promise to those who curse Israel are given by Bill Koenig in his book "Eye to Eye - Facing the Consequences of Dividing Israel" https://secure.watch.org/resources/

Byblos wrote:

Telstra Robs wrote: Now my friends, I will attempt to answer all of your arguments.

That is a bunch of malarkey... There has ALWAYS been a presence of Jews in Israel. Always.. Even after the diasporas. They are not occupiers or conquerors. The British Mandate actually promised a much larger land to Israel but the Arabs wouldn't have it. Instead they battled against Israel and the UN therefore forfeiting their land rights. This Israelis did not start any war.. In fact after the 6 day war the Israelis conquered land all the way down to the Sinai but later gave it back. They didn't have to but they did because they wanted peace.

First of all, it was originally inhabited by several tribes whom God told the Israelis to evict. But that's not important. Of the Israelis living in Israel at the moment, very few have descendants living in Israel past World War I. In past times, a large quantity Israelis moved out of Israel to various countries in Europe (who came back after a thousand years or so). Though it is probably not that germane, it is important to note that these people had not been in their land for over one thousand years.

Not true. Israel/Palestine has always been inhabited by Jews of some count since biblical times. Their claim to parts of that land is at least contemporaneous if not predating any other group.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Palestinians (of whom are most likely of some Israeli descent, or Philistinian, depending on the area) most likely see the Israelis as foreign Europeans (these feelings not helped by the Suez Crisis, a war between Egypt and a coalition force of Britain, France and Israel, where Britain and France got assistance from Israel in conquering the Sinai in 1956). The Palestinians are wrong in mistreating the Israelis who have returned to their land, but it is incorrect to assume that they have had eternal existence there. If that were the case, the Holocaust would not have taken place (as Hitler was killing the Jews in Europe; had they been in Israel, he would have not been able to reach them and if he did, it would have certainly been easier for the Allies to know, who didn't find out till the very end).

That is some warped logic there my friend. First, you assume there were no Jews in Israel/Palestine for a period of time, an assumption I would love for you to somehow back up; then as a so-called proof of said assumption you offer the fact that the Holocaust occurred in Germany instead of Israel? Are you serious? The Holocaust didn't happen in Germany because there were no Jews in Israel, it happened in Germany because that's where the seeds of hatred and antisemitism festered the most.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Six Day war in part had causes dating back to the Suez Crisis when British and French governments assisted Israel in conquering the Sinai peninsula from the Egyptians, as they feared their assets in the Suez Canal (the only canal that allows you to go from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean, having to circumnavigate Africa otherwise) would be lost to the Egyptians. A British-French-Israeli force conquered the Sinai in 1956 in the said Suez Crisis.

In 1964, Israel began to divert water from Jordan, reducing crucial flow to the Hashemite Territory. In response, Arab states began to construct a dam (in their own territory) to restrict flow of the river that the Israelis were diverting to a dam in Jordan and Syria. The diversion works would have reduced Israeli water supply by 11%. In response, Israel used their military to attack the diversion works. The attacks by Israel sparked a chain of events leading to the Six Day War.

In 1964 Israel began to divert water because it is her birthright to use the water sources available in the region even if the water sources are not part of its own territories. Please read up on the U.N.'s charters on international water rights. The fact is that the Arab states beginning with Jordan were choking the life out of the Israelis by withholding such rights of water usage.

Telstra Robs wrote:

What?? How about jobs? Israel always had full intentions of allowing Palestinians to work in Israel. And many still do today. Before that there was absolutely nothing in Israel. No jobs or anything. Just a barren wasteland. They provided jobs for them...

No jobs? A barren wasteland? You cannot live in such a place. Emigration would have left it with an extremely low population when Israel conquered it. Such territories included East Jerusalem (not given to the Israelis by the UN), something with obvious value and worth before conquest and the Sinai peninsula, which includes the Suez Canal, a very, very rich and important asset.

Last I heard the Sinai peninsula was returned to its rightful owners once its existence was recognized and a peace deal was struck. Does that tell you something my friend? Look at the historical record. Every time Israel was approached with a sincere offer for peace a peace deal was struck and ceased territory was returned. In fact, Israel returned territory it had occupied even without a peace deal and that included water sources Israel desperately needed. Can you name this territory?

As far as jobs, are concerned, Palestinians who wish to live in Israel under Israeli law have all the rights and privileges Israeli citizens do including jobs, voting, joining the military, and representation in the Knesset. Show me a single Arab country that have the same rights for Jews in their country.

Telstra Robs wrote:

Paranoid? Again you are misinformed... What about the Gaza strip they gave up for the Oslo Accords? The minute Israel gave up those lands what did the Palestinians do? They used those lands to launch missiles into Israel. What would you do if you gave up your land to your neighbor and they used that land to launch missiles into your house? Would you be cautious?

The Gaza strip never ever belonged to Israel. It belonged to the Philistines, and then the Palestinians. As I mentioned before, they had little food and medical supplies, ships bringing them were blocked by an Israeli blockade over an alleged weapons smuggling. If you stole that same land from your neighbour and then prevented him from eating or bringing medication to his home after giving back what you stole while you watched him starve over something that you have no proof of, does that then give him the right to launch missiles into your land?

And Israel never claimed to have owned or even annexed the Gaza strip. It was occupied for security reasons, pure and simple. When the rockets stop flying from Gaza perhaps Israel will leave entirely and lift the blockade.

Telstra Robs wrote:

The Palestinians have no intentions of settling disputes with the Israelis. They want a Palestinian state without any Israel.. That is why they won't form it because then they would have to recognize the Israelis borders.

And speaking of evil.. What kind of a nut job would dress a baby as a suicide bomber?

The Palestinians as well as the rest of the world have proposed two solutions to the problem. The One State solution, which suggests that Israel and Palestine unify to be one big state where Palestinians and Israelis are equal has been rejected by the Israelis. The Two State solution suggests separate states for Israel and Palestine, but Israel refuses to give up the eastern half of Jerusalem in the West Bank and without this part of Jerusalem for a capital, the Palestinians have rejected this solution. We must leave to them to figure it out.

Make no mistake about it, Israel would love nothing more than to settle these disputes with its neighbors and live in peace. It has proven time and again its readiness to make concessions for the sake of peace, concessions that make sense. The right of return of Palestinian refugees from 1948 is a thorny issue but what most people fail to realize is that Israel is not opposed to the right of return into new Palestinian territories. But that's not what the Palestinians want. They want the right of return TO ISRAEL, where the refugees came from. That is simply not doable as it will tip the population scales WITHIN ISRAEL to a majority non-Jew, something no other ethnic country will accept. By example, it would be the same as permanently settling the Palestinian refugees in their host countries. Take Lebanon for example. There are over 500,000 Palestinians in refugee camps in Lebanon, the majority of whom are Muslims. If they were to be assimilated into the country's population (of 4 million), a quarter of the country will immediately become of Palestinian origin. To say nothing of the fact that it will obliterate the delicate political balance between Christians and Muslims there.

As for other territories (parts of Gaza and the West Bank), Israel's stance is such that ok, they did build a lot of housing on these lands that may not be feasible to be given up but they are willing to trade other parts of land in return. But I don't see this as an obstacle to peace either; Israel will make the sacrifice of relocating the settlements given a real chance at peace.

As far as East Jerusalem, I really believe Israel will make the ultimate sacrifice and give up that piece of land for the sake of a lasting peace that includes all its neighbors recognizing Israel's right to exist. But they can't play that card unless and until they see a real chance for peace from the other side.

Telstra Robs wrote:The Palestinians are not all terrorists. Many are poor people who are trying to live their lives. They don't all have Israel and most certainly wouldn't strap bombs to their babies! That is an extremely morbid thought! No matter what your religion, no matter what your hatred or anger, it takes great zeal to want to sacrifice your own child. No sane person would do that. It is a disgusting thought.

And whoever said all the Palestinians are terrorists? But the fact remains they are the ones who voted Hamas and now they are being hijacked by their own leadership (namely Hamas, as Fatah is largely ineffectual as a partner in peace anyway) by the delusional promise of a Palestine free of Israel and free of Jews. Never gonna happen and the sooner they realize that the sooner we will have peace. But I wouldn't hold my breath though, their leadership is morally bankrupt.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Telstra Robs wrote:Moving on to the next post.

Oh and just so you know, all those who attacked Israel hid behind women and children so Israel could not fight back. When Israel defended itself the liberal media attacked them, for self defense. Oh sure, why should they defend themselves, why not just let them all be killed. Oh wait, that is what Iran wants!!!!!! I have no pity, or sympathy for those who attack Israel.

The actions of a few who attacked Israel are heinous indeed. The actions and words of the Arab and Iranian governments, especially the hatred (which is on both sides) are things which I condemn. However, these are not the actions of all the Palestinians. Many people in this part of the world have evil thoughts towards Israel. However, many more don't. Instead of saying "that is what Iran wants", perhaps you should say "that is what the people who feel hatred for Israel and live in Iran want".

The fact remains it was the Palestinian people who voted in a leadership that is sworn to the destruction of Israel. So long as negotiation cannot be done directly with all the people and so long as they are being represented by an Israel-hating group there will never be peace.

Telstra Robs wrote:

No the Palestinians have always, and will always, hate Israel. In fact the people of the Gaza strip, before the boarders were closed (and they should be closed!) Said that they were with the terrorist organizations, who just happen to be the ones attacking mind you, and they all want the Jews dead and gone. You think that there is any justice in what the Palestinians do? That's laughable at best. Hamas, a terrorist organization, bombed Israel over and over again while hiding behind children. They hid in hospitals full of patients. They attacked over and over again. You think this was for some land that Israel took? No it is because Israel exists, they will not be happy until Israel is gone. They hide behind the lies that they just want their land back.

Mate, please prove that these are lies and that they want Israel gone. There have been in the past many Arab leaders (from countries other than Palestinian ones) who have expressed such thoughts, and there are still many terrorist organisations who do. However, there have been many peace proposals (on both sides AND from third parties) which show that both sides are attempting to end this useless conflict.

Here are some examples:

- Camp David Summit (2000): Israel cedes 95% of West Bank to new Palestine State. Israel retains indefinite control over 5% of the West Bank. Palestine rejects offer as Israeli checkpoints throughout Palestinian territory do not allow free movement and Israel and that the Barak's offer stated that Arafat forgo the "Right of Return" for Palestinian refugees who fled Israel in 1948.

- Taba Summit (2001): Barak proposes offer where there would be no indefinitely Israeli controlled areas. It was considered a good starting basis for further talks. Negotiation ended when Barak's left wing party was voted out and a more conservative party was voted in.

- Road Map for Peace (by EU, UN, US and Russia): Made a proposal, rejected by the Israeli government who made 14 amendments, which were considered unacceptable by the Palestinian authorities. The proposal called for a cease in Israeli settlement construction and a cease in hostilities.

- Arab Peace Initiative (proposed by Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia): Proposed a return to United Nations pre1967 boarders and that a new Palestinian state would be created with East Jerusalem as its capitol. Rejected by Israel.

You really need to go back and re-read why these peace initiatives all failed. It was never on the part of Israel, who made many concessions. It probably was not on the part of the Arab states in general either but it certainly was always on the part of the Palestinian leadership starting with the most morally corrupt one of them all, Yaser Arafat, who torpedoed the Oslo accord the next day after agreeing to it. Why? Because on top of his moral bankruptcy he was a coward at heart.