I'm not overlooking the history of the '79 agreement.

Submitted by Doc Tater (United States), Feb 11, 2008 at 14:42

Infidel,

I'm looking at what has happened in the past 28 years, which seems to have proven that Land for Peace deals don't work when Israel makes them with jihadists.

Egypt treats its own people terribly, and they could be relied upon to treat the Gazans terribly. They are not motivated by humanitarian ideals. That's tough, but so be it.

Egypt isn't going to keep Hamas from attacking Israel, regardless of what was said in 1979. Egypt is run by the Muslim Brotherhood, just like Hamas is run by the Muslim Brotherhood. Mubarrak serves at the convenience of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood wants to destroy Israel. The Muslim Brotherhood runs a huge Hamas presence in the United States, that wants to destroy American freedoms and submit the US to sharia law (get acquainted with Steve Emerson's research).

Israel may have been right, in '79, to try the land for peace deal. It didn't make sense to me then, and, in the 20/20 clarity of hindsight, it certainly doesn't make sense now.

I regard Dr. Pipes as brilliant. Dr. Pipes has been accurately and shockingly prescient about the Middle East , America, Israel, and Islam. I just think he's wrong about this one because I think he's barking up a diplomacy tree that just won't work the way he'd like it to. I don't know why he is saying that he believes giving Gaza to Egypt would do anything but move an enemy's border closer to Tel Aviv.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".