Three disagreements

Submitted by David Tsal (United States), Apr 30, 2010 at 01:41

The article starts very well, and is good for the most part. But I have three disagreements.

First, a minor one. The end of the Cold war is comparable to the defeat of Germany in WWI. Russian "run out of will" is over, the will is back. Russia as an agressive militaristic state is back. Nationalism of the worst kind is resurgent there. Hatred of America and "American puppets" Georgia, Ukraine, Estonia, Poland, etc. is sweeping the country. Putin is encouraging it while keeping it under control and using it for his purposes. But, as with all such cases, feeding and riding this tiger is very dangerous: it may yet eat Putin, or force him to go where he doesn't want to.

Now to the major disagreement. Waiting for the world or the U.S. to realize that defeat of Palestinian aspirations is in its interest is waiting till hell freezes over. Trying to persuade it is a waste of breath. Even the most underestanding U.S. president would have to quietly convey the message "you are right, but there is nothing we can do to help you, and in fact, should you do that, we would be forced to stand against you."

But!!! The world's opinion is a paper tiger. All one needs is to have the courage to stare it down, to say boldly, "We don't give a fig about you and your opinion," and to follow up on it with consistent actions, and it will vanish. Does the world opinion make much noise about North Korea? About China's persecution of Tibetans and other minorities (talk about rule of other people for decades)? About persecution in Burma, in Iran, in... you name it? This is why.

The world is even genuflecting to Hamas. For the same reason. Hamas from time to time kidnaps Western journalists, threatens them, then releases them (so far). Everyone knows it would be nothing for Hamas to kill them. If Israel did that CONSISTENTLY!!! (consistency is the key), the media would lick its buttocks.

Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet - Scandinavia's largest newspaper - regularly prints anti-Israel articles and has recently fallen as low as to accuse Israelis of stealing Palestinian organs. When the editor was asked why he prints such endless stream of heinous nonsense about Jews and Jews only, replied, "Jews don't issue [death] fatwas." The conclusion is obvious: Jews have to issue death fatwas.

The third disagreement (and it might not be a disagreement) is about the extent of damage necessary to break one's will. The damage has to be horrendous. An excellent example is what was done to Germany at the end of WWII, with millions of Germans dead and mass starvation to the point of cannibalism. And the end of Cold war or defeat of Germany in WWI are counterexamples. This particularly applies to Middle Eastern people (both Jews and Arabs). The damage necessary to break one's will is horrendous, but that does not mean that it's impossible. Do to Palestinians what was dome to Germans in 45, and they will be defeated!

Cruel? Inhumane? OF COURSE! But is what's going on humane? And you (not Dr. Pipes, but the world's self-righteous classes) wanted peace, didn't you? You have asked for sacrifices for peace? Well, do some sacrificing yourself! Sacrifice your humanity! It has no place in this wolfish scuffle.

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".