What does Bibi Really Want?


By Ian Kramer
May 25, 2011
Share

I supported Sharon for over twenty years.

Until the disasterous Gush Katif fiasco.

Now Bibi leaves me with a similar mental schism.

Yesterday he gave Congress at least four reasons why there will be no Peace Talks in the immediate future, because the Arabs will refuse to accept the conditions imposed:

1. Jerusalem remains exclusively Israeli and undivided.
2. No return of any refugees.
3. Recognition of the State of Israel as a Jewish State.
4. Removal of Hamas from government.

So Bibi is worthy of support ...

On the other hand, he stated loud and clear his support for a Palestinian State. Certainly in direct contradiction to Halacha, but long before we get there the security considerations remain paramount.

He went too far when he said that Israel would be the FIRST to recognize a "Palestinian State" under the conditions he laid out.

Reminds me of a comment made by the late Yisrael Eldad (father of MK Arieh Eldad) when Begin returned from Camp David in the seventies, exuding satisfaction:

"There is a halacha that says that if a man is lost in the wilderness, he is allowed to eat pig in order to remain alive. But nowhere is it stated that one is commanded to lick one's fingers."

COMMENTS

Harvey

25 May, 2011 - 11:59

Rate this:

0 points

The whole process is doomed to failure
Even if the Palestinians were to get their holy grail of quasi statehood ,it's only a stepping stone to their ultimate goal
Then when the first terrorist attack impacts on israel , it will be all bets off,permanent military intervention and annexation
Admittedly , the status quo is a pain but at least it avoids going through all of the above


Harvey

25 May, 2011 - 11:59

Rate this:

0 points

The whole process is doomed to failure
Even if the Palestinians were to get their holy grail of quasi statehood ,it's only a stepping stone to their ultimate goal
Then when the first terrorist attack impacts on israel , it will be all bets off,permanent military intervention and annexation
Admittedly , the status quo is a pain but at least it avoids going through all of the above


Harvey

25 May, 2011 - 12:00

Rate this:

0 points

Two for the price of one
How's that


Joe Millis

25 May, 2011 - 12:06

Rate this:

0 points

A kick up the rear, perhaps, to save Israel from the nightmare of becoming an apartheid state. Or a theocracy. Or both, whose only supporters are demented Rapturists and other Evangelicals.


Ian Kramer

25 May, 2011 - 18:12

Rate this:

-1 points

Millis, for someone who regularly defames Israel and distorts Hebrew language news reports on the assumption that only you understand the Holy Tongue, you sure care a lot about Israel ...


Ian Kramer

25 May, 2011 - 18:15

Rate this:

-1 points

Millis,
"whose only supporters are demented Rapturists and other Evangelicals"
- I have to assume that you think this is the entire composition of the American Congress, their undeniable support for Israel having been amply demonstrated at Bibi's speech to them.


Joe Millis

26 May, 2011 - 08:37

Rate this:

0 points

Reiss, much as it would like to believe otherwise, the US Congress isn't the master of the universe, and its elected members have to worry about what the evangelicals and Rapturists would say if they didn't act like muppets (sorry, puppets).

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.