Setting the stage for transfer
Let me see if I can weigh in on this. I decided to post rather than comment because Diana made some points that need to be addressed.
Diana puts forward the proposition that
Transfer will turn all of the Arab Middle East irredeemably against the United States, Israel's proxy. It isn't now...First of all, it is hard to imagine how much more they could hate America or how much more they could do to harm America or how much more they could threaten to do. The US is going to knock the crap out of Iraq and the Arabs will learn to live with it instead of vowing vengeance for the rest of their lives. But I do believe Israel is a special case. Even without transfer, the Arabs have a hate on Israel that knows no bounds and has not withered in over fifty years. It is a fantasy to think that they will get over it or that if they got the bomb that they wouldn't find an excuse to use it to create their version of the 'final solution". In that regard, transfer won't make it worse but will reduce the killings and make Israel more defensible.
Unfortunately we will still have to deal with the "bomb" if, as and when they get it. So in that regard nothing will change. But we will be safe from terror and from erosion of our demographics and from the charge of illegal occupation or occupying a whole people or humiliating a people. Well you know the drill. Then we will just have to take the abuse for having transferred them.
But I do not believe we can move them out Kosovo style even if we wanted to. Can you imagine how long it would take to load three million people on buses where we have to drag them on against their will one by one. Equally important is that the Jewish people would never do it because it is just like what the Nazis did to the Jews. This scene will never happen.
I agree with Daniel Pipes who argues, among others, that only a devastating defeat of the Arabs in general will do the trick as it did with Germany and Japan. In '67 Pan Arabism was all the rage and Nasser lead the way. Who knew from Islamicists. The war so utterly devastated the Arabs that Pan Arabism and socialism became a spent force. In its wake Islamicism came of age. So things can change. For better or for worse. Had not the Soviets been there to cushion the blow, the Arabs would have had to face up to their failure as a society.
I believe that America in order to save Diana's ass has to take the Arabs on. I have written many articles to the effect that Islamisation of the World is the goal of the Arabs and they must be stopped. Going into Iraq is the second step in that process after Afghanistan. I forsee a friendly Iraq even if America has to remain there for ten years. Next Hezbollah will be destroyed on the ground by Israel and America will make Syria amend their ways and switch sides. Iran will be next and then Saudi Arabia. So this upcoming war is about much more than Iraq. Then dealing with the Palestinians will be a piece of cake compared to now when they have so many allies. Remember these allies don't care about the Palestinians other than to use them as a proxy to destroy Israel. If they all switch sides there is no point. Then they will get more mileage from cooperating.
Recently I posted an article that explored the option of enlarging Jordan to encompass much of Iraq and some of the oil fields. There would be enough money to provide housing and jobs for the Palestinians in this expanded Jordan. I do not believe that in the absence of coersion that the Palestinians would prefer to live in camps in Palestine rather than to have a normal life in Jordan. The Palestinians will have to be deprogrammed from their hatred and this will take some time. But if you remove their leaderships call to fight and resist and hate, they will go quietly and be better off for it.
This is not a done deal but I see more hope in it to solve the "bomb" question then to try to appease them with further concessions. It is a fact of negotiations that the more anxious you are to get a deal the less you will get assuming that there is a deal available period.
Now back to transfer. Diana imagines transfer in the present climate. I say that we are already being hung for our alleged crimes so what would the difference be. Yes we would lose those that believe in us or our cause. Perhaps, but is this necessarily so? Let us assume that America decided to back the idea of transfer and got the EU to agree (I hear they are for sale) and this became the new Road Map coupled with the defeat of Iraq the climate is totally different. Does she still think the American people wouldn't accept it. Everyone likes a winner and if America is on a roll as I have suggested then it will have much more support to keep going.
Who will they turn to?....Russia and China...This idea is preposterous. Russia has all the oil it needs and plans to be an exporter of oil. China is not ready to take on America in a challenge in the Middle East and the US would never stand for it. Better to provide the Chinese with what they need rather then to have a challenge in the ME.
Diana suggests that Alisa is suffering from a self-deluding fantasy. I suggest that it is Diana who is suffering from the self deluding fantasy if she believes that the Arabs, in the absence of utter defeat, will ever stop trying to destroy Israel.
So I put it to the reader as to what scenario is most likely to succeed in protecting Israel from the "bomb.
Ted Belman firstname.lastname@example.org