…as long as we continue to turn a blind eye to butchery. Anyone who thinks that “settlements” cause this is disconnected with regional reality.
34 thoughts on “There Will Never Be Peace In The Middle East”
Comments are closed.
…as long as we continue to turn a blind eye to butchery. Anyone who thinks that “settlements” cause this is disconnected with regional reality.
Comments are closed.
Doesn’t fit the narrative. Besides, Japan is a bigger story… well… except for that Hitleresque governor of Wisconsin and his Reputhuglican henchmen that destroyed the centuries work of unions. Oh, and that 11 yr old hispanic girl in Texas? She deserved it. [[[/MSM coverage]]]
I have no idea what it takes to be a liberal journalist these days, but the claim that it takes a heart no longer seems to be apt.
According to Israeli press accounts, PA newspapers as well as private palestinian citizens (eg on Facebook, outside govt control) denounced the murders, and no one is reported to have praised them. The denunciations were often coupled with denunciations of occupation, and yes, many do think the settlements were an incitement, but no one was willing to say that killing children in their sleep was anything other than horrible.
Two questions:
1) why do you think that American newspapers’ coverage of the event will have any impact at all on peace in the middle east? What is the mechanism? What is the causal chain? In other words: why would a blind eye matter?
Why I’m asking: Republican and Democratic US presidents, Israeli prime ministers with various ideological stances, as well as *the majority* of Israeli citizens have not been able to change the settlement policy (due to coalition-based parliamentary politics), nor has anyone at all been able to come up with an answer that will bring about peace in the middle east. If you want to criticize the New York Times, fine, but don’t think that American journalists have any effect on what is going on, as the people who the American papers might influence have already made up their minds, and such people (eg Bush-41, Clinton, Bush-43, Obama, people who gave them money, and the majority of the readers of the New York Times) found that they can’t make any difference.
2) Why put settlements in quotes? Mainstream Israelis on all sides think that the West Bank settlements are settlements. If you were talking about the Golan Heights, you might have a point — the Golan Heights were occupied territory which was then annexed and incorporated into Israel. But the West Bank wasn’t annexed — it is occupied territory, and the Israeli civilians who have created enclaves there are called settlers.
The settlements nearest to the border might someday be annexed – they are now functioning as suburbs for Russians who needed cheaper housing (they’d move to Israel proper if it was economically advantageous) but the settlements further from the border are homes to ideologically driven fanatics who are proud of being settlers, so why the scare quotes?
Sorry, of course, my comments should have strictly about the West Bank: Ariel Sharon drastically changed the settlement policy when he forcibly removed settlers from the Gaza strip, but I don’t think he was influenced by American newspapers. Hmmm, when Begin forcibly removed settlers out of the Sinai in 1982, I suppose maybe he was indirectly influenced by American newspapers (via Jimmy Carter)… ….but Netanyahu is no Begin, and Obama is no Carter. 🙂
I now see that people in Gaza celebrated the murders. Disgusting.
The geographical location of Itamar (the settlement where the murders took place) doesn’t in any way justify the killings. But if you don’t want to be “disconnected with regional reality”, as Rand put it, you be sure to familiarize yourself with where Itamar is — it is 160 Orthodox Jewish families living dead center in the West Bank. I think it is stupid of them to live there, particularly with children. These aren’t suburban commuters like the ones I mentioned above. See the map here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar
You’re amazing, Bob-1. When a kid in a bad neighborhood in any other country is murdered do we blame the kid’s family for living there? Children shouldn’t be killed no matter where they live. I’m so sick of “but”-heads like you. You know — “sure, it was awful what happened, but the Palestinian cause, blah blah blah.” Do you think they just want the settlements to stop? Do you not know that one of the main conditions Palestinians demand in order to stop this sort of shit is for Israel to cease to be? What sort of dream world do you live in?
If I wanted to move to Mogadishu, it wouldn’t be moral to bring my baby daughter with me. And how is this all that different? Itamar isn’t in Israel, it is in a war zone without a proper government. The Israelis who live there live there by choice — they could move back to Israel if they wanted to. I don’t blame the family for getting murdered, but I do think it is reckless and stupid to live there with children, given that they know their presence is viewed as a provocation.
As for what “the Palestinians want”, to their credit, the PA and many individuals living on the West Bank are calling for the murderers to be caught and brought to stand trial.
If your child was murdered after your foolish and bizarre desire to move to a completely foreign land (which the Jews in the Palestinian-claimed lands aren’t doing; they consider the “settlement” lands part of their own country), it still wouldn’t be right to mollify what happened with “well, he shouldn’t have been there.” Well, no one should murder a baby in a cradle. I don’t care where they are or who thinks that baby in a cradle was “a provocation.” Stop blaming the victim.
I’m not blaming the victim – I blame the murderers.
But the Israelis don’t consider the West Bank part of their own country. If they did, they would annex it and, well, make it part of Israel. In contrast, as I mentioned above, the Golan Heights was made part of Israel, everyone living there was given Israeli citizenship, and the difference is quite significant for both Arabs and Jews living there.
Just as it would be, as you say, foolish and bizarre for me to move my daughter from the safety of the United States to a dangerous place like Mogadishu, it is foolish and bizarre for these religious fanatics to go live in middle of the West Bank.
Bob-1 has spoken as if there is nothing to be considered about the deaths of these children but where the parents chose to live, and the fact that the Israeli government has chosen to not formally claim the places where they live.
The places where these settlers live are places where Jews lived before 1948, and in some places where they had lived since the 13th century. Those Jews were driven out by the *Jordanian* occupation of those lands. Those lands are not reclaimed by the Israeli government because of massive pressure from the US, and even moreso, from the Left, in both Israel and Europe.
The Left hates Israel because the same 1967 victory that put Israel in control of the West Bank also destroyed “the socialist camp” hopes for controlling the ME oil, which would have placed their hands on the throat of industrial society around the world. Israel did this by forcing the Egyptian Army out of Yemen, through destroying the Egyptian Army in Sinai. Yemen was a completely sufficient base, if they could have stabilized it, for conquering the Arabian Peninsula, as another Egyptian Army had done 1813-18. But with Israeli tanks on the Suez Canal, the Egyptians had to pull out of Yemen.
The US pressures Israel to refrain because its State Department is acclimated to the Arab tyrants’ view through Bin Sultan’s institutional shaping campaign over 4 decades.
This family had harmed no one, and done nothing but help to re-establish a portion of the Jewish presence in these lands that had existed for 700 years, since the Crusaders were driven out. The individuals who butchered them come from a group of families, clans, and tribes that have adhered to each wave of totalitarian reaction against industrial society around the world, and helped the totalitarians hammer at the freedoms of action needed to let that society thrive.
Temporizing and equivocating in this struggle with these people and their allies is vile. Telling your friends and neighbors, even on this list, that “they just shouldn’t have been there” ignores history. It also ignores the realities of how much support is needed for a portion of industrial society called “Israel”, if we are not to desert yet another ally in the struggle to keep reactionaries from breaking the networks of industrial society. Those members of the Fogel family are dead. *Our* question is will we deaden our own clarity on what we are fighting for, and who we pick to ally with. I’d pick the Fogels any day.
I ally with Israel. Like the USA, it isn’t perfect, but it is my kind of place, I have family there, and I like and admire it very much.
Tom, it is true that Jews used to live throughout the West Bank, and they lived elsewhere in the middle east too. But Israelis didn’t. Jews used to live in Alexandria, and while Jews can live and work there even now, it is absurd to consider an Israeli settlement in Alexandria. The Israeli settlement of Itamar is just as absurd. Itamar, like Alexandria, isn’t part of Israel, and more importantly, it won’t become part of Israel.
Consider this: despite any supposed pressure from the USA, Europe, and “the left”, Israel has de facto annexed certain settlements along its border by building a security wall. These settlements will, in all probability, become part of Israel. Because the wall works, the settlements are no longer a war zone, except in a legal sense. In a very real sense, they are just Israeli suburbs. If the Fogels had been living behind that wall, in the suburbs, I wouldn’t make such a distinction about where they chose to live.
Tom, you’re wrong when you say that pressure from the USA, Europe, and “the left” has stopped Israel from annexing the West Bank. Israel’s three “D’s” are what stopped it: Demographics, Democracy, and Decency. Israel won’t kick all the Palestinans out, it won’t kill them, and, within its borders at least, it won’t allow people to be anything less than full citizens of a democratic republic. If Israel annexed the West Bank, Israel would soon lose its Jewish majority, and Israelis don’t trust an Arab majority to perpetuate a state that is either a free country or a home for the Jews.
At this point, the history of who lived where doesn’t matter. Israel is a done deal – it isn’t going anywhere. The security wall makes the eventual annexation of certain settlements a done deal as well. Palestinians who used to live in what is now Israel won’t be given a right of return, and Israelis won’t get peace until they stop imposing a right to return on land that is far from their border.
Because of the three Ds, Itamar won’t become part of Israel. My prediction for Itamar is that the families living there will eventually be forced out by the Israeli government, much as the settlers in Gaza and the Sinai were forced out. So why are the settlers living there? They are exposing themselves and their children to danger needlessly and pointlessly.
–
PS: Your statement is wrong in a different way as well: Israel does quite well standing up to pressure from the USA and Europe. And as for “the left” in Israel, remember that “the right” in Israel is generally to the left of US Democratic party when it comes to any domestic policy, so such terms are pretty useless.
I have no warm feelings for Israel. They are an ally of America like the French are, more in name than in reality. I still remember the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty. And many Arabs have gotten a raw deal at the hands of the Israelis.
Yet despite all of that, I don’t have much sympathy for ‘Palestinians’. Like the latest bloody murder of helpless children and the celebration afterwards, they are constantly providing examples of how dangerous and insane they are.
Are the Israelis responsible for the creation of the snake pit? Maybe. But that doesn’t change the fact it’s a snake pit. Beyond hope and beyond saving.
You can’t make peace with a snake at your throat. The snake only wants death, not peace. Gaza is the proof.
I note that Bob was so quick to defend that it took 3 comments and 40 minutes later to note the party in Gaza for the murderers. Those stories were available hours before I made the first comment. Perhaps Bob should strongly considering educating himself before making a complete ass of himself.
I’m still educating myself. I find Israeli politics fascinating, but I’m no expert. For example, it was only last night that I learned of this group:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gush_Emunim_Underground (a rare example of a late 20th century Jewish terrorist organization) and of its connections to Itamar. One of the funders of many of Itamar’s neighboring northern West Bank settlements, Moshe Zar, was also a terrorist — he was arrested, tried, convicted, and imprisoned by the Israelis. His son, later killed in an ambush, founded Itamar. That much, I’m sure of. I see claims that many of Itamar’s residents are still members of the Gush Emunim Underground, but I don’t know if the claims are true. I don’t like guilt-by-association arguments, so I’m not making any strong claims here – I’m just mentioning this to point out that I’m still educating myself about the situation, and I bet you could do so too.
If you visit the friends of Itamar website, you’ll find tons of photos of happy smiling children. I look at those kids, and I think “why raise them in a war zone?” Also on the site is calls from Itamar’s leaders to resist a two state solution, and instead create a one state solution by having all Jews across the world move to the West Bank. This isn’t a realistic recipe for peace.
Also on the site is calls from Itamar’s leaders to resist a two state solution, and instead create a one state solution by having all Jews across the world move to the West Bank. This isn’t a realistic recipe for peace.
Actually, it’s probably the only realistic recipe for peace, other than giving the Arabs their goal — the complete end of Israel.
Whatever you think of Gush Emunim, their goal is to build a state — that of their enemy is to destroy one.
Rand, thanks for replying. I don’t see how it is realistic. Jews already living in Israel don’t want to move to the West Bank. Jews across the world (translation: the United States) certainly don’t want to move there in any great numbers. There are roughly 5.4 million Jews living in Israel, and 2.3 Arabs, while in the West Bank there are an additional 3 million Arabs. I don’t see how the numbers work for a one state solution that has a Jewish majority, particularly given birthrates, and I don’t see why you’d get a huge influx of Jews from the USA — life here is great, I’m proud to be an American, and I think most Jewish Americans feel that way.
If you’re curious about the possibility of Jews from countries other than the USA moving to Israel, see this chart to understand why the numbers aren’t there: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/jewpop.html
Regardless of how many Jews across the world would live there, Israel should have taken annexed the West bank in 1967, and probably would have absent pressure from its supposed allies. The original partition never made any sense from a security standpoint. And there will be no peace until the Arabs finally truly recognize Israel’s legitimacy and existence, and take into their own nations the people in the camps, instead of maintaining them in squalor while continuing to feed them hope that they will be able to shove the Jews into the sea, as pawns in their continuing war.
The majority of the Palestinians living on the West Bank don’t live in camps — they are the ones who didn’t flee, and so they live in cities. To put numbers on it — there are roughly 194,000 Palestinians living in camps on the West Bank, out of a Palestinian population of 2.3 million.
I’ve long believed that Israel should have annexed the West Bank (and then tried hard to give everyone there reasons to become patriotic citizens), but I now see that the population numbers won’t work. If Israel had annexed the West Bank in 1967, it would now be on course to lose its Jewish majority.
Israel did the best it could in terms of annexation of the West Bank by building a security wall just outside of its 1967 borders, bringing the largest settlements into mainstream Israeli society. The only realistic plans for peace, such as the one that was almost agreed to in 1999, accept these de facto annexations along the border, and cede tiny far-flung outposts like Itamar to the Palestinians.
Israel is being poisoned by holding onto the West Bank as an occupied territory. That was true in 1967 and it’s still true.
The only one-state solution that includes the West Bank within Israel will require the displacement, under armed force, of one to two million more refugees. Where will they go? What kind of Israel could perform such an act?
And let’s keep in mind that many of these Settlers in the sites deep inside the West Bank are not Israelis, but zealots from other places – many from the US. They are trying to force that Great Religious Cleansing by the pressure of their own presence.
I was in Israel in 1982 when the Defense Minister – a chap named Ariel Sharon – started this settlements program, with the announced goal of creating “facts on the ground”. The result, after three decades, is a West Bank set up for guaranteed conflict. The pattern tells that tale: where these settlements are located.
Here’s the jpg, copied from Wikipedia, of the locations as-of 2006:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Westbankjan06.jpg
Expand it and look carefully. The people who laid this pattern out are not interested in peace, except on their own terms exclusively.
An Arab from Gaza and a self-confessed member of Hamas once asked me, “How can we have peace?” I though it was a strange question coming from a terrorist. When I asked him if he was ready to recognize Israel’s right to exist, he answered, “There is no such country as ‘Israel’; there is only Palestine, my country.” That’s why negotiating peace with Hamas or any other Arab faction is a fool’s errand. In this man’s mind, Israel’s right to exist is not an issue because there is no Israel; there is just a large, well-armed group of space-occupying Jewish squatters, who deserve death. Furthermore, every U.S. president keeps saying the same mantra, “They [Palestinian Authority] must recognize Israel’s right to exist.” Correction; they must first recognize that Israel exists. Actually, somebody forgot to tell all of the politicians that we Jews don’t need their permission to exist as a nation; G-d gave that to us at Mount Sinai.
The people who laid this pattern out are not interested in peace, except on their own terms exclusively.
Well then, I guess the kids had it coming? Sharon, in 1982, provoked them. So knife the infants and party in the streets, because finally, somebody got payback! Woo hoo! Must be great to be a liberal.
By the way, how many Jews live in Libya? Bahrain?
Moshe, do you want Israel to have a Jewish majority? If so, what’s to be done about the West Bank?
Leland:
That is a vile mis-reading of what I wrote. No, I don’t think any children “have it coming” when they are murdered. Ever.
Why does every rational discussion of Israel get twisted in this manner?
I hope that Israel survives. But the conditions of that survival may include a higher price than most Israelis are willing to pay. Let me ask you: are you willing to displace another 1 to 2 million people out of the West Bank, so all that land can become part of the Jewish State of Israel?
How far are you willing to go?
Or, are you willing to see the IDF remove most of the interior Jewish settlements, the ones well inside the WB, under armed force?
Here’s another question: would the IDF obey such an order?
How far is Israel ready to go, to find peace if it can be found?
You point to the extreme views of a Hamas member. Well, how did he become that crazy? Have you asked yourself that question lately?
I understand just how nasty some of the Arab leaders are.
Do you understand how nasty some of the settlers really are? What their agenda will require?
Here is one opinion I will stand by: some of the worst enemies of the nation of Israel live in those settlements.
Why does every rational discussion of Israel get twisted in this manner?
Since every rational discussion apparently begins with “Israel started it.”
You point to the extreme views of a Hamas member. Well, how did he become that crazy? Have you asked yourself that question lately?
I didn’t point to the extreme views of Hamas, particularly since I don’t consider the views to be extreme. I’m the one that mentioned they partied in the street. Sounds like rather the common view for the area. But since you answer a question with a question; I ask again, how many Jews living in Libya? Bahrain?
Kevin, Ariel Sharon himself oversaw the Israeli Defense Forces forcibly removing Jewish settlers from Gaza, and I have little doubt that in time the interior Jewish settlements on the West Bank will be removed by Israel as well.
Leland, you’re using strawman arguments, and apparently missing the point of the demographic problem. As for other countries in the middle east – it doesn’t matter what goes on there, as Israelis demand to be held to a higher standard than a bunch of dictatorships – that’s what running a free democratic western democracy is all about. But for what it is worth: http://www.haruth.com/JewsBahrain.html The number you are looking for appears to be around 30, but read what one of those 30 people had to say. I assume it was written before the recent crackdown on democracy protesters, but the story of Bahrain’s stumble toward democracy has yet to play out.
—
Another solution not yet mentioned is that a democratic and free Palestine allows Jews to live in places like Itamar, but it would require a recognition of Palestinian sovereignty, which I think is going to be a non-starter for the Jewish settlers . Yet another solution involves patchwork sovereignty, isolated Israeli enclaves surrounded by Palestinians — a peaceful version of the status quo — but that’s going to be a non-starter for the Palestinians.
My understanding is that nearly everyone in Israel (except the settlers) admits that the solution will look like the 1999 near-agreement.
Leland, you’re using strawman arguments, and apparently missing the point of the demographic problem. As for other countries in the middle east – it doesn’t matter what goes on there, as Israelis demand to be held to a higher standard than a bunch of dictatorships – that’s what running a free democratic western democracy is all about.
I believe my point is the demographic problem. I haven’t missed it at all. You are probably confused, because you seem to think my question presumes the 30 Jews in Bahrain are responsible for the violence in that nation. That’s not what I think, but I’m curious why you think those 30 Jews in Bahrain are the issue? Or do you think another demographic is involved?
Leland, I find your last comment completely incoherent! Every sentence was utter gibberish. Scroll back up and read this thread. Educate yourself.
You were the one who asked about Bahrain. I answered, and gave you an interesting link which you apparently didn’t read. But Bahrain has nothing at all to do with the “demographic problem” Israel faces regarding the West Bank. Once again: If the West Bank is incorporated into Israel, there will be roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs in Israel, and the Arabs currently have a higher birthrate. If the Arabs wouldn’t already have the majority, they would In a very short amount of time. Today Rand has presented us with a series of posts on how liberals are not doing the math, but in this case, it is the settlers and the people advocating for them who aren’t doing the math. We could discuss all of this, but only if you are capable of being coherent.
I find your last comment completely incoherent! Every sentence was utter gibberish.
Bob, we’ve proven time and time again that reading comprehension is not your strong suit. I don’t need to scroll up. Actually, it’s pretty incoherent to suggest because you have a problem reading; the solution is that I should reread.
Today Rand has presented us with a series of posts on how liberals are not doing the math, but in this case, it is the settlers and the people advocating for them who aren’t doing the math.
In other posts, Rand refers to math. There is no math here. 5 people were murdered, 3 of which we children under the age of 12. For most people, no math is necessary to figure out the injustice of murdering children. Why do you, Bob, think the rest of us should do the math?
Those 30 Jews are not the reason for violence in Bahrain. Those 3 children are not the reason for violence in Israel. You said follow the demographics, so quit doing the math and look at the demographic.
I’ve rarely seen the conversation here make so little sense. How in the world did you conclude that I think Bahrain’s miniscule Jewish community is the cause of any violence anywhere?
Seriously: if you are feeling ill or confused, seek help.
Leland – it just dawned on me what your tortured logic must be. Let me say this again: People are insisting that the settler movement makes no sense. It makes no sense in the short run because it endangers children, and it makes no sense in the long run because it threatens Israel’s future as a Jewish democracy. Insisting this is not the same as saying that the murders of the Fogel family were in any way just, that the murders were in any way payback, that the murders were in any way acceptable.
If Rand had posted “This is awful” with a link to the Fogel family murders, I wouldn’t have commented. But instead, he linked their murder to the peace in the middle east and talked abou being “disconnected with regional reality.” So, I ‘ve been commenting here about regional reality. And you’ve been responding with strawmen.
Bob-1:
It’s obvious to any fair reader that our Leland is not interested in an honest conversation or a rational debate. He is out to twist anything written that disagrees with his views as being a call for the death of more Jewish children, or something else horrible.
It goes far beyond the Straw Man Fallacy, to something much worse.
Back to the questions I posed, which were ignored, rephrased here:
1. If the solution is one-state, is Leland willing to participate in the forcible expulsion from the West Bank territory of about two million people, so that the one-state entity will be a Jewish nation?
2. Or, if the solution is two-state, then in order to allow a viable PA state within the WB, is Leland willing to support the removal, by force if needed (it will be!) of the settlements located inside the WB?
Or, will we see every discussion twisted into new martyrdoms, and new smears on the motivations of anyone who poses an honest question?
What you two dishonest people, Bob and Kevin, fail to notice is the reason for the violence is the desire for it. It’s pretty assine of both of you to suggest the problem is the Jews are provoking the violence, while ignoring the violent tendencies of a demographic you both continue to ignore. My point is that the same demographic you both continue to ignore is currently being violent in other parts of the region in which no Jews (or none in significant numbers) exists. Even with my slapping you guys with this point; you still pretend the reason for violence is the existsnce of Jews in an area they are not welcome. If that’s truly the case, then do you plan to ignore the consistent claims by the demographic that must not be named that the Jews do not belong in the Middle East?
Did you not notice my comments about the security wall? The wall is there to prevent Palestinian terrorism, and for now, it works against the kind of terrorism Israel faces. The IDF is deterrent against the kind of attacks a wall can’t stop.
Leland, why not stop with the rudeness? Lets have a polite conversation! What is your short-term (next 10 years) vision for West Bank and Israel?
Mine is this:
1) Israel should have defendable borders
2) Israel has freedom and equal rights within those borders.
How to achieve it:
1) Israel disbands the settlements in the interior of the West Bank.
2a) Israel annexes the suburban border settlements behind the security wall (either unilaterally or as part of an agreement with the Palestinians like the one that was almost reached in 1999-2000).
2b) Alternatively, Israel pulls back to the 1967 lines, but 2a is much more realistic given the degree of building that has taken place along the border.
3) Disengagement with the Palestinians. At worst, Israel treats the West Bank like Gaza — complete disengagement if the Palestinians want to be peaceful, and overwhelming military force if attacks continue. At best, Israel recognizes Palestine as an independent country which can live in peace with Israel, but as the situation in Gaza demonstrates, none of that is necessary for a disengagement.
This isn’t a very cheerful vision, but it doesn’t ignore the reality of Palestinian terrorism. It has the benefit of not making Israel an apartheid state, and it preserves Israel as a free country with a Jewish majority.
There are other issues that could be discussed: the status of Jerusalem is the elephant in the room. Israeli businessmen as well as Palestinians will say there is an issue with Palestinian labor. There is also the the much more solvable problem of resolving the degree to which Israel is a secular country – to ensure that Israel’s non-Jewish citizens have equal rights and opportunities, but that sort of thing would be much easier to resolve once Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians was well-defined by clear-cut borders and an end to military occupation.
—
Of course, someone like Moshe (above) might say “But Jews have a right to live anywhere on the West Bank!” I agree. Jews do. But Israelis don’t. The distinction is important. The state of Israel has the right to exist, and should exist, but just as an American citizen but does not have the right to live in Canada (that’s determined by the Canadians), an Israeli citizen does not have the right to live in a neighboring country.
—
Leland, withdrawing from the Sinai, Lebanon, and Gaza left Israel stronger. Annexing the Golan Heights and the de facto annexation of the settlements behind the security wall left Israel stronger. I’m suggesting that Israel will be stronger still once Israel completes the process and leaves the interior of the West Bank. I say all of this a Jewish American who wants Israel to flourish.
I’d be interested to hear your reaction to my position, and I’d be particularly interested to hear if you have an alternative vision.
Rand, I’m also curious whether the arguments presented in this thread were persuasive to you, particularly regarding “the demographics argument” for why Israel can not annex the West Bank.
For Leland:
Improbably, Bahrain’s ambassador to the US is Jewish:
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/meet-houda-ezra-ebrahim-nonoo-bahrain-s-jewish-u-s-ambassador-1.349208
She (she!) is the first Jewish ambassador from an Arab country.
And in the comments, it was pointed out that Israel has Arab ambassadors.
(No, none of this is relevant to the Fogel murders, and is only barely relevant to peace in the middle east, since at high diplomatic levels, Arabs and Jews have been getting along with each other for a long time, but this thread appears to be dead anyway, and of course, Leland wanted to know about Bahrain’s Jews, which actually did get me interested me in the subject.)