Thursday, October 26, 2006

ElBARADEI NOW WANTS TO SOLVE THE 'PALESTINIAN QUESTION'

After failing miserably to prevent North Korea and Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, bamboozling IAEA chief Muhammed ElBaradei now wants to try his 'skills' at a new issue: the Israeli - 'Palestinian' conflict. The Egyptian-born ElBaradei told a University of Maryland audience yesterday that a solution to the Israeli-'Palestinian' conflict is within grasp if the international community commits to a 'blueprint' and pursues 'dialogue,' and that conflicts like those in the Middle East “cannot be solved through military force.” He called for a new broad approach focusing on human security rather than state security. Right....

There was a blueprint in the mid-90's for a 'solution' to the Israeli-'Palestinian' conflict and it was called the 'Oslo accords.' I didn't like it much, because I felt that we were giving up way too much for way too little. The reason it failed was not because Israel was not willing to give up enough, but because the 'Palestinians' true goal was is not the establishment of a state reichlet, but the destruction of the existing State of Israel and its replacement with a twenty-second Arab state in the Middle East (or its merger into one of the existing Arab states). In other words, this is not a border dispute, which might be resolvable with 'dialogue' about a 'blueprint.' This is an existential dispute: will the Jewish homeland continue to exist on the land of the biblical Kingdom of Israel, notwithstanding the fact that all of its neighbors are hostile Arab states?

There is nothing there to be resolved through 'dialogue' about a 'blueprint.' We've tried that and it failed. All 'dialogue' will bring us now is what it has brought the world community in the cases of North Korea and Iran: another weapons build-up, more war and more bloodshed. Continue reading....

2 comments:

  1. It will not surprise me if El Baradei turns out to be a jihadist in the near future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. exposed as one or becomes one?

    as in "turns out to have been."

    frankly, anybody who gives an ounce of credence to pali claims is either a lefty dupe or an anti-semite or a jihadist.

    he could be all three, or just any two.

    and another thing: pseudo moderate muslims like him and bahrami piss me off: they are quick to crticize the usa and israel, but NEVER criticize the "fanatics".

    which means they might be cowards, too.

    i wish bush would go back to his "US OR THEM" approach. the one libs think is simplistic.

    it was simple, and clear. and led to effective policy.

    ReplyDelete