It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Bush administration's first major policy statement on the Middle East was delivered by Secretary of State James Baker on May 22. For the most part, he used standard phrases and recalled traditional American policies. But there was one line at least that was original, even startlingly so. This was Baker's call to Israelis "to lay aside, once and for all, the unrealistic vision of a greater Israel."
Some Israelis responded with alarm at this phrase. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir called it "useless." So did some Americans; William Safire called it "inflammatory." But they and many others would have been more upset — indeed, they would be flabbergasted — if they knew the effect Baker's statement had on politicians in the Middle East.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday reiterated his position that the vision of Israel holding onto the West Bank and Gaza Strip as part of its sovereign territory was finished."Greater Israel is over. There is no such thing. Anyone who talks that way is deluding themselves," Olmert told the cabinet during its weekly meeting.
He added, though, that this had not always been his stance: "During Camp David I thought that [then prime minister] Ehud Barak's concessions were too much, and I told him as much."I thought that land from the Jordan River through to the sea was all ours, but ultimately, after a long and tortured process, I arrived at the conclusion that we must share with those we live with, if we don't want to be a bi-national state."
But it wasn’t Iran that turned the Israeli-Iranian cold war warm – it was Israel. In October 1992, prior to Iran’s material support for Palestinian rejectionists, the Shimon Peres/Yitzhak Rabin government undertook a major campaign to depict Iran and Shi’a Islamic fundamentalism as a global threat.
Even though Iran was weak militarily after the devastating war with Iraq, Rabin told Israel’s Knesset (parliament) in 1993 that Israel’s “struggle against murderous Islamic terror” was “meant to awaken the world which is lying in slumber” of the dangers of Shi’a fundamentalism. “Death is at our doorstep”, Rabin said of Iran – though he only five years earlier dismissed Iran’s rhetoric as inconsequential.
The Israeli reversal on Iran was partially motivated by the fear that its strategic importance would diminish significantly in the post-cold war middle east if the then president (1989-97) Hashemi Rafsanjani’s outreach to the Bush Sr administration was successful. Also, the geopolitical map of the middle east had changed. Israel no longer needed Iran to balance Iraq and the Arabs – rather, Iran was now a potentially powerful regional player who could become a threat. And according to Israel’s military doctrine, potential threats are to be treated as existing threats.
Since the spring of 1992 public opinion in Israel is being prepared for the prospect of a war with Iran, to be fought to bring about Iran's total military and political defeat. In one version, Israel would attack Iran alone, in another it would `persuade' the West to do the job.
The indoctrination campaign to this effect is gaining in intensity. It is accompanied by what could be called semi-official horror scenarios purporting to detail what Iran could do to Israel, the West and the entire world when it acquires nuclear weapons as it is expected to a few years hence.
THE NEW YORK TIMES on Oct. 20, 1991.
"Israel has `hundreds' of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons,including more than 100 nuclear artillery shells,nuclear land mines in the Golan Heights and hundreds of low-yield neutron warheads."
Originally posted by asmeone2
On principal I would say yes. No country should exist at the expense of pushing out the original residents.
"One True God" could create all of humanity and claim to love them all equally, yet choose a favorite people among them.
Originally posted by savetimerushonline
theres one problem with your theory.. the one true Living God of creation promised that land to Israel.. so taking it off them would not be a solution at all.
Originally posted by jakyll Would the world be a safer place if Israel didn't exist?