Wednesday, July 25, 2007

The Bowstring is Stretched

Zionist Youngster had something to say about the State of Israel after reading yesterday’s account of the inclusion of the nakba in the official Israeli school curriculum. It’s his opinion that Israel is in that lambent moment of unbearable tension after the bowsting has been stretched but before the arrow flies.

He left this in our comments:

Israeli flagThe surface impression is one of desperation. But, under the surface, things are constantly improving.

I mean that the decision to teach the Pretendestinian narrative is not representative of the Jews of Israel. Nor Olmert’s talk of giving away Judea and Samaria. Nor even the police action against the settlements.
- - - - - - - - - -
The majority, after the trauma of the assassination of Rabin (Nov. 1995), is behaving very, very responsibly — if there’s a case to be put before HaShem that the Jewish nation has atoned for the sin of gratuitous hatred (for which the Second Temple was destroyed), then this is it. Make no mistake, though: it is only by its current silence that the illusion of a suicidal Israeli Jewish people is maintained.

Few believe in concessions anymore. Many have begun exploring alternative ways of solving the conflict, some ineffective (pitting enemy factions against each other), some extreme (“Nuke the r--heads”) and the one solution that was proposed years ago, by the late Rabbi Meir Kahane (may HaShem avenge his blood), the one I advocate myself (mass expulsion of the enemy population). The majority is in the stage of thinking what the right course is, of uncertainty about it, but let there be no doubt that there is absolute certainty that concessions are out, consigned to the trash heap of failed ideas.

That’s the necessary first half of the move toward change: a majority of conscious rejecters of the Old Order. The arrow is in place and the bowstring is being stretched as we speak. Now all that’s left is for the majority to stop being silent. In due course.

8 comments:

falcon_01 said...

Unfortunately, the price of allowing the string to stretch so far is that many more people will lose their lives trying to regain that which was handed to terrorists. Even if the media didn't portray Israel in a good light, at least we know they did try everything to salvage peace (both reasonable and crazy) before taking the next step.

Remember though, an arrow is only effective if you let it fly before the string is worn out and you are left with nothing.

ZionistYoungster said...

Thanks for the heads-up, Baron!

falcon_01,

That's the $1,000,000 question: "We know things are a-changin' underground, but how much will it take, how long, how many losses incurred (G-d forbid) until the underground changes translate to a visible movement on the surface?"

It's because of the frustrating nature of this question that reading the news makes me so mad sometimes that I just have to put things away for a few hours or even a whole day.

But the bright point here is that, while a decade ago the question was, "Whether", now the question is, "When". Ten years ago the concessionists were the majority; now, a despised, seen as out of touch at best, minority. There's no one I know from ten years ago who still holds to the same beliefs, if he was a concessionist then. And that includes me as well.

I don't believe in revolutions. One day the Israeli government will just find itself with a de facto state of no-confidence. It's already the case that people in Israel now prefer to pursue other venues than the official courts to settle their disputes, and that's because of the revulsion with the moonbat laws that have taken hold of the courts. If present trends continue, then there won't be a coup, but gradual, totally bloodless change. The best political course that a state could take. I just hope it won't take too long (see above).

ZionistYoungster said...

I wish to back my opinion with some hard data. I just posted this on LGF as a reply to a comment (asking about the percentage of Israeli Jews still believing in Land for Peace), and I think it's appropriate here too. This is from the 2007 poll for Yediot Achronot, one of Israel's major newspapers (on the web as YNET), which I have right here on my 'puter as a scan:

28% still believe in the Land for Peace formula.

31% believe it's possible to reach a peace agreement with the "Palestinians".

76% believe that the next war is on the way.

42% believe the destruction of Israel and the expulsion of most of its Jews (G-d forbid) is the goal of the "Palestinians". 29% believe only the destruction of Israel (G-d forbid) is their goal. 28% still believe it's only about the 1967 territories.

82% trust the IDF, while only 33% trust the government to make the right security decisions.

It's easy for this reality to be masked under the leadership. It's still a mask, that must be remembered. And masks usually tend to fall.

whiskey_199 said...

I could not disagree more.

Olmert is still in power, and likely to remain so. If Israelis feared for the future and wanted to fight, they would have gotten rid of him after the disastrous affair in Lebanon. They did not.

Israel was soundly, and handily defeated by Hezbollah. A ship nearly sunk, many tanks destroyed, and outfought on the ground by Hezbollah. Their rockets are unstoppable. And there was no consequence for being rocketed.

Israel retreated and surrendered to the International Left, Media, and Muslim agitation groups. Left propaganda unchallenged. And could not destroy the enemy on the battlefield.

Israelis are comfortable suburbanites who cannot really defend themselves, they will delude themselves that they can appease, make peace with, and surrender by bits to their enemy right up to the moment that Tel Aviv and Jerusalem vanish in a nuclear haze from Iran. Or perhaps Syria.

Certainly the idea that Israel would make attacks unpalatable is laughable.

This is the fundamental problem with the soft, materialist, consumerist West of which Israel is part: they are very good at all sorts of material and technological and scientific advancements (Israel has astonishing amounts of Nobel Prize winners, bio and computer tech, and world-class companies). They are very bad at fighting people willing to kill them. Soft lives in office parks don't prepare for a fight for survival. [The converse is, fights for survival ala Gaza lead to nothing more than low-IQ gangsterism.]

It's the same problem that Denmark, the US, and Sweden face. Unlike those nations, Israel cannot afford a single mistake. Sweden can afford flashpoints because there is not unlimited manpower in safe rear areas, nor yet Iranian nukes able to reach them. There is also the prospect of bail-out by NPD men in East Germany with no women and the enticing prospect of wealth/fame/fortune by going off to fight the "enemy" in Sweden.

Israel has none of that safety margin. Israel knows it will be destroyed, but lacks the will due to office-park softness to fight for it's life. Hoping that something will turn up to save it.

Yorkshireminer said...

Dear Zionist Youngster,

Mark Twain said that history might not repeat itself but it does tend to rhyme. if what you say is right then you are seeing the same process that happened in Britain from the time of Munich until the outbreak of the war. Many people became reconciled to war while hoping to avoid it. I have watched over the last couple of years how the pressure has been stepped up against Israel. I have watched our politicians do nothing, too stupid to realize that if Israel goes Europe will be in the front line. It is not too difficult to understand the feeling of the Israeli people. subject more and more to a diatribe of vitriolic rhetoric, feeling more and more vulnerable to attack, more and more isolated, having a mad monkey demanding and prophesying its destruction, and building nuclear weapons to accomplish it. The feeling of doom and inevitability must be overwhelming. I suspect that Olmert, like Chamberlain is a decent an honorable man, believing in the basic common decency of humanity. He will of cause be ruthlessly swept aside when the bombs start falling. He might not even survive if the first one is atomic. If that happens then the results will be cataclysmic for the Islamic world because on Israel's repost will depend Israel's survival. Israel if attacked with atomic weapons will have to respond with atomic weapon. No rational state would if in possession of atomic weapons leave its neighbors who have consistently called for it destruction in a position to do so. I would expect Israel to try and decapitate this Arabic hydra to give itself breathing space to recover. Damascus Amman the Aswan Dam Tripoli Mecca and Medina. What land fighting that followed would be ruthless. Walls might be built to keep people out but they also keep people in, Gaza and the West Bank would be a shooting gallery. If my immediate survival was at stake I could not imagine Israel worrying too much about what the U.N. had to say on the matter, in a few months time.
I am certain that America is fully aware of the consequences of such an attack on Israel. A country as America does not send lightly three battle fleets, each with more destructive power than all the bombs dropped in the second world war, to cruise endlessly off the mouth of the Persian Gulf. It was sent there to intimidate Iran. Let us hope that the Mullahs and the mad diner jacket are impressed. How they react will depend the future of the world. I gather from my reading of the newspapers, that heated exchanges have been had between Iranian diplomats and American diplomats in Iraq. The usual verbiage to describe such discussion is usually forthright. I assume that the American diplomats have been a little bit more than forthright and spelled out the consequences to Iran if they continue on their course and rubbed salt into the wound by handing out manual on how to make stone age axes. We will all have to wait and see

ZionistYoungster said...

whiskey_199,

We don't do revolutions. Last time someone tried, Yigal Amir in 1995, when he assassinated Rabin, the shock was simply cataclysmic. The reason Olmert won't be unseated by a revolution isn't that we're "comfortable suburbanites who cannot really defend themselves" as you said, but the great fear (a historical Jewish fear, I might add) of internecine warfare.

The urgent task for Israel now is to hasten the elections. Netanyahu is better than Olmert, which is damning with faint praise; Moshe Feiglin of Manhigut Yehudit ("Jewish Leadership") is a better candidate, and he might pull it off. I hope he does.

Yorkshireminer,

Olmert is worse than Chamberlain. At least Chamberlain had some idealism in him; Olmert's a mere businessman who ascended to premiership by accident (Ariel Sharon's stroke). He's a corrupt dealer who'd sell everything to keep himself on the seat.

As for the future-- our great rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (a.k.a. Maimonides) had this to say on the prophecy of the final war of Gog and Magog described in Ezekiel 38: one should not plan according to it, nor even try to interpret it to construct a timeline of the last days; instead, he should just look at the events unfold when they do, and increase in belief by doing so. Operatively, that means all our actions should be as normal, as if that prophecy never existed. Why do I bring this issue at all? Because--contrary to what could be expected of a religious, End Times believer--I wish to make it clear that I, or any Jewish believer for that matter, have no pretensions as to knowledge of future events. There's absolutely no certainty that atomics would come into the picture at all. After all, conventional warfare can do damage enough, as 9/11 showed.

I believe in taking care of the small picture that is within our field of visibility; once that is done, the Big Picture falls into place. There's no choice, because trying to take care of the Big Picture can make you go crazy. Way back, one poster on the Infidel Bloggers Alliance suggested, that after Islam, the global conflict would be with China; when I read this, I thought to myself, "I'm going to spare my head from spinning by making conjectures so far into the future".

HaShem bless you.
ZY

Yggdrasil said...

Dear Zionist the younger

Your ideas correspond with mine, the most obvious solution to the islamic threath is simply to remove them from territory you control.

This however leads to a heave of philosophical and theoretical challenges you have to solve to initiate the process of repratiation within the frame of democracy and the lawstate.

I am a ardent fan of Aristotle, the amazing philosopher of ancient Hellas, and in his book "Politics" you can find a deep and serious discussion on the subject. Check his reflection on citizenship that is good.

Cheers :)

Yggdrasil

ZionistYoungster said...

Hi Yggdrasil,

True. I very much think these steps will take place only under an emergency government a la the British and American ones during WWII.

In Israel the single crucial step is a military reform regarding the Rules of Engagement--the IDF's hands are right now tied up with insane ROEs. The Torah-based ROEs are neither atrocious (indeed, they were the first ROEs in a world that lacked them, i.e. the Ancient Near East) nor soft and incapacitating like those of today.

Israel also has the slight advantage that it has no Constitution (only Basic Law)--a result of early politicking, when David Ben Gurion, the first PM and one of the founding fathers, had to drop it in order to build his coalition. That event of circumstance, unintentionally, may be one of Israel's saving graces soon.

If I can find Aristotle in the library... but not in Greek! Greek is, uh, well... Greek to me.

HaShem bless you.
ZY