<< So maybe next the US gets around to enforcing UN resolutions .... >>
That would be great. Enforcement of the Security Council resolutions would be very much welcomed. Unfortunately the UN is more bark than bite.
<< If you are such a fool that you spit in the face of peace, you deserve the consequences. >>
That was what Hitler said to Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain agreed to give up land for peace. He gave up half of Czechoslovakia, in exchange for a "promise of peace". In other words, he gave up land in exchange for nothing, and thus showed Hitler that the free world was timid, scared, and weak. Hitler took half of Czechoslovakia, and then went on to take almost all of Europe.
You are asking Israel to depend upon the newly created and unknown "coalition" to guarantee Israel's peace. You say that because I don't want to accept accept a land-for-peace deal similar to what Neville Chamberlain agreed to, I am spitting in the face of peace? If anything I am "spitting" in the face of a deal that would probably lead to Israel's destruction.
If Israel would pull back to indefensible borders they would be subjected to constant, savage terrorist attacks, and the coalition would sit back and watch.
Before Israel gives up any land, the coalition should show that they are effective by moving into the West Bank and Gaza and destroying all of the terrorist groups there. Once ALL terrorist groups are gone from the West Bank and Gaza, then Israel could move to new, negotiated borders with the Palestinians, as outlined in UN security council resolution 1397, which states:
"Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders, " |
