To Those Who Advocate More Concessions By Israel For the Sake of Peace ...

[Reffo]

... look what is happening to the peace deal with Egypt. Remember, Israel gave up land (all of Sinai) and evacuated "settlements" for the sake of peace with Egypt ...

Egypt presidential rivals pledge to review Israel peace treaty in historic TV debate

Egyptian presidential hopefuls Amr Moussa and Abdel Moneim Abol Fotouh said in a televised debate on Thursday that Israel is an adversary and enemy, and pledged to review Egypt’s peace treaty with the country

Both candidates said they would review Egypt's 1979 peace treaty with Israel, a country Abol Fotouh described as an enemy and Moussa called an adversary. Last month, Moussa told told an election rally in southern Egypt that the Camp David agreement was "dead and buried."

[wat0n]

Let's see if this actually translates into anything or if it is just talk.

[Reffo]

watOn

If I was a betting man, then I would bet that it WILL translate to something. Not necessarily to war. At least not immediately. If you look at human civilisations and different cultures, you will find, for example in tribal societies, that before they actually resort to violence, they dance, they posture, they chant in chorus in order to intimidate their enemies and psych themselves up to action (violence). That's how we humans are. Egypt is now taking the first steps down that road.

[sharonbn]

Reffo,

If I was a betting man, then I would bet that it will not translate to something. at least not something tangible. well, maybe something tangible in tourism from Israel to Egypt (there is no tourism the other way) but that's it.

if we can learn anything from history, is that money talks. it talks louder then anything else, and talks the loudest in the ears of the leaders of civilization, something like "things you see from up there, you don't see down here". There is usually (albeit not always) a big difference between what a leader says to his people and what he says to his close advisers, and between what a leader says before and after he's elected.

[Reffo]

Reffo,

If I was a betting man, then I would bet that it will not translate to something. at least not something tangible. well, maybe something tangible in tourism from Israel to Egypt (there is no tourism the other way) but that's it.

if we can learn anything from history, is that money talks. it talks louder then anything else, and talks the loudest in the ears of the leaders of civilization, something like "things you see from up there, you don't see down here". There is usually (albeit not always) a big difference between what a leader says to his people and what he says to his close advisers, and between what a leader says before and after he's elected.

Ah, the good old Jewish optimism. The kind of optimism that got many of our parents or great grand parents to stay in Germany and other parts of Eastern Europe when the dark clouds of Nazism were gathering. they too were saying that it's all just talk and they don't really mean it ...

But even if you are right sharonbn then think about this. The Egyptians are taking the first steps on the slippery slope. Even if those candidates don't really mean it. What happens down the track if the "protection money" dries up? And what happens if fanatics emboldened by such rhetoric start unleashing incidents? Let me be specific: terrorist incidents. Don't you think that after such rhetorics it would be easier for things to spiral out of control?

[sharonbn]

Ah, the good old Jewish optimism. The kind of optimism that got many of our parents or great grand parents to stay in Germany and other parts of Eastern Europe when the dark clouds of Nazism were gathering. they too were saying that it's all just talk and they don't really mean it ...

Ah, the good old American pessimism. The kind of pessimism that gave birth to the Domino effect theory and got the US into the Vietnam war. The kind of pessimism that gave birth to fictional Iraqi WMD and got the US into the second Iraqi war. both were needless, useless and fruitless (at least if you don't count rotten fruits).

well, we're both speculating on the future, we know who was given the gift of prophecy...
I guess we will have to wait and see what time will bring

[Reffo]

Ah, the good old American pessimism. The kind of pessimism that gave birth to the Domino effect theory and got the US into the Vietnam war. The kind of pessimism that gave birth to fictional Iraqi WMD and got the US into the second Iraqi war. both were needless, useless and fruitless (at least if you don't count rotten fruits).

well, we're both speculating on the future, we know who was given the gift of prophecy...
I guess we will have to wait and see what time will bring

First of all sharonbn, I live in Australia, not America so if you want to give me tit for tat please don't bring America into it.

Second of all, you don't need to give me tit for tat because I am Jewish too.

Third of all, even if you do want to bring 'American pessimism' a la regarding Vietnam and Iraq into it, I must remind you that you are comparing chalk and cheese. Why? Because both adversaries of America, Vietnam and Iraq, went to great length to deny ghe domino theory and WMDs because they preferred not to be embroiled in conflict with America. But I ask you, is that what the prospective Egyptian leaders are doing with Israel? Of course not. They are talking of terminating the peace treaty.

Anyway, like you say neither of us are prophets but we still have a right to express opinions. We will see who will turn out to be right. Personally, I HOPE that you will be right but I am not confident that you will ...

[sharonbn]

yes, I did forget you live in Australia, Reffo, and I have absolutely nothing to say about that country since, for better or worse, it is virtually nonexistent in world politics.
its nice to know you're Jewish too, but when did that deter me from teasing? after all, Jews are renown for being adversarial towards one another, no? (at least that's what the anti-semitic say...)

My point was to stress the phenomenon of "what you see from up there ..." it happens a lot that a candidates expresses harsh/extreme views, but when he/she are elected and bares the responsibility and sees the worldwide effects of his/her extreme policy - they change their minds. It happened with almost all Israeli PMs...
Egypt is very dependent on aid from the US and Europe. this is something that one can ignore when they are not in office, but once they get there...

of course this is generalization, there are always the exceptions (like the Iranian Islamic revolution of 1979) (I am making you job easy, giving myself the tit for tat...) so I guess we'll have to wait and see...

[Reffo]

OK sharonbn, I have no problems with being teased, I know it's all in good fun. But you did not answer this point of mine:

"But even if you are right sharonbn then think about this. The Egyptians are taking the first steps on the slippery slope. Even if those candidates don't really mean it. What happens down the track if the "protection money" dries up? And what happens if fanatics emboldened by such rhetoric start unleashing incidents? Let me be specific: terrorist incidents. Don't you think that after such rhetorics it would be easier for things to spiral out of control?"

[sharonbn]

My answer consists of two points:

1) like you said, the Egyptians are taking the first steps on the slippery slope. Its way way too early to decide they hit rock bottom, and way way to early to sign off the peace treaty as a failure. You want we to refer to terror attacks before they occur? the only attacks so far were on the gas pipe in Sinai (Egypt is a major supplier of gas to Israel) and it certainly is not a good sign but i see it as part of the internal struggle in Egypt over the successor to Mubaraq. We can only sit ans wait for the dust to settle before coming to any conclusions.

2) let us assume the worst scenario - a fundamental Islamic party assumes power in Egypt, announces its disengagement from the peace treaty and breaks all ties with Israel. we can go further and assumes it goes hostile, advances troops to the border, and supports terror attacks against Israel - far enough? now you can honestly tell me that in a blink of the eye you would forsake 30 years of peace and (almost) total quiet b/c of what "happens" now?

[Reffo]

My answer consists of two points:

1) like you said, the Egyptians are taking the first steps on the slippery slope. Its way way too early to decide they hit rock bottom, and way way to early to sign off the peace treaty as a failure. You want we to refer to terror attacks before they occur? the only attacks so far were on the gas pipe in Sinai (Egypt is a major supplier of gas to Israel) and it certainly is not a good sign but i see it as part of the internal struggle in Egypt over the successor to Mubaraq. We can only sit ans wait for the dust to settle before coming to any conclusions.

2) let us assume the worst scenario - a fundamental Islamic party assumes power in Egypt, announces its disengagement from the peace treaty and breaks all ties with Israel. we can go further and assumes it goes hostile, advances troops to the border, and supports terror attacks against Israel - far enough? now you can honestly tell me that in a blink of the eye you would forsake 30 years of peace and (almost) total quiet b/c of what "happens" now?

sharonbn

It seems that you missed the point that I tried to make when I started this thread.

I did not say that Israel should overturn the peace treaty with Egypt because Egypt's potential future leaders want to abrogate the peace deal.

What I DID say was that Israel should not be so ready to make mindless concessions to the Palestinian Arabs because what is happening with Egypt demonstrates what can happen with the Palestinian Arabs too.

Yet, I am still NOT against concessions by Israel. As long as the Palestinian Arabs too reciprocate. For example by formally recognising Israel as the nation state FOR the Jewish people. And as long as Israel does not go overboard with it's concessions for a peace that could turn out to be a mirage ...

[sharonbn]

yes, I understand. and my point was directed towards your saying
"what is happening with Egypt demonstrates what can happen with the Palestinian Arabs too"
and to that I say: Amen!
what happens now in Egypt does not nullify or diminish the benefits that Israel got from the peace treaty.
what happens in 30 years time, will not nullify or diminish the benefits that Israel will get from signing peace with the Palestinians.

in my wet dreams, I see the Palestinian Arabs acting e-x-a-c-t-l-y like the Egyptians, giving us 30 years of peace and quiet before making "noises" that their long term outcome is unclear.

I will say that again: the worst scenario is that after 30 years of peace, Israel is forced to re-conquer the west bank and Gaza. and lets say the war is bloody and brutal and there are lots of casualties from both sides. lets say this happens EVERY 30 years.
BUT
The interim period of 30 years is indeed peaceful and quiet -
then it is better than the current situation and its worth giving up the land each and every time. that's my pov.

[Reffo]

I will say that again: the worst scenario is that after 30 years of peace, Israel is forced to re-conquer the west bank and Gaza. and lets say the war is bloody and brutal and there are lots of casualties from both sides. lets say this happens EVERY 30 years

But you still ignore the point that I made. Which is, I'll highlight it:

Israel should NOT give up TOO MUCH for a peace that is likely to be only temporary. And even more importantly, it should insist on reciprocal compromises from the Palestinian Arabs for whatever concessions it makes

... otherwise, Israel might find that in 30 years time, to use your example, it may not be able to reconquer the land that it gave up for peace. Let alone subdue the Palestinians. What will your kids say to you sharonbn? Do you think they will thank you for allowing the Palestinian Arabs to blackmail you to sell the land that was won with the blood of it's soldiers cheaply and for very short term results (in historical terms)?

[sharonbn]

no. Reffo. this is not your point. You just changed it.

The point of THIS thread, as indicated by its opening post, is a direct analogy you make between the peace treaty with Egypt - the price Israel had to pay (giving up the Sinai) and the benefit we got (30 years of peace and quiet) and **possible** (but still not certainty) of the end of this period - with what Israel is required to give up (and possibly gain) from peace with the Pals.

I believe I answered THAT point.

and to answer your question from the last post: yes. **MY** children, and anyone else living in Israel, serving in the army and being target for possible suicide attack, being subject for personal search at entry to every shopping mall and cafe, would kiss my feet for giving them 30 years of peace and quiet, without guarantee of anything after that.

[Reffo]

Thank you sharonbn for telling me what point/s I was making. If you know better than me, then I guess I can't argue with you about that ...

I'll tell you what. The ultimate decision is up to the Israeli people to decide what they are or are not willing to give up for what quite probably may turn out to be a very short term peace. You are ONE Israeli who seems to be willing to give up a lot for very little (at least in my opinion). I doubt that the majority of Israelis agree with you. But if they do, then hey, I for one respect your wishes. Not only that, I genuinely wish you all the succes and hope that you won't have cause to regret your decisions down the track. I really do mean that.