Charlie Rose

BENEZRAA  04/28/2010 11:59 PM Report

THANK YOU, THE LEARNING WENT BOTH WAYS.

I look forward to future threads, perhaps even weaving a few beautiful garments. And my offer still stands, if it pleases you, to contact me personally at the e-mail address in an earlier comment.

Merci beaucoup, Monsieur Robdverity!

robdverity  04/28/2010 05:36 PM Report

Mercifully, this thread is receding to history. But I learned something - at others expense no doubt. Worth it. Thanks.

BENEZRAA  04/28/2010 04:52 AM Report

AT THE HORIZON OF THE UNIVERSE....

Robdverity, firstly, thank you for the compliments as well as your newfound discovery of Nietzche and Strauss, both so misunderstood by so many, often due to poor translation. I won't pretend to know enough about either Nietzche or Strauss to make any black-and-white claims about either. Music is a very different media than words, and although one may philosophize about music, it is profoundly rare to find a perfect one-to-one correspondence between the express intent of an author and the notes of a composer. Usually some sort of thematic capture is the best that one can hope for. Still, as the music itself suggests in it's "conclusion" by musical non-resolution, there is a question that may go unanswered with respect to the universe's "horizon". The universe may or may not have an "end', a "limit" in space or time. Life may or may not have an "end", a "limit" in space or time. If Nietzche was more of an existentialist and Strauss more of an idealist, into that ambiguity people are more likely to project their own misinterpretations than to say anything meaningful, missing the depth and breadth of tone poem composition and prose poetic authorship. Nietzche focused on transfiguration in mundane life from "mundane man" to "over man". Strauss focused on transfiguration from death into eternal life. Both focused on transfiguration.

Now that I have filled in what Wikipedia has left out, please, do... "rub [my] nose in [my] own reference." I am serious. It is not obvious to me what you mean and whether or not you are just playing. Also, treat yourself to seeing the classic Arthur C. Clark film "2001: A Space Odyssey."

At the Horizon of our responsa....

robdverity  04/27/2010 06:19 PM Report

P.S. - Forgot to rub your nose in your own reference.

N.B. " The unsolvable end of the universe: for Strauss was not pacified by Nietzsche's solution.[2] ”

Neither C major nor B major is established as the tonic at the end of the composition."

'End of the universe' - so there. Nnnah, nnah!

robdverity  04/27/2010 06:10 PM Report

First, I'm grateful. Thank you. Second, you have a tortured mind. How you came to the association with me and "Also Sprach," is a real stretch. Sprach is German for speech. Found,"Also sprach Zarathustra, Op.30," here: http://www.archive.org/details/also_sprach_zarathustra.

If you'd started at my level and said 'Star Wars,' I might have kept up. Had to look up Zarathustra to discover Zoroaster. I'm a constant NPR classical music type, so this enlightenment is indeed appreciated. Despite its being unfair. Clubbing me with refinement is beneath contempt - something someone imbued with hope and a fanciful outlook on the human race would stoop to.

Admit, listening as I type, it adds to the melancholy that even with that refinement, we wont avert the inevitable. Sad becomes sadder. And yes I rage at our stupidity.

USA Today says our young are less religious. Maybe there's hope, eh?

Let's end on a music culture note. This bit about the tonal mechanics of the piece is interesting. From Wikipedia:

"There are two viewpoints about the World riddle theme (a particular sequence of notes in the melody). Some sources denote the fifth/octave intervals (C-G-C (8va)) as the World riddle motif.[2] However, other sources refer to the 2 conflicting keys in the final section as representing the World riddle (C-G-C B-F?-B (8va)), with the unresolved harmonic progression being an unfinished or unsolved riddle: the melody does not conclude with a clearly defined tonic note as being either C or B, hence it is unfinished.[2] The ending of the composition has been described:

“ But the riddle is not solved. The tone-poem ends enigmatically in two keys, the Nature-motif plucked softly, by the basses in its original key of C—and above the woodwinds, in the key of B major. The unsolvable end of the universe: for Strauss was not pacified by Nietzsche's solution.[2] ”

Neither C major nor B major is established as the tonic at the end of the composition."

BENEZRAA  04/27/2010 02:03 PM Report

"SPRACH" IS GOOGELABLE. SO IS "ALSO SPRACH".

Wake up, Robdverity! It's a New Day! Listen to the Great Music!

robdverity  04/26/2010 05:50 PM Report

Sprach? What's that? Not even Googleable. Must be Yiddish for, "Very perceptive clairvoyant who sees thru all the world's shamans and who's warnings regarding persons of the cloth would well be heeded."

Cheers Ben. Keep your piety and your scull cap at the ready. Evil is on the march. But beware, the world's religions are chock-a-block with moles. Beelzebub has infiltrated them all. Their wines (and their kool-aid, of course) have been spiked. Reason is the first casualty. Defending the faith and the homeland requires killing, murder and mayhem. Keeps Patraeus in crackerjacks and the MI oligarches' quarterly reports inclined properly.

Thought for the day: "The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not."

- Eric Hoffer

I'm indifferent to god's existence, but not to the ones that his existence is (allegedly) paramount. Many would gladly do me harm to get me to see the grace and care of being one of the(ir) faith.

It's fatuous, beyond silly and to cap it all off we will immolate ourselves to prove to the offenders just how wrong they are / were.

I bore myself. I defer to your 2nd paragraph below. Cheers!

BENEZRAA  04/26/2010 03:02 PM Report

MR. ROBDVERITY, ALSO....

You reject everything, be it secular or religious in presentation or fact, and you simplify everything into one basic formula, which can be stated:

"The world is rotten; the cause of that rottenness is 'all forms of religion'; how dare the world be so rotten and so mortal, given that I live in it; Chicken Little was Right; we are all doomed; no one has the right to be optimistic about anything at any time, nor to think that any problem may be solvable; ALSO SPRACH ROBDVERITY!"

Having simplified the world in this way for yourself, you may simplify it even further.... Whenever you feel the urge to comment (to an interesting and informative program or any other type of program), just cut-and-paste the above provided all-inclusive comment into any "comment" section of any website! It is all-purpose, equal opportunity, discriminates against no one, and makes no pretense to actual discussion. You could even create your own Blog, "ALSO SPRACH ROBDVERITY!" You could be in charge of your own "Comments", exploring with all takers the infinitely many pathways to self-destruction and world destruction!

For now it is excellent that you listen and learn. Despite all your negativity, you obviously care, or you would pay no attention at all to world events. I rather suspect that, like most of us, you feel that the world is out of control and that there is little or nothing that you can do about it. Join the "Club" -- but, keep trying!

Good luck! I really mean it! And I do not mean at all to be condescending! I do hope that with a little humor and reason, you may break out of that shell of negativity to let your better, deeper light shine on through! And THAT I hope for you, not based on any polyanna sense of religion, just out of a sense of common decency (which you may or may not believe in as well). And I offer you an idea: some Atheists may be closer to a sense of God or Spirituality than some or even many, who profess religion! Why? Little or no dogma to blind them to experiences.

Ciao for now!

BENEZRAA  04/26/2010 01:44 PM Report

MR ROBDVERITY,

You seem to thrive on destruction, negativity, hatred, laying of insults, distortion of commentary, disregard of facts, and vulgar imagery. It is your privilege to interpret condescension, where none is intended, just as it is your privilege to feed your head on all that negativity. The recent news from Israel about the Hamas Video Cartoon ridiculing Gilad Shalit and his father Noam should feed your hatred and negativity as you chalk one up for the Jihadist haters of Jews, Israel, and the USA. I look forward to your next temper tantrum! (And that IS condescension towards you.) Good luck to you!

robdverity  04/26/2010 01:06 AM Report

Well Ben your condescending copout works - your option, but you better check your Israeli passport as it may have been rescinded. Confrontations are for meeting head-on, and with disproportional force (100:1 to date and counting). May your wailing wall praying provide you with comfort. Are you a head bobber? A blood slosher? Self induced euphoria?

The last may be a cheap shot. Your condescension made it a quid pro quo. Plus one last exhibit of yet another bit of religious unbelievable silliness. Add Catholic pederasty to the mix and my assertions are validated all the way to hell and back - religions (all of em) final destination. [May as well be an equal opp. heretic.]

If religions don't kill you and me, they will our progeny somewhere down the line. They are worthy of all the contempt that can be mustered. This is a "better way."

BENEZRAA  04/25/2010 11:04 PM Report

DEAR MR. ROBDVERITY...

... may you find your way to a better Way. Good luck to you!

robdverity  04/25/2010 05:15 PM Report

Tsk, tsk Ben. A public forum is just that - public. Your attempt at 'last tag' after you make your tag is symptomatic of mankind's fanciful belief systems. As backup for your beliefs you want to play 1st tag in a sense by citing the bible as the 1st and thus the oldest source. Muslims want to play last tag as a newer and thus more accurate source (having accounted for the Jewish and Christian discrepancies - as they see it of course).

ALL religions are insidiously fatuous. Their assertions (beliefs) all cross over the real to the surreal (definition of faith, I suppose). It's that very superficiality that fortifies my 'faith' that our species is not smart enough to survive. Nor does it deserve to.

We are going extinct ultimately because of religion; their claims of 'salvation' notwithstanding. The ultimate irony.

You conveniently side-stepped my Mohegan and the Poospatuck Indians in the NYC area analogy. I was smugly proud of that in it's perceived (by me) aptness.

Now a non-response will put the last word where it belongs, a blanket indictment of ALL religions and their concomitant contribution to our species extinction. If we were to mature beyond our conceit that we are so special that (a mythical being) God - or a nameless entity that makes discussion pretty clumsy - has prepared an equally special place called Heaven then there might be some hope. Then theirs Hell for all those that don't believe in such matters EXACTLY like you do. How did Darwin miss that as an essential part of our evolution? Or devolution.

So you see, I can no more abandon my (religious-type?) belief that on balance our species is dumber than owl-shit and we've blown our chance at being blessed with cognitive abilities. We've squandered them. Dogs don't have the same level, but they're a helluva lot more noble.

Lastly, your parenthetical throwaway of "(And, believe it or not, neither the bulk of history nor the Bible were written by Goldman-Sachs, nor by the [implied] so-called 'conspiracy of Jewish bankers to take over the world.)," is keeping me up at nights. How did you connect those dots (in order to deny them)? The names I most detest in connection with the financial crisis - Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Lloyd Blankfein, followed closely in avarice, Bernie Madoff - all of the faith. You should have left that unsaid. Scary! I could use some convincing. Some proof. Lloyd says he's doing God's work, so it looks like you all may get more than just Israel long term. The world is second prize. (Your welcome!)

BENEZRAA  04/25/2010 11:20 AM Report

LAST WORD.... Dear Mr. Robdverity,

There is an old joke, that if Moses had lead the Hebrew people in a straight line north and west rather than circling in the desert for forty years, the Jewish People could have settled in Switzerland, and world history might have been entirely different. But, reality is reality and history is history.

Jews worldwide pray facing the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Israel . Muslims worldwide pray facing the Kaba in Mecca, Saudia Arabia. Jews are obligated to remember Jerusalem all the days of their lives. Muslims are obligated to make a Holy Pilgrimage (Haj) to Mecca at least once in their life.

In real estate terms the Bible is the deed designating Israel for the Bnei Itzchak (Children of Isaac, the Jewish People) and the lands directly east of Israel for the Bnei Ishmael (Children of Ishmael, who are today subsumed by the conquering Muslims, which tradition intertwined itself with that of the Bnei Ishmael such that all Muslims regard themselves as being Bnei Ishmael). Remember: Ishmael (born to Hagar, maid-servant of Sarah) was the older step-brother of Itzchak (born to Sarah, wife of Abraham). According to the Jewish tradition, Abraham was the legal and biological father to both Ishmael and Itzchak. Abraham blessed both his sons to be great peoples according to their character. According to their character, Abraham's Will specified Israel for the Children of Isaac and the land east of the Jordan for the Children of Ishmael.

The Koran (the Holy Book of Islam) tells the history a little differently. Respectfully, Islam as a religion did not come into existence until the lifetime and in the personage of it's primary prophet, Mohammed, in the first half of the 7th Century A.D. The Koran was written well after the death of Mohammed. By the time of Mohammed, the millennia history of Ancient Israel was already over with by six centuries, having given way to the Diaspora after the great destruction of Israel by the Romans, who renamed the territory of Israel "Syria Palestina". The faith of Christianity was already into it's 7th century. The Koran, failing to accurately quote the history already in the Bible, distorts significant details of the history, including the rightful inheritance of the land of Israel. Now the world has three different major faith traditions in which some of the facts are agreed to and some are disputed. Judaism has a history of more than three-thousand years. Christianity has a history of two-thousand years. Islam has a history of fourteen-hundred years.

From generation to generation the facts and interpretations of facts have been a basis for "righteous conflict". So, how do all parties reconcile and put an end to such conflict? It most certainly does not happen by disrespecting those traditions, nor by creating new conflicts in "Arizona" for example, as you suggest. Nor is it in making additional concessions to the Muslim Jihad. With respect to location and relocation, what if all the Arabs relocated to Israel and the Israelis into Arabia? Then Israel would have all the oil and the Suez Canal and hegemony over great continents.... But, this is clearly ridiculous, is it not? It is also not in the "deed".

As I stated in my previous comment, I believe essentially that the proverbial "Ball" is in the court of my Muslim cousins, whose faith in El-Rachman will lead them to welcoming Israel home.

May we put a hold on this dialogue for now so as not to abuse the privilege of this forum that Mr. Rose has so graciously made available? If you like to continue our conversation, just write to me directly at my name, "BENEZRAA" at AOL. And put an end to that "our species will self-destruct" nonsense. (It's not impossible, I admit, but, it is far more likely that, if we do, it'll be because we drown in our own garbage, not due to an apocalyptic war. Although, at that point a military conflagration might be a blessing! As a good capitalist, I have to believe that self-destruction is not profitable. We must colonize the universe in order that MacDonald's and Starbucks' may expand.... )

robdverity  04/25/2010 03:15 AM Report

Afterthought - you seem to be indirectly (and inadvertently) agreeing with me re location. For you it's the Arabs you want to relocate. Voila, here's bettin the Arabs feel the same about Israelis. Location! Location! Location!

robdverity  04/25/2010 03:06 AM Report

Ben - You're prob too smart for this forum. Nice thought out response. Your sensitivity re the creation of Israel seems to stem from my lack of stressing location. Arizona would have worked and the world would have increased its chance of adding enumerable generations to its survival - AS AN EXAMPLE. Impractical? Perhaps. But I'm trying for a point here.

You refer me to the bible and history re location. My Google-oriented history placed the Mohegan and the Poospatuck Indians in the NYC area (I think).

Would the New Yorkers be placidly sanguine if an international body a la the UN, UK, US said that these two (diaspora-ed, maltreated) tribes have an internationally sanctioned right to much or all of Manhattan?

Location, location, location. Real estates mantra nearly every place on the globe. Isn't the ME conflict ipso facto proof that something is wrong. That something (to me) is location, location, location.

Lastly, if Petraeus deigns to read these comments his self worth is suspect and would bring into question his fitness for the job.

Our species will self-destruct and the reason will be fanciful and trivial, a la two Semitic tribes hatred for each other - or not. Using too much oil, or perhaps someday not enough. Or water - prob the next catastrophic reason and resource for annihilation. Your last paragraph was approaching the truth.

BENEZRAA  04/25/2010 01:37 AM Report

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT, TO WHICH I RESPOND:

Dear Mr. Robdverity (rob the truth?)...

Firstly, I am grateful to Mr. Rose for making it possible for such as yourself and myself to listen and learn from such important leadership as General Petraeus, and to participate by commenting. To the extent that this democratic opportunity provides anyone and everyone a "platform", I am sure that you are as grateful as I am to Mr. Rose.

Secondly, I hope that neither my comments nor yours nor any other comments via this "platform" present an unfair burden to General Petraeus. I quite doubt it. In fact I rather think that General Petraeus, should he even be apprised of these comments, would be gratified that there are responsive listeners; perhaps he will even find one or two ideas interesting. Since I am not a cynic, I also believe that General Petraeus has utmost pride and respect for all of us, especially those of us, who take the time to participate in our democracy, for which his service in the military is dedicated.

Thirdly, regarding your misinterpretation that I propose creating an Arab Diaspora: I do not suggest that Arabia be sent into exile, nor that any Arabian land be seized. For whatever reason, you define the returning of Arabs to Arab lands as a move into a diaspora; and you define the land of Israel, occupied over thousands of years by so many conquerors, as being in the middle of Arabia. The Arabian occupation of Israel does not make Israel part and parcel of Arabia. You ask, "Why was... Israel placed where it is? Go read the Bible, go read history! (And, believe it or not, neither the bulk of history nor the Bible were written by Goldman-Sachs, nor by the [implied] so-called 'conspiracy of Jewish bankers to take over the world.)

You speak of an Arab diaspora. Respectfully, the vast majority of Israel has lived in exile for thousands of years, praying for a time of return and liberation. You speak of world recognition of the return of the People of Israel to their ancient homeland, to their creation in 1948 of the modern State of Israel, as "the biggest geopolitical mistake since WW2 -- or maybe forever." This is an astounding comment that you make, a comment that is heartless, mindless... there are not enough adjectives to describe the repugnance of this comment. It is a comment beyond reason.

Also, I do not share your pessimistic view of man, nor do I share your pessimism about the future, which according to you will inevitably come to the destruction of the world by man at his own hand, perhaps occurring sooner rather than later due to the existence of the modern State of Israel. In your mind the world is doomed, therefore you are doomed. Or perhaps it is the other way around. As to why Israel and World Destruction is a part of that metaphysic, my guess is that once you free your mind of that particular auto-destruct scipt, once you stop taking pot-shots at everything and everybody, you might just rediscover the joy and optimism of just plain being alive. Smell a few roses, breathe some fresh country or sea air, find love....

Lastly, if anything, it is my optimism and faith in my cousins, the Arabs, that the Umah (Body of Islam) will soon come to be enlightened, that the Umah will realize that El-Rachman (God, the Compassionate One) would want the Umah to make room for Israel, The People of The Book, to live and thrive in His Ancient Homeland. The Umah is capable of great doings and performing great generosity. I believe that the greatest dreams of the Umah are yet to be realized, that Jihad is not their way into the future, and that a golden age for Islam can come about, if and only if Islam first makes room for Israel. To the extent that Islam does so joyfully and willingly, so will be the speed with which positive evolution will come to Islam. To the extent that Islam fights it's own best self, so will generations suffer unnecessarily.

I do not disagree with you, when you say that the resettlement I suggest "...would require UN, US, Arab and world input and approval on a scale very unlikely to happen." Unlikey as it may appear, yet, I believe it is possible and more likely than either one of us winning the lottery, and far more important and desireable. And, while my optimistic comments about the Umah [above] may appear to contradict my characterizations of Islam [below], there is in fact no contradiction, as the world of Islam is growing (very painfully) through a period of terrible Jihad, that must come to an end, the sooner the better.

I must however correct you in that I never suggested that any resettlement would or should take place "... without deportees awareness or objections"; nor did I ever suggest deportation, that being a complete misrepresentation of my words. Regardless of the merits and risks -- which I already discussed in my original comment [below] -- world opinion and policy are likely to continue on the same destructive path, causing unnecessary pain and bloodshed, forcing continuing wars of attrition, leading the world closer to Armageddon. It is in order to avoid such a future that I put forth my ideas to General Petraeus. I can only hope that, if there is any merit to my ideas, that General Petraeus may make use of them, as every day he bears the burden of avoiding Armageddon on our behalf.

robdverity  04/24/2010 05:57 PM Report

So?

Man on the street: "robdverity, what do you think should happen to the CEOs of the bailed out banks?

Me: "Waterboard them, extract fingernails, fines twice their net worth, jail terms of 80% of remaining life expectancy."

Davey and I can opine all we want, but (sadly?) it doesn't mean too much.

NeilMacCallister  04/24/2010 12:20 AM Report

CHARLIE ROSE: "..all of those who are worried about Iran, because of its capacity to develop a nuclear capability, what do they want you to do?"

DAVID PETRAEUS: "..you’ve got to stop that program."

robdverity  04/23/2010 07:25 PM Report

Ben - Your search for a platform burdens the General unfairly. An Arab diaspora, as proposed by you, would require UN, US, Arab and world input and approval on a scale very unlikely to happen.

Which brings an interesting question to the fore. Why was location of Israel placed where it is? Why in the middle of Arabia? Like the Goldman Sachs debacle doomed to failure at the outset. Why not in Europe, or even AZ? About the same climate.

Your plan, whether gradual or otherwise, would require it to happen without deportees awareness or objections.

The creation of Israel with hindsight was the biggest geopolitical mistake since WWII - or maybe forever. This comes from my view that its existence will ultimately be the lynch-pin for launching the world into the apocalyptic cataclysm you discuss.

Our species likes to kill each other too much to survive - or deserve to. Israel's existence will accelerate this extinction by several generations. Avoid it? No.

BENEZRAA  04/23/2010 05:55 PM Report

RAISING A POLICY QUESTION FOR GENERAL PETRAEUS WITH RESPECT TO ISRAEL.

Primarily tooled to execute American Policy, there do occur circumstances, when input from the Military may affect Policy. Whereas in such places as Afghanistan issues and participants are measured in shades of "gray" [quoting General Petraeus], the issues and participants in the Arab-Israelis Conflict are quite clear. Any "grayness" that creeps into the Arab-Israeli Conflict has more to do with such things as 'political correctness' and forcing a plausible but untenable 'two-state solution'.

Our American Military is obligated to plan based on American Policy, and therefore as long as American Policy is devoted to forcing the 'two-state solution', then any American Military planning will be offered accordingly.

To date there has been no credible evidence that Israel can expect peace from it's surrounding nations. The Arab League has yet to recognize Israel's right to exist and Israel's real existence with two exceptions [Egypt, Jordan]. The Arab League recognizes the state of "Palestine", though no such state exists, and this alleged state of "Palestine" is inclusive of all of Israel as well as the disputed territories and has Jerusalem as it's capital. With the express exceptions of Egypt and Jordan, having made no peace with Israel, the Arab League nations are in the same state of war with Israel that they have been in since the United Nations first acknowledged Israel in 1948. Of course an Arab state of "Palestine" was not even a concept in the mind of Palestinian Arabs let alone the Arab League nations, and none in the Arab World objected, when in 1948 Jordan occupied the territories that the UN intended for the creation of a state of Palestine. Today in Israel's north both Lebanon and Syria are still in a state of war with Israel, spiced by the elements of Hezbollah and Hamas and backed by Iran, as General Petraeus correctly spoke to in last nights conversation with Mr. Rose.

It is incomprehensible that American Policy should support a 'two-state solution' given the obvious political and factual bases on which America should support the birth and development of any nation. America should support democratic impulses in nations in law and in practice. Real world politics does raise it's ugly head all too often, as for example neither Iraq nor Afghanistan nor even Pakistan recognize the State of Israel. Clearly positive resolution of the more local Arab-Israeli Conflict could reverberate positively from Jerusalem to Mecca and Baghdad all the way to Kabul.

Yet there is an illusion that only two alternatives exist with respect to resolution of the Arab-Israeli Conflict -- either the 'two-state solution' [of Oslo] or the 'one-state solution' [of Iran]. Both of these are not true solutions and both of these are flawed for the same fundamental reason, which is the devotion of the World's of Islam and the World's of Christianity to belief in the inevitable destruction of Israel [sooner or later according to the apocalyptic theological underpinnings of each of those two faiths]. The dangers of the apocalyptic visions of both of these faiths (and to a small extent amongst a tiny minority of Jews in the context of their faith as well) is that there is a presumption to know and speak for God based on the idea that Israel's existence today pertains to the End Days. Muslims believe that Israel will be split asunder and that Islam will prevail, while Christians believe that Israel will be split asunder and that Christianity will prevail. The 'two-state solution' is an human fabrication straight out of Christian theology that presumes that Israel's existence today is so miraculous that it can only be the harbinger of the End Days. The Muslim Jihad presumes the same thing only with the Muslim Jihad prevailing. The 'one-state solution' [of Iran] is in fact a variation on the 'two-state solution' in that once the demographics and the sharing of resources, military, government, etc. come to full fruition the end result is the same, ergo, the destruction of Israel.

General Petraeus states that the demographics of the 'one-state solution' imply pragmatically that a "just" 'two-state solution' is called for. If in fact the requirement for a "just" 'two-state solution' calls [not only for a "just" Israeli state, which already exists, but...] for a "just" Palestinian-Arab state, then it should be clear that there is no evidence of any significant devotion anywhere in the Arab world and certainly not in the Palestinian-Arab world favoring a "just" Arab state, if by "just" it is understood that freedom [freedom of religion, freedom of individuals, freedom of women, freedom of political expression] is fundamental to a just state. By any democratic test there is no evidence that freedom is a concept acceptable to the Arabian world, the only partial exceptions being such dynamically conflicted states as Turkey, a NATO Member.

Therefore, there can be no justice in the creation of a Palestinian-Arab state, because it would by definition require the application of a double standard in order to bring such a state into existence. The double standard is the real democracy in Israel versus the bare appearance of democracy that would exist in a Palestinian-Arab state. And the barometer of this is not only the utter Arab exclusion of Jews in present day Gaza, in Judea-Samaria, in Syria, in Lebanon, and in the vast majority of Arabia. Are the Druse free to worship as Druse in the Arab World? Mostly not, finding most freedom in Israel. Are the Bahai free from persecution in Arabia? Mostly not, the Bahai have made their World Headquarters in Israel. Christians? Buddhists? Atheists? Again, persecuted elsewhere, free in Israel. Most ironically, it cannot be said that Muslims are free in Muslim lands -- but, they are free, even voting citizens in Israel! In Muslim lands first one is either Sunni or Shia, then the divisions go from there and the oppression and violence is ubiquitous.

Too much attention is paid to the "demographic inevitability" of Palestinian-Arab-Muslim reproduction in Judea-Samaria and in Gaza, and not enough attention is paid to the denial of demographic reproduction of Israelis (Jewish and otherwise, excepting Muslims), which democratic reproductive right is denied in favor of the exclusionary practices of the Muslims. No nation can support a Fifth Column devoted to destruction from within of that nation. Although at first glance this seems to support the 'two-state solution' it is in reality the best argument -- in the humanitarian interests of that Fifth Column as much as the State of Israel -- to resettle those, who openly cannot and do not tolerate Israel's existential right, into the Muslim states in which they might thrive as Muslims. Those Muslim state give no evidence in our time that they will stop burning the Holy Books of the World, even as they scream at the occasional defacing of their own.

They give no evidence they will stop murdering, enslaving, raping, and torturing "infidels".

In the absence of a real democratic right to live and thrive in Muslim lands except as a member of the dominant Muslim group in any particular Muslim 'neighborhood' it is incumbent upon the West to contain the expansive military and demographic threats of the Muslim Jihad, and to support and develop geographic opportunities for freedom to thrive. Clearly in the Israeli context this means supporting the resettlement of several million Palestinian-Arab-Muslims into Lebanon, Syria, Jordan Iraq, Iran, Saudia Arabia, Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Algeria, etc. This would remove the demographic threat to Israel as a Jewish and Democratic state enabling freedom for all faiths to live and grow.

It is stunning that the obvious truth of this is not acknowledged. It is even more stunning that such a policy is misperceived as being somehow anti-democratic. In relatively recent history Hitler, once voted into office, destroyed German democracy and replaced it with Nazi Fascism. Any Palestinian-Arab government will similarly be fascist, as is the Hamas government in Gaza today. Just as Hitler should have been stopped, the Muslim Jihad must be stopped. Failure to resettle these militant, fascist populations today inevitably means another Intifada and another war. The Palestinian-Arabs have tried to project themselves as innocent farmers of olive trees that Jews wantonly destroy, even as they fabricate such events or use their olive groves as cover for the launching of rockets against Israel. As General Petraeus said, there are "ten-thousand rockets" in southern Lebanon alone pointed deep into Israel. As a matter of survival, Israel, when drawn into another war, will need to re-occupy such territories as it has already returned, having hoped for peace and having received none. This means more killings on a mass scale to all sides. This is the inevitable path of the 'two-state solution' or the subtler Iranian 'one-state solution'.

The true democratic test for establishing peace in the Arab-Israeli Conflict is whether or not the West will set aside it's theological predilections favoring the destruction of Israel and instead see to it's growth as the Democracy it has proven itself to be, land of refuge not only for Jews, but, for people of all faiths, even those of Islam, who have ironically been persecuted within the worlds of Islam.

So the policy issue I raise for General Petraeus, given the inevitability of terrible war with an inevitably "unjust" new Palestinian-Arab state and then with all the surrounding states as well, perhaps undermining the existing peace between Israel and both Jordan and Egypt: what can you General Petraeus do as a leader in the American Military to test the scenarios presented in this comment and then bring the outcomes before our Executive and Legislative branches of government? The thesis is that (1) there are five-million Muslim Palestinian Arabs in Israel and Gaza, mostly not citizens, who are militantly anti-Israel and on that basis deserving of re-settlement into other Arab Muslim nations, that (2) there would remain 1-2 million Arab citizens of Israel, choosing to favor Israel, (3) that re-settling the coercive Fifth Column described in #1 would constitute a pro-democratic act not at all like the genocide of the Nazis, with whom this Fifth Column in fact collaborated, (4) that the world should finally accept Israel's annexation of Jerusalem, (5) that the world should support Israel to annex Judea-Samaria, Golan, and Sheva Farms, (5) that an updated peace agreement between Israel and Egypt should include the purchase by Israel of a sufficiently significant portion of the Sinai so as to save face for the Syrians, to whom Israel has already returned 90% of the Golan, and so as to save face for the Lebanese, to whom Israel has returned all but the Sheva Farms, (6) that in accomplishing the above there will be great financial savings to the world money supply, much less bloodshed, and opportunity for long lasting peace including undisputed, sensible, defensible borders for Israel.

Obviously, there should be no attempt or policy forcing a sudden mass re-settlement plan, as this would be un-democratic and would have the effect of precipitating an Intifada and a large scale regional war.

Such a policy is testable and should work by being step-implemented, making use of a series of development agreements (to be arranged) including agricultural, manufacturing, and other such jobs development so as to sweeten the re-settlement of Palestinian-Arabs into various Arab nations. There is no shortage of Arab and Muslim geography available to take in the Palestinian-Arabs, as Muslim hegemony radiates from Mecca not just in the Arabian peninsula, but, all the way inclusive of half of Africa, the Middle East, Eurabia, Asia, Far Asia, significant parts of India, and the Far East. Israel has no equivalent options, as there is only one, tiny Hebrew speaking nation in the entire world: Israel itself.

If you have trouble accepting the above thesis, ask yourself the following question: how well has the 'two-state solution thesis' worked out over the last hundred years, when the original intent of the Balfour Declaration was scuttled? How many unnecessary deaths and wars do we need before you open your eyes?

robdverity  04/23/2010 04:50 PM Report

You charge to think about it. Your capital IF seems antithetical to your point, as it relegates Iran's threats to rhetoric hiding behind the IF. Israels has doubtless let the same sort of rhetoric be known to Iran - also behind IF qualifiers.

Thinking about it in two forms: the day before vs the day after. After first - oil at (pick a number - $500 per barrel?), jittery world govts, frozen financial mkts, credit seized up, militaries mobilized world wide, air traffic halted, while the world awaits the response. The next shoe to drop.

The day before - prob. too much like the day before that. Out of the blue? Unless event-triggered.

Who knows? My pessimism shouts that it's inevitable. The ME conflict may hasten it a few generations, but our species lacks a genetic-coded self preservation in my view. Led as if proving my point by suicide bombers. Ultimately he, she'll get a nuke. At what point do we become as deranged as the bombers, reducung humanity to not worth salvaging?

Fatalism - after awhile - becomes too easy, but being a light-weight that's where I've fallen.

DavLev  04/23/2010 03:53 PM Report

Iran's leadership threatened to wipe out US cities using it's surrogate terrorist groups, IF attacked with nuclear weapons. Yet what choice do we have in the West, with S-300 Missiles to be furnished to Iran..they approaching a successful test of a nuclear device and having a huge military force ( make their own weapons). They boast long range missiles and 40,000 suicide bombers. Iran was offered enriched fuel rods by the West, but turned it down. They have the capacity to make 10-15 bombs/year. The entire area will be under the gun., with that sword over their heads.

Ahmad/Hitler/Saddam and Assad/peas in the same miserable pod. The good General handled the interview well, no committments, but a stern warning. Israel itself, with 400 high fusion nukes can wipe out Iran within 20 minutes..or Syria in 10. It's okay to talk..right up to the mushroom clouds appear over Times Square and Disengoff Street, or

downtown Cairo. Think about it.

robdverity  04/23/2010 03:53 PM Report

Patraeus's self-serving global jingoism was pathetic for the US and (ultimately) for our species; calling for a world-wide network of sorts to match al Qaeda wherever they pop up - a la Yemen, Somalia et al as examples of his point. Assures he and his ilk steady employment and pays his dues to the MI oligarches.

He can't have it both ways (with our continued presence) re not creating new enemies at the end of the day. DUH! With our techno-arrogance we kill as much because we can (drones, air strikes) as much as or more out of need. We will minimize newly created enemies by our absence - not by our presence.

The ancient tribalisms of both Iraq and Af-Pak needs to play out (or not) of their own accord. The world is full of such arrangements and we can not police them all. Nor should we try - selectively or broadly - it's a losing endeavor.

The childish chest thumping triumphalism over top al Qaeda kills in Iraq - merely to be immediately replaced with fiercer insurgencies - demonstrates the futility of intervention in these entrenched tribal customs.

Finally, Patraeus's thinly veiled threat against Iran was irresponsible and above his pay grade. That's the purview of Obama, Gates, Mullens, Clinton et al. in concert and approval by congress. He's a hired hand, despite his peacock chest full of good conduct ribbons and preeening glitterati. Couldn't he just have worn a civilian suit? It's the CR show not the UN. Does his peacock pride relish in the 167% increase in the Pentagon health care expenditure, driven by a surge in mental health and physical problems for troops who have deployed multiple times?

The Patraeuses of the world will ultimately assure the cataclsym due our species. Our bankruptcy might be God's way of extending our species time by a few generations. Put that in your TEA pot.

REMant  04/23/2010 01:16 PM Report

The Taliban is reported to have considerably moderated its stance and is giving considerable aid, in addition to the pay, as well as, providing govt, like the Viet Cong did. They may be preachy and ppl may not like them much, but they are apparently considered better than the Kabul govt, and already in control. So I think this situation much the same as Vietnam. There the escalation in military operations just made the political situation worse. Isn't most of this tho not about Mullah Omar, but about the tribal leaders, or so-called war lords? Does anyone propose getting rid of them, as well? In Vietnam, in the early years particularly, there were all sorts of such groups jockeying for power and the Saigon govt trying unsuccessfully to harness them. Karzai is acting just like Diem. I am wondering, for instance, how we might go about cleaning up Chicago. The video that recently surfaced of the air support cowboys reminded me of a very familiar and regrettable mindset, too. Regarding Iran, I'm sure the general would agree that it would be a very big mistake for us to be seen as backing only the Sunnis.