I was too emotional from the massacre in Itamar to comment before now. PM Netanyahu said everything right in his interview following the barbaric slaying of most of the Fogel family in their sleep in the town of Itamar. But speech is only one of four things that need be done by political leadership in Israel.
At the physical level a manhunt for the terrorists, and a change of policy to something more in line with improved security. Turning to God is also a good idea that everyone can do. A little soul searching at a personal level to increase the spiritual security of the people is always a good thing after traumatic calamities such as these. This restores an inner sense of security that such woeful events seek to remove from the hearts of all who hear of it, in addition to the grace from Heaven that it may bring in its wake.
Finally, a change of policy from one that trusts the PA to secure peace to one that entrusts the IDF to do so, is a healthier form of national security than current policy. Yes, the Prime Minister correctly labeled the Palestinian Authority as inciters of hate and violence. But the Prime Minister did not mention that his administration's current policy is to trust "our backs" to the PA and those that they incite. "Our backs" in this case, are the throats that were slit and the chests that were stabbed and the pure hearts that were stilled. "Trust" is the "Security Fence/Wall" that was not built around Itamar. "Trust" is in the continued tolerance of PA abuse of media as a tool for hate, calling for international pressure against the PA, rather than calling for Knesset legislative action against the PA.
The Prime Minister's speech felt right, at the time. But there is a need for his overall policy to begin to feel more right as well. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Trust, Not Opinion, Should Form Security Policy
When forming a nation's security policy, one should not look to opinion polls as to what is the best means to defend your people. Security is founded in the establishment of safety measures that one can trust. Risking all for whim based values is not a pragmatic method to secure national defense. Consequently, values one can trust such as Biblical ethics and historical legal precedents are advisers that are more likely to lead one to healthier choices than the latest U.N. resolution generally would.
If most of the United Nations member states think Israel should give up the West Bank in a land for peace deal, ignore it. If the United States Department of State considers Settlements an obstacle to peace (if they are Jewish), then do not listen to them.
Would a parent select a babysitter based on her popularity at high school or only according to the parent's ability to trust the babysitter alone with the child? Thus how can any nation be expected to run its policies based on "opinion polls" such as these?
Netanyahu is not Mubarak and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) is not the Sinai peninsula. John Locke not only spoke of the right to rebel against tyranny, but of the need to do so in a moral manner. To establish law and order, not enshrine anarchy. A PA state would be a Mubarak style regime at best until Hamas took over and then it would be pure anarchy. By all means embrace the winds of change, but do not treat our democratic friend Israel like a despotic regime and attempt to declare illegitimate their rights to their God given land.
As mentioned before, whether or not Israel elects to use it, Israel has the authority to annex the entire West Bank if she would choose to, under Biblical injunctions and International Law as well. The current Israeli Administration has been against that up until now. But that is the only (legal) reason why Israel has not done so.
The PA has openly declared that it does not plan to match Israel's magnanimity toward her neighbors, nor her own citizens. You do not have to be familiar with International Law to understand this. We all know that if Israel would annex the West Bank she would use it to promote peace for all of its citizens of any race, and if the PA would claim it, they would exclude those whom they choose to and prepare for eventual jihad.
America wrote on it's Liberty Bell, the words of God through Moses, "...And you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land for all its inhabitants..." (Leviticus 25:10) The nation of that Biblical message must uphold that message, not just for the nations of the world, but for herself as well. Liberty begins in the Holy Land. That liberty begins with a state of mind, the ability to keep what is yours so that you have something that you can share with everyone. Not give it to those who would never share it with anyone.
By forsaking the Land that God gave, the power to help others would be limited. By keeping the land, the ability to help others would be strengthened. Incidentally, the nation's security depends on it. May Israel soon do what is in its best interest, and thereby do what is best for all peoples in the region, by the grace of God.
If most of the United Nations member states think Israel should give up the West Bank in a land for peace deal, ignore it. If the United States Department of State considers Settlements an obstacle to peace (if they are Jewish), then do not listen to them.
Would a parent select a babysitter based on her popularity at high school or only according to the parent's ability to trust the babysitter alone with the child? Thus how can any nation be expected to run its policies based on "opinion polls" such as these?
Netanyahu is not Mubarak and Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) is not the Sinai peninsula. John Locke not only spoke of the right to rebel against tyranny, but of the need to do so in a moral manner. To establish law and order, not enshrine anarchy. A PA state would be a Mubarak style regime at best until Hamas took over and then it would be pure anarchy. By all means embrace the winds of change, but do not treat our democratic friend Israel like a despotic regime and attempt to declare illegitimate their rights to their God given land.
As mentioned before, whether or not Israel elects to use it, Israel has the authority to annex the entire West Bank if she would choose to, under Biblical injunctions and International Law as well. The current Israeli Administration has been against that up until now. But that is the only (legal) reason why Israel has not done so.
The PA has openly declared that it does not plan to match Israel's magnanimity toward her neighbors, nor her own citizens. You do not have to be familiar with International Law to understand this. We all know that if Israel would annex the West Bank she would use it to promote peace for all of its citizens of any race, and if the PA would claim it, they would exclude those whom they choose to and prepare for eventual jihad.
America wrote on it's Liberty Bell, the words of God through Moses, "...And you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land for all its inhabitants..." (Leviticus 25:10) The nation of that Biblical message must uphold that message, not just for the nations of the world, but for herself as well. Liberty begins in the Holy Land. That liberty begins with a state of mind, the ability to keep what is yours so that you have something that you can share with everyone. Not give it to those who would never share it with anyone.
By forsaking the Land that God gave, the power to help others would be limited. By keeping the land, the ability to help others would be strengthened. Incidentally, the nation's security depends on it. May Israel soon do what is in its best interest, and thereby do what is best for all peoples in the region, by the grace of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
