Monday, June 7, 2010

Giving Our Enemies a Voice

Update at the bottom


What does that word mean.

Is someone you hate your enemy?

Is someone who hates you an enemy?

In order for two people to be enemies do they have to mutually hate each other?

I just finished reading a speech given by Barack Obama to AIPAC, in which he has an interesting quote:

And my plan includes a robust regional diplomatic strategy that includes talking to Syria and Iran
Let's ask the question why do we need to talk to Syria and Iran? Because according to the United States, the plan is that is, that sometime in the future there will (theoretically) be peace in the entire Middle East. Not an unstable peace, but a real genuine peace.

And therein lies the problem.

In order for a peace to be reached you need to have two sides who agree on something, something that will benefit both sides. What benefit does Iran have in stopping their nuclear program? Or funding terrorists in Israel who kill Jews?

When all you're doing is talking, the most Iran can fear is that they're going to be yelled at.

Then there's the other issue of really suave Middle Eastern men.

When Achmadinajad came to the US to speak back in September, I was struck by how smooth he seemed. If I didn't know who he was I would have thought that he was a nice guy.

But we know what kind of guy he is, he's a guy who stands on balconies and screams "Death to Israel and the Jews" to cheering crowds below.

What gain to we have by talking to them? To understand them more?

The fatal mistake the both the US and Israel are making is that they think that they're dealing with people who think like they do and have the same values as themselves.

George Bush seems to think that he can send the army into an Arab country topple the government, give them cable TV and they're going to love democracy.

As we've seen he hasn't been too successful at that.

But the number one underlying cause of every single conflict in the Middle East stems to down to three question.

How do you define evil?

What does America consider to be evil?

And is the definition of evil different for Obama, McCain, or Clinton?

Because this next president is going to have to be the one to define that question.

I think that the question "How do you define evil" is still an important question still plaguing us today.
Last week we had the Gaza Flotilla incident, and as soon as the reports started going out at what had happened out on the high seas, the world became split, and most straight down the middle, on the issue.
There were people on the Right who were claiming that Israel was in the right and had not done anything wrong.
There people on the Left who jumped on the IDF for "creating a violent incident" on the flotilla.
(Oddly enough the majority of Jews here in Israel remained together on their stance.)

What disturbs me is that there is even a question here. Normally a ship being boarded by a country's Navy is back page news. Why is this such a big incident? What's the big deal?

It all comes down to how do we define evil? Is evil boarding a ship of people who are trying to break a blockade, while armed with knives, metal clubs, hosting terror leaders and just bringing with them a horrific atmosphere of hate?

Or is evil lowering IDF commandos from a helicopter onto the bow of the boat in order to commandeer the boat that was trying to break a blockade, a blockade which has only one purpose, to stop the trafficking of weapons into Gaza?

No comments: