Never Again?

John Uskglass

Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Never Again?

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 5, 2006; A19

When something happens for the first time in 1,871 years, it is worth noting. In A.D. 70, and again in 135, the Roman Empire brutally put down Jewish revolts in Judea, destroying Jerusalem, killing hundreds of thousands of Jews and sending hundreds of thousands more into slavery and exile. For nearly two millennia, the Jews wandered the world. And now, in 2006, for the first time since then, there are once again more Jews living in Israel -- the successor state to Judea -- than in any other place on Earth.

Israel's Jewish population has just passed 5.6 million. America's Jewish population was about 5.5 million in 1990, dropped to about 5.2 million 10 years later and is in a precipitous decline that, because of low fertility rates and high levels of assimilation, will cut that number in half by mid-century.

When 6 million European Jews were killed in the Holocaust, only two main centers of Jewish life remained: America and Israel. That binary star system remains today, but a tipping point has just been reached. With every year, as the Jewish population continues to rise in Israel and decline in America (and in the rest of the Diaspora), Israel increasingly becomes, as it was at the time of Jesus, the center of the Jewish world.

An epic restoration, and one of the most improbable. To take just one of the remarkable achievements of the return: Hebrew is the only "dead" language in recorded history to have been brought back to daily use as the living language of a nation. But there is a price and a danger to this transformation. It radically alters the prospects for Jewish survival.

For 2,000 years, Jews found protection in dispersion -- protection not for individual communities, which were routinely persecuted and massacred, but protection for the Jewish people as a whole. Decimated here, they could survive there. They could be persecuted in Spain and find refuge in Constantinople. They could be massacred in the Rhineland during the Crusades or in the Ukraine during the Khmelnytsky Insurrection of 1648-49 and yet survive in the rest of Europe.

Hitler put an end to that illusion. He demonstrated that modern anti-Semitism married to modern technology -- railroads, disciplined bureaucracies, gas chambers that kill with industrial efficiency -- could take a scattered people and "concentrate" them for annihilation.

The establishment of Israel was a Jewish declaration to a world that had allowed the Holocaust to happen -- after Hitler had made his intentions perfectly clear -- that the Jews would henceforth resort to self-protection and self-reliance. And so they have, building a Jewish army, the first in 2,000 years, that prevailed in three great wars of survival (1948-49, 1967 and 1973).

But in a cruel historical irony, doing so required concentration -- putting all the eggs back in one basket, a tiny territory hard by the Mediterranean, eight miles wide at its waist. A tempting target for those who would finish Hitler's work.

His successors now reside in Tehran. The world has paid ample attention to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's declaration that Israel must be destroyed. Less attention has been paid to Iranian leaders' pronouncements on exactly how Israel would be "eliminated by one storm," as Ahmadinejad has promised.

Former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the presumed moderate of this gang, has explained that "the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam." The logic is impeccable, the intention clear: A nuclear attack would effectively destroy tiny Israel, while any retaliation launched by a dying Israel would have no major effect on an Islamic civilization of a billion people stretching from Mauritania to Indonesia.

As it races to acquire nuclear weapons, Iran makes clear that if there is any trouble, the Jews will be the first to suffer. "We have announced that wherever [in Iran] America does make any mischief, the first place we target will be Israel," said Gen. Mohammad Ebrahim Dehghani, a top Revolutionary Guards commander. Hitler was only slightly more direct when he announced seven months before invading Poland that, if there was another war, "the result will be . . . the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."

Last week Bernard Lewis, America's dean of Islamic studies, who just turned 90 and remembers the 20th century well, confessed that for the first time he feels it is 1938 again. He did not need to add that in 1938, in the face of the gathering storm -- a fanatical, aggressive, openly declared enemy of the West, and most determinedly of the Jews -- the world did nothing.

When Iran's mullahs acquire their coveted nukes in the next few years, the number of Jews in Israel will just be reaching 6 million. Never again?

That's some sobering shit right there.
 
Yeah, but this time, the Jews have a very useful way of self-defense. Nationhood. They're not scattered nomads looking for a safehouse anymore.

Plus, I would think that nations that acknowledge Israel's right to be, would push hard if Israel was attacked by Iran for simple reasons of irradication. And when push comes to shove, Iran will not be standing so "boldly" anymore.
 
Israel has one of the finest military forces in the world, so I think the Arab nations better behave before they are defeated like they were in the Six Day War.
 
They might actually have a shot at setting up a decent ABM defense, actually. The country is so small that many overlapping defenses can be created.

No way to defend against short range nuclear attacks, of course. Or someone just driving a truck in with a primitive dirty bomb.
 
well john, thats one nice piece of bullshit propaganda...

the only people that care about jews being jews are jews. Romans feared a revolt and Hitler needed a scapegoat. the arabs now hold a grudge because Israel was created by force on arab soil. doesnt have anything to do with the poor lil' jews!!!1!one!!

wtf does it matter if these people (eg the jews) have been procecuted over the centuries? how relevant is that?

all in all, i feel the arabs have ample reason to dislike the israeli. the first wave of migration was fine, as the jews bought their land. post wwII migration is pure bullshit. initially throwing 500.000 to 1mil arabs off their land and deporting them is NOT the way to go. and that was only the beginning... than you wonder why some people might hold a grudge?

how would you feel if a flock of people debarked in northern California, settled there, declared their own state, quickly formed a military force able to defend their newly formed country from the US, canadian and mexican military? sounds like the US would hold quite a fucking big grudge for a few centuries to come, no?

besides, do you really believe Iran will carpetbomb/nuke Israel? it'd be bringing about their own destruction...

what exactly are you advocating here John? want W to pre-emptively nuke Iran perhaps? dont make me laugh.

"sobering shit"? shit indeed, but sobering? hardly...

(i'm not saying the arabs are right, i'm saying that the whole "oooh poor jews"-attitude is fucking bullshit)
 
That article is hardly "sobering". It outlines nothing that hasn't been obvious for decades now.

Israel will only exist as long as it has America as the big badass ally. Once America loses interest in the Middle East (which is bound to happen within the next 20 years), Israel will be simply overrun and wiped out by the hostile Arabs in its immediate proximity. Either way, the Jewish nation is doomed.
 
I sincerely doubt Iran's nuclear program will get that far (at least in the short term). I am sure that Israel is preparing to take matters into their own hands if nothing else intervenes (and perhaps even then). Commando raids and so forth.

I have to agree with Ratty that there really isn't anything 'sobering' there.
 
Ratty said:
Israel will only exist as long as it has America as the big badass ally. Once America loses interest in the Middle East (which is bound to happen within the next 20 years), Israel will be simply overrun and wiped out by the hostile Arabs in its immediate proximity. Either way, the Jewish nation is doomed.
I'm afraid you have no idea what you are talking about. Isreal produces the vast majority of it's own wepon systems, and we do no support that much of it's military budget, and they are frankly just far more willing and able militarily then anyone on that side of the world. I seriously doubt that any nation in the world outside of China, Russia and us could "overrun" them. You can have 30 million Islamic Jihadists, still does not help against a tactical nuke, a Merkava or the IDF's air arm.

The major problem would be nukes. We'll have to do something about that, I care more about Isreal then I do about almost any country outside of the US.
 
John Uskglass said:
The major problem would be nukes. We'll have to do something about that, I care more about Isreal then I do about almost any country outside of the US.
Simple question here, but: why?
 
Simple question here, but: why?
I have a lot of friends who are either dual citizens or considering it. And a lot of Jewish friends. It is also the most sacred land in Christianity, and I would much, much, much rather have it kept and maintained by the state of Israel then some Islamofascist bullshit government. They treat the Christians worse then they treat the Druze, and almost as bad as they treat the Jews.

They are also one of the few Democracies I would not consider 'decedent', even if I don't think 'decedent' is always such a bad thing. They've fought off enemies much, much larger then they are, and I have nothing but respect for the IDF and overall the Israeli people.

Frankly, as far as I am concerned, if any coalition of bullshit Islamofascists ever overruns Israel, I think we would be justified in just going Apeshit across the entire region. Only country there worth a damn at this moment.
 
He's right- Israel is the region's strongest and most tolerant democracy. And Iran is no Nazi Germany, not by a long shot. More like Mussolini's Italy.

Also, Ratty, what's up with the attitude? The Israelis destroyed the Arabs in the Six-Day war and managed to defend themselves almost from the beginning of their existence with far inferior weapons and equipment. Now that the IDF has a preponderance of military hardware and the Arab nations don't have the Soviet Union to look towards for support, they're even weaker.
 
John Uskglass said:
It is also the most sacred land in Christianity, and I would much, much, much rather have it kept and maintained by the state of Israel then some Islamofascist bullshit government.
why, of course! a theocratic bullshit governement is obviously so much better...
John Uskglass said:
They treat the Christians worse then they treat the Druze, and almost as bad as they treat the Jews.
ironically, many islamist countries treat christians better than any western country is currently treating arabs (regardless of religion).
John Uskglass said:
Only country there worth a damn at this moment.
in short, to gain your respect, you must:
0) have buddies there!
1) seize land.
2) deport the original inhabitants.
3) develop an army strong enough to kick any retaliating forces' asses.
4) destabilise the region for decades.
5) say it's all OK, because you were procecuted for centuries!

i'm impressed...
 
SuAside said:
why, of course! a theocratic bullshit governement is obviously so much better...

Except that Israel is a parliamentary democracy that is completely secular. Religious toleration is written into the constitution.

ironically, many islamist countries treat christians better than any western country is currently treating arabs (regardless of religion).

Ironically, that's complete horseshit. With the notable exception of Egypt, most countires with Islamic governments persecute Christians regularly. Are you seriously arguing that Iran's treatment of Christians is better than the US's treatment of Arabs?

The US treats Arabs absoloutely the same as everyone else- unless of course they're foreign nationals caught in a warzone, but that's obviously another thread.
 
John Uskglass said:
I'm afraid you have no idea what you are talking about. Isreal produces the vast majority of it's own wepon systems, and we do no support that much of it's military budget, and they are frankly just far more willing and able militarily then anyone on that side of the world. I seriously doubt that any nation in the world outside of China, Russia and us could "overrun" them. You can have 30 million Islamic Jihadists, still does not help against a tactical nuke, a Merkava or the IDF's air arm.

The major problem would be nukes. We'll have to do something about that, I care more about Isreal then I do about almost any country outside of the US.
Israel's survival ability is amazing, but I think you overrestimate it. Israel still receives a lot of financial aid from US and its economy depends on US as its largest trading partner. If these ties were severed or lessened, it would be a dramatic blow to Israel's economy. Furthermore, though Israel has by far the best trained and equipped army in the Middle East, don't underestimate Iran. Their army has come a long way from poorly-armed cannon fodder of the Iraq-Iran war, and they have a tremendous advantage in numbers (you'll agree that a stagnating population of 6.5 million versus a booming population of 68 million are not very good odds). In addition to this, the huge demand for oil means their economy (and thus their military power) can only grow in the next twenty years. While I don't doubt Israelis will put on a hell of a fight, it is a war they can't win without powerful foreign allies.

Which saddens me greatly, because there are two peoples in this world whom I admire and sympathise with the most - Jews and Russians. Few ethnic groups have suffered in the course of history as much as those two. Yet despite all the plights and tragedies that befell them, they always seemed to come out stronger and better. For instance, every country with a Semite community oppressed them at some point in its history, and many even tried to exterminate them; yet, Jews are now more vital than ever. All the persecutions seem to have brought the best out of them, so a disproportionate number of successful and gifted people have Jewish roots. Jesus, Einstein, Freud, Spinoza, Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Chomsky, Kafka, Liebermann, Asimov, Pasternak... to name but a few. Their innumerable contributions to the world alone are reason enough why their destruction - which I fear will inevitably occur in this century - would be one of mankind's greatest tragedies.

SuAside said:
why, of course! a theocratic bullshit governement is obviously so much better...
Israel is one of the two or three middle-eastern countries that are de facto and de iure democratic republics where religious tolerance is guaranteed and vigorously upholded.

ironically, many islamist countries treat christians better than any western country is currently treating arabs (regardless of religion).
Which ones? From what I know, non-Arabs receive a terrible treatment in virtually every Arab country with the possible exception of Jordan. On the other hand, even those western countries which have a dismal record in treatment of minorities, such as France, at least nominally guarantee equal rights for all their citizens, regardless of their race, ethnicity or religion.
 
The problem with your argument is pretty obvious Ratty.

Middle_east.jpg


Notice the three countries between Iran and Israell? Getting the Iranian army through those three, even with the support of several of the countries in between would be very, very hard. The Iranian Air Force is next to useless after the Revolution and the Iran-Iraq war (the Shah had the most powerful air arm in the area, but kind of hard to repair F16s without our help).

That means that however many million Iranian troops will have to move across barley inhabitable areas without any air protection WHATSOEVER.

You know what that means? Pure AirLand battle. At every choke point the IAF will be able to destroy anything the Iranians have. And their lines of supply would be nonexistent.

ironically, many islamist countries treat christians better than any western country is currently treating arabs (regardless of religion).
That's probably among the most ignorant statements I have ever seen on this board.
 
Ratty said:
Which ones? From what I know, non-Arabs receive a terrible treatment in virtually every Arab country with the possible exception of Jordan. On the other hand, even those western countries which have a dismal record in treatment of minorities, such as France, at least nominally guarantee equal rights for all their citizens, regardless of their race, ethnicity or religion.
Well, there's also Egypt and some other countries where Westerners are generally pampered when they come to visit, so that those people may have a taste of money and Western civilization.
But we should make a clear distinction: the Western governments all guarantee equal treatment, and generally provide equal treatment. The fact that many Arabs have it rough has much more to do with other factors, such as ghetto-forming, isolation and racism.
Most Arab countries, on the other hand, do not guarantee equal treatment, or in some cases, they promote the mistreatment of non-Arabs and non-Muslims.
 
John Uskglass said:
The Iranian Air Force is next to useless after the Revolution and the Iran-Iraq war (the Shah had the most powerful air arm in the area, but kind of hard to repair F16s without our help).
It's true that IIAF, much like the rest of the Iranian military, has had a lot of problems maintaining the existing and procuring new equipment. If there was a war between Israel and Iran *now*, its consequences would be disastrous for Iran.

But we aren't talking now, are we? Iran can afford to purchase military tech from any Eastern exporter. It is also a notorious fact that Iran is busy setting up production of its own to rival Israel's. It's hard to tell how sophisticated their domestic equipment is, since it's successfully kept under a veil of secrecy, but one can conjecture it's a match for anything the West has. If its economy continues to grow (and it will), over the next few decades Iran can build a military as potent as the one it had in Shah's days, if not moreso.
 
Ratty said:
It is also a notorious fact that Iran is busy setting up production of its own to rival Israel's. It's hard to tell how sophisticated their domestic equipment is, since it's successfully kept under a veil of secrecy, but one can conjecture it's a match for anything the West has.

Highly unlikely. You must be referring to older military technology, because they probably didn't steal it and they definitely didn't develop an equivalent to the F-22 without us noticing it.
 
That seems to depend on a few things Ratty.

1) The PRC will continue to export military equipment to Iran (as Russia will not), inspite of Western pressure. This seems unlikely to me for the simple fact that China has far too much to loose on the diplomatic stage (for the simple fact that their breaking an international arms embargo during the Olympics would be moronic, bring backlash from the West).
2) The Iranian economy will continue to grow. I don't know why you assume that. Oil prices are inflated right now, and considering the fact that we (US & EU) are probably going to initiate some kind of embargo, this seems kind of unlikely.
3) The local Iranian military-industrial complex is up to scratch. It is not. The vast majority of the IRIAF is still composed of either Shahist-era aircraft or reverse engineered derivatives (of the 40 year old American originals). They have a few F-14s and F-4s. Compare with the IAF, and the (obvious) fact that we would probably be involved and you have an airforce that is dead before it gets off the ground. I also doubt that they have the heavy industrial capacity to keep 1 million troops in ammunition and supply all the way to Tel Aviv. Modern war takes a lot of ammunition and repair supplies, and Iran would not be able to import it.
4) The Islamist regime will last that long. It won't.

Also, the Iranian Navy would not be able to deal with the ISC, meaning that Iran would not only not be able defend the Perisan Gulf. You know what that means?

An Iran not only unable to export oil, but probably not able to produce enough oil for it's own demands thanks to naval and air bombardment.
 
Pajari said:
Except that Israel is a parliamentary democracy that is completely secular. Religious toleration is written into the constitution.
easy to say when many original arab "citizens" have been deported or aren't allowed to vote. makes for a pretty nice democracy indeed.
nice laws & principles does not tolerance make...
Pajari said:
Ironically, that's complete horseshit. With the notable exception of Egypt, most countires with Islamic governments persecute Christians regularly. Are you seriously arguing that Iran's treatment of Christians is better than the US's treatment of Arabs?
The US treats Arabs absoloutely the same as everyone else- unless of course they're foreign nationals caught in a warzone, but that's obviously another thread.
o rly? Iraq treated christians like everyone else btw, christians were common & integrated but that might change in the future...

as for arab countries who treat other religions well? just Egypt? yeah, i bet thats what you learned in hateschool. swallow some more propaganda.

Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Kuwait, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Jordan (sp?)... i'm sure i'm skipping a bunch, i dont feel like looking it up. it kinda depends on what you call arab & what you call islamic & so on. i just took the obvious arabics.

also, you seem to think good treatment is solely based on laws & religious freedom? ya rly...

you might want to reread what i wrote & think about it for more than a second instead of letting your gutt do the thinking for you.
Ratty said:
*snip*
Which ones? From what I know, non-Arabs receive a terrible treatment in virtually every Arab country with the possible exception of Jordan. On the other hand, even those western countries which have a dismal record in treatment of minorities, such as France, at least nominally guarantee equal rights for all their citizens, regardless of their race, ethnicity or religion.
see above.

when you go to an arab or muslim country, you get invited in everywhere. you are welcomed, regardless if you intend to spend money or not. the poorest people give you their best food (even going as far as keeping nothing for themself) and expect NOTHING in return except a thank you and a smile. if you offer to pay or contribute, they'll more often be INSULTED than happy.

when is the last time you invited some foreign guy you've never met into your home, with whome you have nothing to do at all, shared your food with him and made him feel welcome. (talking of christians: "love thy neighbor"? heh, yeah, right. more like "fear everything you dont know")

have you been there? judging by your comments, i suppose not. i on the other hand have.
i also know more about the islam than what the propaganda tells you.
John Uskglass said:
SuAside said:
ironically, many islamist countries treat christians better than any western country is currently treating arabs (regardless of religion).
That's probably among the most ignorant statements I have ever seen on this board.
oh really?
then tell me, when have you last been there "on the ground", oh great internet hero. when have you last spoken with the people there? the normal folks as well as the upper class?

oh wait, you haven't? you just talked to prejudiced jewish friends and your information comes from the US propaganda machine and selective reading on the internet? whowouldvethunkit?
Sander said:
The fact that many Arabs have it rough has much more to do with other factors, such as ghetto-forming, isolation and racism.
quite right, some nice laws doesnt make everything right. you have to follow through with policy and every day tolerance & acceptance.
Sander said:
Most Arab countries, on the other hand, do not guarantee equal treatment, or in some cases, they promote the mistreatment of non-Arabs and non-Muslims.
that might be so in some extremist countries, but that is the vast minority. not the majority.
 
Back
Top