My prior column dealt with some of the precise ways in which a nuclear war might actually begin between Israel and its enemies. From the standpoint of preventing such a war, it is essential that Israel now protect itself with suitable policies of preemption, defense and deterrence.
Israel's survival problem is basically as follows: A small state, indeed a microstate that is less than half the size of Lake Michigan, is surrounded by several openly-genocidal enemy states - some of which still seek biological and/or nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
My previous column on Project Daniel considered the dire consequences of a nuclear war in the Middle East, an almost unimaginable scenario of devastation and suffering that Israel must carefully avoid. It was the spectre of precisely such a scenario that first gave rise to Project Daniel.
Israel holds nuclear weapons for only one purpose: To prevent catastrophic destruction of the Jewish state by enemy state aggression. It is altogether inconceivable that Israel would ever resort to such weapons as an initial move of war
Some years ago, in conversations with then Israeli Ambassador Zalman Shoval, I urged the creation of a special "brain trust" to examine Israel's increasingly precarious security situation. The main objective, related to Ambassador Shoval, would be to assemble a uniquely capable cadre of strategic thinkers who would be free from the various constraints that normally burden both academic and military planners. The Ambassador agreed fully, but for one reason or another, the idea never got off the ground at that time.
Televised images of Israel's recent defensive operation in Gaza suggest cruelty and indiscriminacy. In fact, exactly the opposite is true. By deliberately placing young Arab children in the front lines of armed mobs that march with lethal intent upon Israeli soldiers, it is Palestinian leaders who openly commit violations of the law of war.
What sort of "freedom fighters" applaud the close-range murder of a pregnant Israeli woman and her four young daughters? There is only one correct answer: Palestinian terrorists. There is, in fact, no other insurgent movement on this persistently bleeding planet that can begin to compare with Arab/Islamic terror. From the standpoint of sheer barbarism, of a primal evil that mocks any human pretension to being a civilized "resistance," no other movement even comes close.
While most of the world outside of Washington and Jerusalem chooses to ignore calls identifying Palestinian terrorism as attempted genocide, international law has an unswerving and renewed obligation to do so.
A comparable legal case could just as easily have been made on behalf of Israel. Still reeling from an organized chorus of barbarous calls for individual and collective Jewish annihilation, Israel itself must now continuously remind the world of its own incontestable and established rights to self-defense.
Targeted Killing Of Terrorist Leaders: Israel’s Rights Of Assassination According To International Law
Now that Israel has eliminated Hamas terrorist masterminds Sheik Ahmed Yassin and pediatrician child killer Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, Prime Minister Sharon may soon strike at certain other lead murderers who relentlessly plot suicide-bombings against Israelis.
Earlier this month, a previously unknown Arab/Islamic terror group claimed the murder and mutilation of four American civilian contractors in western Iraq as "retaliation" for Israel's assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.
With Prime Minister Sharon's now planned unilateral disengagement from Gaza, Israel would openly reward Palestinian terrorism and simultaneously begin to codify its own incremental disappearance.
Even now - even after thousands of Israeli men, women and children have been systematically dismembered and murdered by the most barbarous terrorist movement in recent memory - much of the world remains willfully impervious to what is true in the Middle East.
A dreadful precedent was set recently by Spain. Recoiling in understandable horror from the March 11th Islamist terror attacks on commuter trains in Madrid, the voters in that country promptly ousted a courageous prime minister who had stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States in Iraq.
The Palestinians continue to speak of "occupied territories." They are joined by their civilized European allies whose traditional anti-Semitism is now reinvigorated by Arab/Islamic Jew hatred.
The Land and People of Israel are now in great peril. Day after day, hour after hour - almost minute by minute - Jewish men, women and children are fiendishly murdered by Arab terrorists.
One wonders, what are they talking ABOUT? With WHOM are they talking? WHY are they compelled to be SEEN on the phone? And why are they so undeniably eager that others overhear their conversation?
There can be no justice without memory. In 1998, Chrysler entered into an ambitious merger agreement with Germany's Daimler-Benz. Since that time, its economic well-being has generally and persistently deteriorated. Most recently, Chrysler's woes of falling stock prices and shrinking cash reserves have been aggravated by widening product deficiencies and burgeoning vehicle recalls.
Were it not for the evident seriousness of its implications, the David Haivri case would represent little more than the reduction to absurdity of a democratic country's legal system. Known popularly as the "T-Shirt Trial," the current court proceedings in Israel are based on an incident in which the defendant was charged with possession and distribution of a "publication" intended to incite racism.
Now that the primary season is seriously upon us, at least one claim is common to all of the candidates. No matter the differences between them, all of the political aspirants exhibit a fundamental populism. "I want to be the people's president" is their shared mantra. Indeed, for any of them to suggest otherwise would be far more than foolish; it would be downright blasphemous.