by Ross C. Leiber

This article is dedicated to all Jews killed, maimed, harmed, harassed and persecuted over the last 2,000 years.

It is appropriate reading for those who understand there are a number of ways through which Israel may be destroyed in the not so distant future, ranging from demographics to capitulation to total annihilation. It is targeted at those who have concluded that the existence of Israel as a Jewish State in the Jewish land is not accepted by the Arabs, and, therefore, come hell or high water, she must either disappear or surprise a foe or two, by breaking away from existing paradigms.

The reader may consider playing Antonin Dvorak's Symphony #9, "From the New World", while going through the document.

First Movement: Adagio - Allegro molto


This essay presents how Israel can save herself and help the world. It provides the necessary rationale, followed by a decisive way out for Israel, without her using weapons of mass destruction. She protects her population, punishes the Arabs, and teaches a lesson to the West for 2,000 years of anti-Semitism. Can it be done? The answer is yes, and the timing could not be more propitious. However, time is short.

On the other hand, if Israel forgets that Judaism is a religion based on reason, and continues to abide by western dogma and miracle doctrines, she may be doomed. Miracles are neither easy to come by, nor are they cheap these days. Using reason also means understanding, accepting, and acting upon the realization that it is not possible to reason with certain groups and individuals loaded with borrowed or self-developed hate and fanaticism. This applies even when such entities are supported by a major power.

The "peaceful" intentions of Iran were clearly detailed by its former President, Hashemi Rafsanjani, in 2002. He suggested that the purpose of Iranian nuclear weapons would be to erase the "Zionist appendix" from the map of the Middle East. He said: "If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in its possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate, because application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just [cause] damage in the Islamic world. The Islamic world could suffer any blow Israel would give and still survive, while one nuclear weapon would put an end to Israel." (my emphasis)

Sorry, "Hashi Rafsi", the underlined sentence is wrong. The Islamic world may not survive. For non-nuclear reasons you can not even imagine. It's up to Israel to show how.

The difference between terrorist organizations and established Arab States is only in the approach, as far as Israel is concerned. Their intention is the same. Existing Arab states are more dangerous to Israel. She can't wait until it is almost inevitable a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) will be launched and then retaliate. It is better to do something meaningful to deter the threat, to send a hard message now. Never has an opportunity been so favorable to Israel. The present situation of the world due to terrorism is a blessing in disguise. It is a chance not to be missed.

If the US fails in Iraq, the urgency of following through with this article's recommendations will increase even more. Those afraid of alienating the US should recognize that changing America's foreign policy would be all to the good. Expelling the settlers and creating a Palestinian state to please the US State Department is at worst suicidal, and at best a suicide attempt. No matter which party the US President belongs to, the policies of the State Department to encircle, shrink, and jeopardize Israel's security never change. They must be changed against their wishes. The American people are very supportive of Israel. So is the US Congress. Unfortunately, its resolutions on the matter are non-binding on the Administration. Furthermore, Israel does not have oil.

A good friend of Israel would have cautioned the Prime Minister (PM) against pursuing the flagrantly undemocratic policy of disengagement. This is how things are done in the Arab world, not in Israel. To my knowledge, no journalist has commented that the US, by nudging Sharon along this undemocratic path in the name of "democracy", has made a mockery of the Administration's proposals for democracy in the Arab world. Arab leaders must be watching and laughing all the way to the oil bank. Just as they were when "respect" for Israeli democracy was shown by the US, EU, and UN, during the Geneva Agreement "world tour" - another dagger in Israel's back by the world community.

Where is it written that Israel must be eternally on the defensive. Particularly at present, after the last 11 years since Oslo? Where does it say that Israel can not turn the situation around?

It would be extremely dangerous for Israel to bide her time until the oil runs out in Arabia. Even if this were to happen tomorrow. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is but a small subset of the Arab-Israeli struggle. No Jew should, at this day and time, believe it is the other way around. No matter how many international politicians say so. The world would have easily solved a boundary dispute a very long time ago, in 1948, or even earlier.

History has shown through comparative examples how easy it would be from a logistic point of view to relocate most Arab Palestinians, end the carnage, and allow enough breathing room for the peoples of both religions who don't fancy living together at the best of times. But it can't be done as proposed by so many supporters of transfer. And it may be too late for that.

For the Arabs, the point of no return may have been reached. The patient - the Arabs - may be beyond psychological help. As the Arab civilization decays morally, politically, and technologically, Israel will be more and more a tempting target. If it looks like the choice for Israel is either a quick and painful annihilation or a slow and painful destruction, then this essay offers a third option.

Following on the footsteps of Lavoisier's law of the conservation of the mass - in nature nothing is created, nothing is destroyed, but everything is transformed - Israel will neither create nor destroy, but simply rebalance the worry of survival in a more equitable way.

Israel's mistakes

The outright hostility towards Israel by most of the West, and the unrelenting Muslim desire to destroy the country and its inhabitants is known. The British seized over 75% of the land destined for the Jews in order to create a fictitious state across the Jordan River to "reward" the previous custodians of Muslim holy sites, the Hashemites, who were superceded when Saudi Arabia became an independent nation. Brand new Arab states were created at that time, monarchies instituted, and while today they've all failed their citizens, Israel is still coping with the consequences. Unfortunately, Israel was the last state to receive land. In this domino game, it was the last piece remaining on the board to get whatever remained of the Promised Land. But Jews living on this tiny portion of less than half of what was left was not acceptable to the Arabs. They went to war.

Israel's greatest strategic errors were to allow the return of Arafat and tacitly recognize the Palestinians as a unique people different from their neighbors, the countries where most came from. This followed the mistake of not calling on Jordan and Egypt to put up some of their land for Palestinian Arab settlements. She had the opportunity. Oslo and the Road Map are markers on a downhill slope. Even if peace were achieved tomorrow with a Palestinian state in the whole of the 1967 borders, over a short time the demographic pressure would make it non-viable.

People are now being led to believe that the US gave two guarantees to Israel - which the State Department denies - and that the relationship between the countries will suffer if the PM doesn't fulfill his commitment to surrender Gaza and foster a Palestinian state. All Jews, both in Israel and in the Diaspora, are paying and will be paying for years to come for the weaknesses of the last Israeli governments.

Stupidly, every new PM offers the Palestinians a basket of goodies filled with delicious concessions. Consequently, the Arabs have no reason to make peace and, in the process, create bigger problems for themselves.

Israel does not forcefully counter Arab propaganda and this is a mistake. The Arab nations and the Palestinians make unsupported claims while rewriting history to deny Israel's links to the land. Moreover, the government leaves open the subject of Jerusalem. Certainly, the holy part of the city will be taken away, with the full support and pressure from the international community. The remote past is a lot easier to deny than the Holocaust - and incredible as it may seem, there is a cadre of holocaust deniers. The whole Arab world is on a war footing regarding these issues, including the right of the Jews to even live on the planet.

Of course, the Israeli system of democratic government - where their people do not have representatives directly accountable to the local citizens - is a national disgrace, and a danger to her existence.

A word on PR

Consistency in policy making has not been a strong Israeli asset lately. This is reflected in her PR, such as it is. What should Israel's message be? Sharon is committed to a Palestinian state. But if there isn't a Palestinian people - and there isn't - why recognize any rights for a state or homeland? Out of charity? In Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank? In Jordan? What about the Arab countries trying to destroy Israel by all means? What about international laws being misapplied? What about falsification of history? What is the message? If there is no firm government policy, how can there be a message? And what is the target audience?

The so-called PR battle for more world acceptance of Israel's motives and rights is not likely to produce the desired results. Most people don't care about the history of either ancient or modern Israel. Others are against her anyway, or due to their governments' positions or anti-Semitism in their press.

The world doesn't want Israel to win the PR battle. The Arabs don't bring up ridiculous accusations like the Protocols, blood libel, and Holocaust denial because these don't work. They know they do work. The EU and the UN act as if they were all true. Therefore, they must be. That's what being an accursed people is all about. "Zionism is racism" is back again. For a large segment of the world, no Israel with all their Jews killed would be better than no Israel with the Jews exiled, because once again they would have to be put into ghettos, restricted, and discriminated against.

Jews should fight this PR battle, as long as Israel does not lose the war. History will take care of the rest. It always does. After 9/11 Bush called Islam a religion of peace, and he's apologized to the Arabs for the recent prisoner abuses. Israel must act, and then let him say that Judaism is a religion of peace. Or not. Remember, when the foreign policy of most Western countries is anti-Israel, there is just so much good PR can accomplish. People tend to believe their own. No PR has led to the US moving its embassy to Jerusalem. No PR is likely to stop the US from pressuring Israel to give up holy Jerusalem and the Temple Mount for peace as the last step on the road map. No PR will pressure the Palestinians to do so, instead. No PR has made the Red Cross accept Israel's Magen David as a partner, because the Red Crescent opposes it.

Arab plans for Israel

Arafat and his crowd deserve some credit. They mislead everybody in terms of their intentions, strategies, and tactics, but not about their ultimate goal of destroying Israel. Press them at the appropriate places and the truth comes out. With over twenty Muslim states in the neighborhood, they still ask questions like "Who has ever heard of a Jewish state?" Jewish history in the land is discarded, denied, and destroyed. On the other hand, they were probably not wrong when replying negatively to Ehud Barak's offer. Indeed, who has ever heard of one people owning the Temple Mountain above ground, and another people owning the underground? They also openly admit all refugees must return. What else does Israel need to hear? The Arabs don't just destroy other people's holy sites and replace them with their own, they don't even admit the former have ever existed. And that applies to people, as well.

Of course, with the so far unofficial Geneva Agreement, the previous issue is solved. The Palestinians get to keep the whole Temple Mount, lock, stock, and barrel. Another step in the denial of history would be completed. Historical evidence? Archeological findings? Nothing seems to matter. If the Jewish Temple is not going to be rebuilt when Israel is in control of Jerusalem, then the Arabs states, the UN, and all other terrorists have already won. Meanwhile, mosques are popping up and down the Temple Mount. Even Barak's nonsense offer must now be changed. At best Israel can only own the sub-underground.

To those who believe the whole of Israel belongs to the Jewish people, the solution of the refugee problem must be in the hands of the Arab states and their allies around the world. They created the problem and they must solve it now, but not in Israel. More than one Palestinian leader has admitted that the Palestinian people don't exist, and that once Israel is gone, the area will be reunited with Jordan.

If the Arab refugees are allowed to return, an independent Palestinian state in place of Israel would not last the month. After all the defeats they suffered in the wars against Israel, countries like Egypt and Syria will take by force what they rightly "deserve". Egypt will take over Gaza and the Negev, in order to have a link to the east. It will likely treat Palestinian Arabs as badly as it did until 1967. Syria would take the Golan and the whole of northern Israel. It might absorb Lebanon entirely in the process. Jordan, if allowed, would take its reward as well. Poor Palestinians again. There is no justice among thieves. No one should expect a UN resolution in favor of the Palestinians.

Unfortunately, Muslim leaders realize Israel is weaker now, both internally and abroad, due to Muslim control of so many international institutions and even organizations they are not members of - the EU, for example. Concepts of right and wrong have no meaning in a world that manages to be both immoral and amoral. "Right" prevails because the winners of war declare they're right. Nazi race theories were wrong because Germany lost the war; otherwise they would be "right". As the Arab press reminds us every day.

Israel wasn't created on the back of any existing country. Therefore, when one sees how the Arabs have denied her any rights of existence, even today, one is well advised not to engage in debate, but to accept it as fact, and act on this information. An American Congressman from New York, Jerrold Nadler, commenting on Palestinian suicide bombings, said that any country facing a similar situation would carpet bomb the enemy. He suggested that if it were happening to America, B-52 bombers would be used. Israel, however, has bigger fish to fry.

It is time to stop being sensitive about Arab honor. Honor is nobody's inherited privilege. People either have it or they don't. Collectively or individually. It is being used as a political slogan. If the Arab countries want to believe they won in 1973, that's fine. Let the Christian world kowtow to Arab honor. Israel had better not.

Second Movement: Largo

What to expect from the UN, Europe and the USA

Two thousand years of Christianity led to many holocausts: these contained inventions about Jews, plots, conspiracies, accusations of witchcraft, inquisitions, and most resulted in murder, exile, and ostracism. Ironically, the Holocaust is a detail of history. A big detail in terms of its magnitude, but nothing new in terms of outcome. The same thing could happen again in the Muslim world. One must pay attention to the conspiracy stories and inventions, which assess all Jews as unfit to live, of not being humans, and call for their annihilation. Whose enlightenment is Israel waiting for?

There have been too many tragedies. Millions died because the allies didn't want to bomb the concentration camps in WWII and house the prisoners. Few Jews were accepted as refugees, even in Palestine itself. High-level betrayals took place in the Arab-Israeli wars. It is time to use all this as examples to protect Jews from having to deal with similar issues in the future.

Unfortunately, what most foreign analysts and experts suggest for solving all these pending problems work only from a Western perspective. The idea of Israel not being allowed to win because outside powers don't permit it must cease. It is time to end this inferiority complex. When the oil goes, anti-Semitism will remain. Oil was not a factor during most of human history.

The UN does not stop Sudan and other countries from committing genocide, because it is too busy thwarting Israel. Does anyone expect the UN to realize this and tell the public? Can't anyone see the UN Secretary General telling the world, with approval from the General Assembly, that the reason so many millions were dying from malnutrition, neglect, abuse, pogroms, and religion wars is because the UN was kept busy making Israel behave herself?

The Palestinian refugees are not likely to be going to Gaza or even the West Bank in any significant numbers. There is no room. They are not wanted there. The West doesn't want them, either. The Arab states don't want them. In their majority they've never been to Israel. But they are one of the best weapons for the destruction of Israel. This farce, over 56 years old, abetted by the world community, has reached such absurd proportions that the UN now needs the play to be completed by ending Israel as a Jewish State. Of course these refugees don't want to live under Jewish rule, should Israel make the mistake of allowing them back after decades of brutality and brainwashing in the camps. But encouraging the 'right of return' is a way for the world to save face. And the world will do it.

Europe has always been a very anti-Semitic land. The level and intensity varies from place to place, even when "legally" suppressed in communist Eastern Europe. Anti-Semitism in Europe is like the frog game, where different frogs keep popping up from different holes at different times, and no matter how often one hits them with a hammer, the game never ends. In order to win, Israel must destroy the mechanism. History explains why no matter how much hate and terror against Israel and themselves, so many Europeans continue to blame her.

During the period leading to the creation of Israel, the British, after being responsible for the death of so many European Jews, did their best to reduce her area to minimal proportions. The Negev desert was to be denied, under the flimsy excuse that it was needed as a place for a British air base to counter the Soviets. Today, at the same time he preaches friendship, the current British PM openly says he doesn't recognize Israel as a Jewish state, because "it is not helpful". To what? To whom? She'd better not expect the brutally anti-Semitic countries of Eastern Europe to be her new buddies, either.

The US people are not against Israel. The US State Department is. It is up to Israel to find ways to offset it, working with those influential Americans who support her. But if this doesn't work, Israel must act on her own behalf. While they need oil, the US will never allow Israel to have final control over the Promised Land. The US supports Saudi Arabia, and this means the State Department supports terrorism. It is an example of the theater of the absurd applied again. Unfortunately, one must conclude that should another 9/11 tragedy, perpetrated by similar elements, befall it, the US may invade another country for all good reasons, while still continuing to press Israel for concessions. The Saudis have powerful connections in America, after all.

Israel is not "allowed" to retain any land beyond 1967, because the US State Dept. won't "permit" it, even though UN resolutions such as 242 are clear about it. Eventually the US may force Israel to get out of the Golan, although it was part of the Promised Land. And then there is the issue of Jerusalem. The US has 2 consulates there, but no embassy. Furthermore, since the US can't control the Palestinians' high birth rate, it controls Jewish immigration by keeping Israel as small as possible, weaker than it would be otherwise, making it less attractive to Diaspora Jews who might have gone there otherwise. It's once again a way of partially satisfying the Saudis, of course.

Ideology can not compete with oil. A pledge is a pledge, says the US Secretary of State, to ensure Israel's PM will not harm Arafat. A pledge is a pledge as far as Israel leaving its settlements. But a pledge is not a pledge when it comes to the US moving its embassy to Jerusalem.

Several people say that Israel can not displease the US, her only ally. But virtually the whole world is against the US in many ways, including friendly countries in Europe and the Middle East. The US hasn't sidelined them. Why such a great fear? Fear of saving the country from annihilation? Fear the US will only give weapons to Egypt, knowing well that this would force a pre-emptive attack by Israel? The worst fear is fear itself.

The US State Dept. in the mid-90s declared the Iranian National Council of Resistance (NCR) a terrorist organization, at the request of the Iranian government, when it was trying to normalize relations with that country. But the US was supporting the NCR at the time. Is there a lesson to be learned? How does an Israeli leader know that tomorrow the US will not support a one-state solution, and then something else even worse? The Israeli card is played in different ways. Israel is helped, then let fall, and picked up before she hits the ground. This is done via military aid to her enemies, threats of withholding aid, and sometimes voting for anti-Israel resolutions at the UN, and some that ever slowly strangle the nation, like the road map. However, it is not fair to see the US as an enemy of Israel.

The State Dept. and European politicians are not fanatic ideologues. They are very pragmatic. Pure political ideologies don't carry the day. Business, big business, and in this case mainly oil business, but also weapons manufacturers, banks, and others, are the ones responsible for the anti-Israel policies carried out by governments. Either through direct lobbying and influence peddling or through a revolving door, they get their executives in and out of government - and at all levels. Understanding this point is crucial, because it provides Israel with the phenomenal opportunity of getting back at the West and at the Muslims, with relatively low risk when compared to a nuclear assault against her. Why? Because the West's pragmatism is militarily and economically stronger than Muslim fanaticism.

There are other diplomatic and political alliances in the making, besides the EU, and Asia-Japan. Emerging countries like Brazil, South Africa, India, and China will create new regional and global bodies to offset the US and the EU. These are not likely to be Israel's greatest supporters, whether or not US influence wanes. First world countries versus second and third world countries is not a battle that will help Israel. Quite the contrary, it is something that can be exploited by the Arab nations. In his recent visit to the Middle East, Brazilian president Lula's attacks on Israel were there for anyone to see. So is South Africa's, and now Turkey's and India's.

Israeli politicians got us all into this existential threat. Israeli politicians have to get the nation out of it. Not the US. They'd better think of the Kurds when trying to understand US and British foreign policies, and why these foreign policy bodies support a Palestinian state but not a Kurdish one. "Trust but verify", said Reagan to Gorbachev. That should be an understatement, as far as Israel is concerned.

What to expect from the Arabs

With the ideological and military competition between the old USSR and the US over for now, the Middle East is the "darling" area for world leaders, and simply trying to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict is the shortest path to a Nobel Peace Prize. The outcome for Israel of this prize given to the Oslo players has been more war and less peace, more dead, and a renewed desire by the Arabs to destroy her.

'No peace, no negotiation, no recognition' was a simple but complete summary of Arab strategy. Now there are a plethora of peace initiatives, peace plans, "hudnas" of different lengths, and, as a result, Israel is at more risk than ever. The new solution is to expel more Jews. How many diplomats and politicians does it take to change a bulb, sorry, to bring peace to the area? One can't even check the latest edition of the Guiness Book of Records. The number increases daily.

There's a reason why the PA and the Arab countries brainwash their people and children - to ensure that even if they are forced to coexist in one way or another with Israel, the enmity will continue, until Israel's destruction. Nobody follows recipes to make dishes one doesn't like. The Arabs neither recognize the Jewish Holocaust, nor any ancient and religious rights to the land. This is not a recipe for peace, but for annihilation and denial. By abandoning territory and expelling Jews from the land, the Israeli government is assuring the future generations of a very frightening coexistence with terrorism.

Recently, Jordan asked the Israeli PM to acknowledge that east of the Jordan River is not the land of the Palestinians - meaning it is not the land of any Arab planning to reside on the West side of the river when Israel is destroyed. For Jordan's king this is a swell situation, preferably with Israel patrolling the border. This means Palestinians can attack her soldiers from both sides of the river. The Israeli population, of course, would continue to be targeted as before, from Gaza and the West Bank. In other words, Israeli troops will be playing the role of foreign troops so often wanted by the Palestinians. They will be protecting Arabs on both sides, while they themselves and the Israelis are attacked. It's the theater of the absurd all over again.

Israel and the world have accepted the lie that there was a Palestinian nation or people. The price to pay will be a heavy one, if a Palestinian state is created in the West Bank and Gaza, as opposed to Jordan or elsewhere. Because these people have been brainwashed to deny the Jewish connection to the land, Israel will be faced with: 1) a neighboring population desiring to destroy her to claim the land back; 2) a new country going nowhere, if any kind of education and historic normalization occurs there, because their people will realize they have no history of their own, and are trapped in large numbers in a tiny territory, unable to immigrate to even other Arab countries where most of their predecessors came from, because nobody would want them, after all the trouble to give them a state. Furthermore, where will the refugees go? If all Palestinian refugees in Syria, for example, were to sign a petition, unanimously asking the Syrian government to let them stay as Syrian residents and stating they no longer want to return to a place most have never been to, it would be denied under the allegation of a Zionist conspiracy.

It has always been a Muslim policy, when conquering any area, to take over the holy places of the local inhabitants and to turn them into mosques. It is a way of putting down the conquered people - to show them that Islam will take away the most important things to them, and there's nothing they can do about it. They have done this extensively not only in Israel, but in Europe, India, and even, recently, in Afghanistan, destroying the magnificent Buddhist statues in that country. When the Jordanians took over East Jerusalem in 1949, they destroyed centuries-old synagogues, the Jewish Quarter, kicked all Jews out, and forbade visits to the Western Wall. Fundamentalists in Egypt have said that once in power the Pyramids will be gone, since they are pagan symbols. Tiny Israel is considered 'infidel" and can never be accepted.

With some Israelis even talking about trading land in the Negev with the Egyptians, the theater of the absurd is performing again. Israel is supposed to create a contiguous Palestinian state. She may help create a contiguous Arab world from the Atlantic to the Persian Gulf. It is a fantastic insight. The world could also see four independent Palestinian states one day: Jordan, Gaza, West Bank, and Israel proper. Actually five, if Jerusalem is turned into an independent Palestinian city-state, the jewel of the crown. After all, the UN and the EU have never seen a Palestinian state they didn't like, as long as it occurs at Israel's expense.

The world has trouble accepting a Jewish state that in 50 years has accomplished more than virtually any nation, almost on her own, and while in a permanent state of war. To minimize success, many people say that Israel benefits from well-educated Jews from other nations. It looks like Israel has invented a new concept: immigration. The Western countries don't actually stop it physically these days, but some of their leaders call the whole thing a failed experiment. The Arabs, in turn, deny the rights of Diaspora Jews to come home. It seems one has found two more definitions for the word "jealousy".

What to expect from Saudi Arabia

After WWI, the British used most of the designated Jewish land to create the kingdom of Transjordan, as consolation to the Hashemites for the end of their role as protectors of Mecca and Medina. In spite of it, an agreement was reached between the Zionists and the Hashemite family, for the creation of two states, one Jewish and one Arab, with the Jordan River as the border. Jerusalem, of course, was a backwater place, never essential to the Arabs until Israel conquered it. Had that agreement, which called for friendship and cooperation, been respected by the British, the Jewish state would have been born 30 years earlier. Unfortunately, the House of Saud, with Ibn Saud as the first monarch of Saudi Arabia and custodian of the two holy cities, was allowed and helped by the British Foreign Office to oppose the creation of any Jewish State in the area whatsoever. A supporter of Hitler's solution to the "Jewish problem", Ibn Saud, with the cooperation of the then mufti of Jerusalem, Arafat's uncle, was the precursor of all that was to come. Until today, the Saudis are using their oil money to promote anti-Semitism in the Arab world and beyond, with the undisguised aim of destroying Israel. Other wealthy sheikdoms in the Persian Gulf follow suit.

The theater of the absurd reinvented itself again, when, after 9/11, President Bush invited Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to his ranch in Texas, and told him: "You are our ally in the war against terrorism". The Saudi royal family has been extensively linked to the funding of Al-Qaida, the Muslim Brotherhood, and a plethora of other organizations and causes to spread Wahhabism everywhere. Even the Saudi ambassador to Britain has published poems in British newspapers praising suicide terrorists. The power of the oil companies in the Western world is such that the role of the House of Saud as the main supporter of extremism and international terrorism continues to be covered up. Saudi peace plan after Saudi peace plan attests to the previous statement. Saudi proposals at the UN are worth their weight in oil to the world.

Saudi Arabia - the land of public executions; the land where 50% of the population is considered as inferior human beings. If they treat their women like this, no wonder they consider Jews as descendants of monkeys and pigs. Saudi Arabia is the land of abducted children of Saudi fathers and foreign mothers; the land of documented torture of foreigners living and working there; a country that, fortunately for Israel, holds the key to Israel's success. If Israel doesn't do what needs to be done now, after almost 100 years of Saudi abuses against her and all Jews, then maybe Israel should pack it in.

But let's give credit when credit is due. The Saudis, as the princes of oil, know how to be consistent in their leadership. No compromises with Israel, no recognition of her right to exist anywhere, no recognition of Jews as human beings. Any and all of their "peace proposals" are death warrants against her. They also know how to connive with the world against Israel - but that's the easiest part. Overall, the Saudis are far more consistent than the last half a dozen Israeli governments. When they offer "serious" peace proposals and road maps, the reader had better remember that Saudis believe the Zionists are the ones responsible for the latest attacks on Saudi soil, with a 95% degree of certainty. The pressure is relentless.

Why do smart Israelis to the right of center continue to see this issue as mainly an Israeli-Palestinian conflict? What do they think the final outcome is going to be? Israel, as the decades progress, and dependence on Arab oil starts to dwindle while WMDs proliferate, could, Palestinian state or no Palestinian state, be on the receiving end of a last and concerted Saudi-led effort to destroy her. Since the end of WWII, the country mostly responsible overall for the death of Jews, directly or indirectly, including the financing of wars, has been Saudi Arabia. If Israel ceases to exist, it will be because of Saudi Arabia.

Third Movement: Scherzo (Molto vivace)

A scenario for the destruction of Israel

No potential Holocaust has ever been stopped. Massacres always occur before any halting is possible. World wars, Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenians in Turkey, the list goes on and on. The Arabs and the Iranians know that. They know that if they can neutralize Israel's response, they will get away with genocide. Even Hitler, brutal at home before the war, didn't kill Jews outside his Reich before starting the war. The Arabs, however, do it all the time to their own different peoples, in a variety of ways, with the world watching. Hitler wanted the number of European Jews left over in Europe to fit in a car, in order to parade them. The Arabs can certainly do without it. During the Cold War, Western Europeans worried that the US would not risk Chicago's destruction in order to save Hamburg. Why do Israelis think the US will risk it all for Tel-Aviv?

What if the Saudis or other "peace loving" Arab countries work in total secrecy with Muslim terrorists to plant a few very powerful non-conventional weapons across the US, say, ten bombs in ten large cities? Suppose that these terrorists quietly approach the US government and reveal the whereabouts of three of these weapons to prove their lethal intentions. They could then proceed to blackmail the country with the threat of millions of deaths, in case the US retaliates against an Iranian, Syrian, Egyptian, or Pakistani attack on Israel, using conventional weapons or not.

Let us explore this scenario even further. The terrorists could simply demand, before or after attacking one of their US targets, that the US invade Israel and start the process of removing Jews and transferring assets and land to Arab forces. It doesn't have to be done overnight. In theory nobody needs to die. Unless, of course, the US calls their bluff, resulting in millions of Americans dead. What does anyone think the State Department's recommendation is going to be? The scenario can become even more realistic considering the ongoing pressure on Israel to abandon its non-conventional weapons. Such pressure can only accelerate, as the "peace" negotiations continue.

And if the US were to come to the military rescue of Israel regardless, risking Chicago for Tel-Aviv, the price afterwards might be so high that it is probably not worth it.

The Perils of De-nazification

Many people have commented on the need for the de-nazification of the Palestinians, meaning the reform of their institutions, propaganda vehicles, and education system, in order to eliminate the hate and paranoia they have been inculcated with over the years, including the refugees in the neighboring countries. There are many difficulties with this approach.

After WWII, Germany and her allies in Europe were soundly beaten. These countries were by no means backward entities with distorted religious views. Leaving aside for a moment the interest of the West in stopping as many nations as possible in the area from falling under Communism, it was well understood that the axis countries and some of their allies in Eastern Europe during the war were there to stay. A process of economic reconstruction, a degree of punishment against some of the perpetrators of war crimes, combined with the previous quasi-democratic past, made de-nazification fairly successful. The intent of stopping Germany from ever causing WWIII was also a strong motivator. Religion may have played a contributing role, as well. Guilty over the Holocaust may have helped. It didn't, however, stop a few million Germans from being transferred from the Czech Sudetenland to Germany, or Poland acquiring some German land. But the world survived.

What is overlooked, however, is that few Jews were left in the most affected countries, such as Germany, Austria, Poland, the Baltic states and Hungary. Let us suppose, for example, that instead of the creation of Israel, the Allies had decided to form an independent Jewish State in Central Europe, against the wishes of the affected nations. They would certainly have a point claiming that there was never a Jewish state in the area. Why not move the Jews to Palestine, they would have said. Furthermore, anti-Semitism didn't die just because Germany lost the war.

Under this fictitious scenario, what would have happened if a small Jewish homeland had been forcefully established in land annexed from Austria and Germany, Austria and Hungary, Poland and the Baltic states, the Ukraine, or any other permutations, in countries requiring a certain degree of de-nazification? The only commodity of which there was no shortage of after the war was anti-Semitism. Can anyone imagine a peaceful Jewish state surviving in the area, with or without the Cold War? How long until the affected countries decided they wanted their land back and the Jews out? Wouldn't it be an even more precarious situation for the Jews than the one the Kurds face today, their ancestral land straddling four hostile nations? In other words, would de-nazification have worked well, then? That's food for thought.

Let us extrapolate this scenario to the Middle East, with the understanding that Israel is the natural land of the Jews. The first problem is that all the Arab countries in the area are unpleasant places. Extremely cruel, both to Jews and to their own populations, and bent on destroying Israel. There is no right for Israel to be on the land, period. The second problem is that these countries, although European or Ottoman colonies for many years, did not suffer the debacle of losing two world wars, as Germany did. Israeli victories have been mild by comparison. The world has made sure of that. So much so that Egypt even celebrates finishing second to Israel in 1973. The third problem is that Arab kings and presidential dictators, in the Persian Gulf, in Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and many other places, give power to their children once they leave the scene. The hundreds of little princes in Saudi Arabia are well tutored by their royal elders on the need to destroy Israel and the Jews. So they are all up to the job, no matter who turns out to be king. The same thing happens in other monarchies in the area. In Egypt, Syria, and Iraq, for example, Mubarak, Assad, and Hussein taught their would-be successors well. Their children take power full of hate. This is not a function of the education system. This is taught at home, at palaces and mansions. How easy is it to de-nazify?

Because the Palestinians do not live in a vacuum, one can not simply propose to de-nazify them without doing the same elsewhere in the region. It makes more sense to de-nazify the neighboring states first, since they are sovereign countries engaged in terrorism. How does one do it? The Bush plan for democracy? Good luck. Unfortunately, analogies with Germany and Japan after World War II don't work very well. One can not disregard little things like nationalism, Islam, terrorism, the power of the existing Arab system to distort anything, xenophobia, ethnic hatreds, lack of local democratic experience, and a dozen other issues.

It doesn't have to be Israel's problem, though.

Furthermore, who will de-nazify most of the world nations, as illustrated by the UN's posture towards Israel? Remember, Britain was not a country in need of de-nazification after WWII, but look at what they did to the Holocaust survivors trying to get to Palestine. The same behavior was shown before and during the war. The difference is that they set up their concentration camps in Cyprus.

Transfer is part of the solution, but not as proposed

We've seen that de-nazification, as a way for peace, is not likely to work very well. Besides, Israel would still be giving up part of the Holy Land permanently, having already lost the "Jordanian" side.

The Ellon plan, an alternative offered by Benny Ellon, suggests

"the establishment of a cease-fire and negotiations under international auspices to relocate refugees in Arab countries and the dismantling of refugee camps, along with the establishment of a Jordan-Palestinian state with Amman as its capital.
"Arabs who remain in Judea and Samaria would be offered citizenship in the Jordanian-Palestinian state. Arab citizens of Israel also would be offered such status. If the Arabs of Judea and Samaria breach the terms of the agreement, they would be forcibly deported to the other side of the Jordan River."

The obvious problems with the plan are that the demographic threat is still there, the Palestinians won't agree to live on Israeli land while being citizens of another country, the Arabs won't accept it, the world won't accept it, therefore, no negotiations under international auspices are going to occur. Another nasty war is a more likely outcome. Its result? The same status quo.

That leaves the transfer of the Palestinians from Gaza, Judea and Samaria to Jordan, Egypt, or elsewhere, as an option. Let us imagine a peaceful transfer, supported by huge amounts of money, to ensure a far superior quality of life than they have at the moment. This could also involve resettling the refugees among several countries. By comparison with other similar examples, the distances involved are very small. And the population swap forcefully initiated by the Arab states in 1948 - when Jews who had lived in Arab countries before the Arabs came were expelled - would now be completed.

Several works regarding "Transfer" have been produced. Some of the ideas introduced seemed very fair, such as doing it in stages, town by town, village by village, using economic incentives and disincentives, carrot and stick approaches, jobs and residences awaiting the Palestinians, to be completed over a year or two. Many Palestinian are not likely to be thrilled, however, the other party, the Jews, has nowhere to go. Unfortunately, the ideas as proposed are non-starters.

The problem is not the timing of the proposal's implementation, but time itself. Not even Israeli technology has been able to stop the passage of time. In other words, nobody will sit idle while this is happening. The probability of world cooperation or at least compliance is statistically insignificant. What is significant is that no peace treaty can be signed under this proposed outcome. The probability of Israel being hit by a WMD from a sovereign country or terrorist group while this process is taking place is very high. Does anyone expect the Muslim world to extend red carpets for the Palestinians to walk on during transfer, in order to make Israel's task easier? Does anyone expect the new Iraqi government to offer flying carpets from Baghdad's market for the Palestinians to fly on during transfer, in order to make Israel's task faster?

In order to offer a valid comparison with the following segment, let us briefly identify some of the likely responses to a forced transfer as proposed by so many people, notwithstanding the fact that predicting the future accurately in any context, let alone the Middle East's, is a very difficult proposition.

The Arab leaders could not sit idly, since by doing so, and as a result of their own propaganda, they would probably be overthrown and killed. All neighboring countries to Israel would be forced to launch a war, even if they were likely to lose it. Peace treaties would be abrogated. Iran might join the war directly. Hizballah certainly will. The war could come at any time during this lengthy transfer process, therefore, Israel would lose the surprise factor. The use of WMDs, chemical or biological, could not be discarded, even before a war, forcing retaliation. The Arab leaders would unite in order to save their own skins, a bloodbath would take place in Gaza and the West Bank between Israel and Palestinian forces, and an Arab oil embargo would likely occur.

The world community would come together to punish Israel severely, besides perhaps officially calling for her termination. Among many resolutions to be passed, the UN would reinstate "Zionism is racism", and vote for expelling Israel. The US would, at the very least, approve most of the anti-Israel resolutions, and place a military and economic embargo against her. Terror attacks against US targets and citizens at home, and against US interests and troops abroad, would increase. Europeans and other nations would be targets, as well. The intensity of attacks against Jews in Europe would increase manyfold, causing panic and death. Many might leave, under frightening conditions, to live in a weakened and alienated Israel. The country's WMDs might have to be let go as the result of an American ultimatum. The transfer of Palestinians might or might not be completed, but the number of casualties would definitely be very high. The internal political and economic situation of Israel would likely be disastrous. International troops might come to Gaza and the West Bank, or at least to the international borders, with orders not to let any Palestinians out.

So much for "Transfer" as generally proposed. "Checkmate" will attempt to show that the likely outcomes of its actions by all parties are better for Israel than the above. It is all a matter of control.

Fourth Movement: Allegro con fuoco


The Arabs at present have Israel trapped in a number of fronts. Pressure to eliminate her nuclear and other weapons, to concede land and parts of Jerusalem, to return the "refugees", these all move in tandem, or one by one, but the important factor is that these take away not only the country's legitimacy, but also its raison d'etre. They can win in all these fronts over time. What should Israel negotiate under these circumstances? A slower demise? What should the Arabs negotiate? Their victory?

She is almost on her own, Israel. Humane transfer is the best she can offer to the world, in order that she can stay alive and exist, and this is a lot more than the hand she's been dealt. One can't be 100% moral when one is dead.

If something spectacular and catastrophic is coming, then Israel had better be the one to do it. The timing and the opportunity are almost perfect. There is no USSR, the Arab states are in relative disarray, US troops are already in the area (Iraq), and terrorists are fighting against the West. Why wait until the enemy gets some serious WMDs? Let Israel save the world and be blamed for it. If she does nothing, she will be blamed, anyway.

In order to save Israel, her most powerful enemy must cease to exist in its current form. That's Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia must be transformed, not necessarily democratized. And Saudi Arabia is weak now. In his own way, Bin Laden is right. Israel and Bin Laden have their own reasons for destroying the Saudi monarchy. It seems bizarre. "Checkmate" will not lead to warm Arab-Jewish relationships, but at the same time it requires little cooperation by the world.

"Checkmate" must be initiated in total surprise, without warning anyone, principally the US, of course. Variations on the concept are possible. The strategic planners in Israel can come up with changes. It is better than using WMDs. Less people will die than if the present situation continues and leads to disaster.

"Checkmate" is a blueprint.

The first step is for the Israeli Air Force to attack and destroy the holy mosque in Medina. It is the closest to Israel, and not as important as Mecca's. Destroy the mosque using conventional weapons. Don't touch the city. Don't touch the people. Do it at first light, because Israel may need as many hours of daylight as possible, on that day. Do not do it during a Muslim holy day. Acting very early in the morning ensures fewer casualties. It also ensures the Western leaders will be disturbed from their precious sleep to "handle" the crisis. She should also destroy a Saudi oil rig - only one - as a message to the world.

At the same moment, have the IDF destroy the two mosques on the Temple Mount. Once again, almost nobody needs to get hurt. If possible, set up a close circuit to Ramallah, so that Arafat can watch it without knowing what it is all about. Then within one minute or two, kill him. It is better this way. Arresting and putting him on trial is likely to lead to many deaths or kidnappings of Jews in Israel, and attacks against Israeli interests abroad, in order to free him. On the other hand, it might not.

Why attack both Medina and the Temple Mount? Why not only one? Because if Israel destroys only the Jerusalem mosques, the Muslim reaction will be one of rage. While if Israel destroys only the Medina mosque, the Muslim reaction will be one of fear. Israel needs both feelings to be present - rage and fear.

At this point, planned military and political preparations will be put into action. It would be desirable to have the fence completed, but it is not strictly necessary. There will be no million martyrs on the way to Jerusalem. Not even one hundred. When dealing with Arabs, fear is the greatest psychological inducement to compliance.

Israel must at once release prepared warnings, both publicly and in private, to all Muslim countries in the world, as well as to the US, EU, and UN, as to why she was forced to take this course of action, accompanied by a series of non-negotiable demands. For example, she will announce that: "You Muslims still have your most important religious site, Mecca. We Jews only have Jerusalem. Please think about it, think very hard about it". She will tell the governments of Pakistan and the US that if the former launches a nuclear bomb in retaliation, both Mecca and Pakistan will be destroyed. It will announce a similar message to all Arab countries and Iran. Any non-conventional attack against her will lead to the destruction of Mecca and the offending nation(s). She will announce that in case of a retaliatory conventional attack or war, she will reserve the right to destroy Mecca and the offending nations by any methods of her choosing, should her defeat look likely. She will include Mecca, always Mecca, in all her communiqués. She will hint that no oil fields are safe, if she isn't. This will ensure no NATO country will be foolish enough to try something "heroic".

She must put the country on a state of alert, and have her forces in position to control both Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Arabs. There will be protests, but mostly are likely to be manageable, given the magnitude of what she has done and what she is threatening to do. Surprise, determination, and troops on the streets are needed. At this point, meaning right away, she should fully engage the US to reinforce her messages. The US will strongly disapprove, but pragmatism will prevail, as it normally does. The oil is important. There will be clashes with Hizballah and Palestinian terrorist groups, but once again, Israel has the advantage of surprise. And yes, there may be a regional war, but it will be easier for her to win than under the regular "Transfer" proposals, since now she has the control, the momentum, and the initiative.

Israel will also issue the same kind of warnings to terrorist organizations trying to smuggle WMDs. If any is used, Mecca goes, and maybe a few Arab countries, as well. It is as simple as that. The intention is to have Muslims policing Muslims in order to save Islam. For a very long time.

Israel can now specify her terms. It will involve the organized transfer of as many Palestinian and Israeli Arabs as she deems necessary to regain control of her land, including the Golan, Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem. It is a decision to be made in advance, of course. The fence will be moved to the Jordan River.

Israel may also want to have a say where the Palestinians go, to Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and maybe even to Saudi Arabia. Now is the time for the world community to get involved and facilitate the task. And to convince the Arabs that they'd better cooperate. Let the British, who helped create the original problem, discuss with King Abdallah of Jordan whether the Palestinians moving in should be integrated or given an independent country. Distance-wise this will be the shortest and the most humane human migration in history.

On an ongoing basis, Israel will determine the threat level to Mecca and to the oil fields according to the danger of attack either by sovereign nations, or terrorist suicide bombings. There won't be a lot of diplomatic relations between Israel and the Muslim world for a long time to come. Issues like saving the Dead Sea will need to be mediated by the US, who will be looking for a constructive role to play. It may be better to all concerned. Mecca will exist only as long as Israel exists and is safe. It goes without saying that Israel will announce that should a future war against her be launched, and any enemy territory conquered by her, it will then be annexed in perpetuity. No peace treaties, and no "hudnas".

Time has always been on the side of the Arabs. Furthermore, the last few years have shown that from a strategic perspective any unforeseen action by Israeli leaders has been towards surrendering. That's why "Checkmate" has the additional benefit of removing the time advantage against Israel. After "Checkmate", time is on nobody's side, anymore.

Judaism survived 2000 years without a home, and without Jerusalem and a temple on the Temple Mount. How long can Islam survive without Mecca? Why find out?

Is the world really interested in whether Israel is a light unto the nations? Can this concept be put on hold for a few generations in return for Israel continuing to exist? After all, there are corrupt Jewish politicians in Israel, organized crime, common thieves, family abuse, just like anywhere else. The US nuked two cities in Japan, at the end of the war, alleging that it was saving the lives of a million of its soldiers. It killed hundreds of thousands, with more fatal consequences over several generations. Rightly or wrongly, the US at that stage was under no existential threat. Compare the two situations and decide if "Checkmate" is not preferable to WMDs launched by either side out of hate or desperation.

The US can be very predictable. That's the country that led a coalition in1991 to liberate Kuwait, while all the royal family ran away, living in luxury, and attending parties abroad. Then the US brought the same royal family back, and nothing changed. Actually, besides expelling 300,000 Palestinian workers, the government declared 300,000 Kuwaiti nomads as non-Kuwaitis, even though they had been in Kuwait for generations. They were fired from their jobs, their children forbidden from attending schools, and now live in settlements, some surrounded by leftover Iraqi mines. Checkpoints ensure these poor souls can't reach Kuwait City (information taken from "Price of Honor", by Jan Goodwin). Another "good" deed from a Muslim state going unrecognized by the world. Meanwhile, Israel is called racist. That's why "Checkmate" can't be shared with anyone in advance. "Checkmate" is designed to bring some normalcy to the world, to save Israel, to solve the Palestinian issue, and have these human beings find a better life. That's what the world will be engaged in, while having more control over the oil fields.

All future Arab leaders will understand that they could be targeted in case of a war. How many brave Arab leaders are there? Is there one who has led his men into battle, instead of sending others to their deaths, or cheering terrorists and suicide bombers? No, and why not? Because these are dynasties, whether monarchies or dictatorships. These are families determined to enjoy their control and wealth, not to die, not to lose power or money. And that's why nothing will happen to Israel.

Expected Consequences

The Saudi monarchy won't last a week. The king of Saudi Arabia calls himself the custodian of the two holy sites. Since one is gone, and the other is in peril, he would have failed in his task. The regime will be quickly overthrown, probably by the military. Should a religious person or even Bin Laden himself take power, nothing changes as far as Israel is concerned. Her conditions are clear. But Bin Laden is not likely to prevail, either. With the Saudi monarchy gone, it is more likely the country will have a US-backed Musharraf-type leader, or split along tribal lines. For Israel, that's immaterial; peace with Saudi Arabia is not important. There will be other governments overthrown in the Persian Gulf, and, hopefully, in the countries neighboring Israel. This time the world may show some muscle and make sure the old dictators are gone. It will be in the interests of the international community to protect Israel.

Of course, the US will have to move its troops from Iraq towns to protect the oil fields in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. They will get a lot of help from the EU and the UN, this time. Therefore, no oil crisis should occur. Having US troops leaving Arab cities to patrol the oil fields will decrease the number of attacks on them, and greatly reduce fatalities. This is the kind of PR Israel can take advantage of with the help of her friends, to endeavor herself to the American public. If the US play its cards right, it will be in a stronger moral position. Pressure will be put on the Administration in charge not to allow the State Department to act in such a dishonorable way again. It should work for a while. Americans know when they see a winner, Israel, and how to turn a threat into an opportunity.

Jihad will change its meaning from offensive to defensive struggle, from destroying Israel and taking over the world to protecting Mecca and the religion of Islam. Muslim countries will police each other and themselves, to make sure noone makes a terrible mistake to jeopardize Mecca. Two great religions, two holy cities, we'd better think of each other as equals, from now on.

The families of the victims of 9/11, and the victims of terrorism in Israel will get a measure of closure.

Israel should make Jerusalem its religious, as well as political, capital, and offer no explanations to UN member countries. They've done their share of terrorism. The country is small. Embassies can stay in Tel-Aviv, or anywhere else. Their having their embassies anywhere on the land is a privilege they don't deserve. Why make Jerusalem an even more expensive city than it already is?

Saudi and Gulf money stashed abroad and "belonging" to their royal families can be used in part to pay for the settlement and betterment of the Palestinians refugees and those transferred. The UN will gladly agree, because their executives can take a cut, like the oil for food program. Most of the money should be returned to the people of those countries.

As per Jan Goodwin's "Price of Honor", since 1974 Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE have had a confidential agreement with the US, under which their massive petro-dollar investments in America are to be kept secret. Otherwise, the oil flow would allegedly stop. As Goodwin points out, this "flight capital" ensures the royal families involved of total control of their citizens' oil wealth - robbery, in other words, courtesy of the West, and at the expense of Israel. This is a chance for the US and Europe to look good and do a transfer of this stolen wealth back to the owners. And apologize. It is the best recipe to avoid terrorism in the future.

International terrorism will suffer a blow, because the conditions will have changed overnight. The rationale for supporting these organizations will be gone. There will be deportations of Muslims considered dangerous by the Western nations back to their countries. The ones remaining will be expected to abide by the laws of the country they live in. Most of them already do. That's all anyone can ask for.

Will Jews continue to be attacked in Europe? Potentially yes. Certainly European Muslims will go on a rampage. Many Christian Europeans might join in. It is a calculated risk all Jews must accept. Nevertheless, in order to maintain order and avoid chaos, these governments will likely deploy enough forces to maintain order. What other alternative will they have? They must get tough for their own sake. If the situation of the Jews in some European countries becomes untenable, then moving to Israel is the solution. A stronger Israel, that is. Maybe the one million Jews desired are coming home, after all. This time they are free to go. This time the British can not set up a naval blockade outside Haifa with impunity.

Let the Europeans replace any Jewish brain drain with young Saudis with degrees in Islamic studies.

The UN is likely to cease to exist as is. A different model will need to be developed, in which international crises are handled with the purpose of saving people regardless of whom they are.

There will be economic sanctions against Israel. After all, politics is a game. But these are not likely to be too long or harmful. Israel will have done the world a lot of good, and nobody needs to say "thanks".

Conclusion: Importance of people versus structures and holy sites

Consider the consequences of the destruction of a nation, her people, and all they have built. Then reflect on whether "Checkmate" or a variation of it is appropriate.

Absurd? Make a relative comparison. Why is it absurd? Are WMDs against Israel better? Just because the Arabs and the world have (correctly) assumed that Israel won't do certain things, unless she is nuked, is on the verge of military annihilation, or something similar? They have eroded her, little by little, decade after decade, encircling her, undermining her, under the thinly disguised cover of perpetual Arab dictatorships and Western cowardice. Therefore, they must all now be taught a lesson.

When others compare Israel's plight with the situation in Northern Ireland, for example, the main point is missed. Nobody is threatening to drown or exterminate anyone there. If worst comes to worst their citizens hold Irish or British citizenship. During the Cold War, ideology made the world unsafe. However, neither the US nor the USSR had planned to occupy each other's country, push the local population into the sea, and move their own people to colonize the loser's land.

Muslims traditionally have turned other people's holy sites into mosques, or destroyed them and built mosques on the same spot, burying the former and replacing them with the symbol of the "true faith". They respect nothing. Everything is done in the name of Islam, and anything else is either denied or considered work done by infidels. In Israel's case, they claim she has never existed - neither her history, nor the Temple - and today's Jews are not even Jews, although they should be killed just to be on the safe side. Let's reverse the process without mass killings, and rebalance the worry of survival more equitably.

Of course, in the end, the US and Israel will agree that the former should take credit for saving Mecca and Islam. Some things, after all, never change.

Are structures worth sparing, when we have hundreds of suicide bombings, the State is slowly being undermined, and her people threatened with annihilation? Who but the victims should have the right to decide what is right and wrong? Think about it for a second. We're talking destruction and genocide all over again. Is a holy site more important? What if "Checkmate" could have been done in time to save 3000 people's lives from 9/11? Is the Medina mosque worth more than the life of the person reading this article right now, his family, her people? Non-Muslim holy sites certainly don't seem worth much - look how the Arabs vandalized and destroyed Joseph's tomb when it was put under Muslim protection. Who decides? Why should Israel not do certain things when the other side wants total annihilation? Because of oil? Because of Arab pride and honor? Who decides?

Ross C. Leiber is an engineer living in Canada. He invites comments to this article - please address them to