The first half of the Oct. 11 editorial “A Mideast slouching toward war” was measured, evenhanded and at least reasonable.
But in the latter half you fully support the Arab Palestinian position that they are victims, and that there should be no Jewish settlements in the West Bank or Gaza Strip, and even imply that a Palestinian Arab state should have a strong military. But Israeli occupation is the result of Arab wars to eliminate Israel, and it should be apparent now from the hatreds exhibited by the Arab leaders and their youthful rioters that that is still the ultimate goal today.
Why should Israel harbor more than a million Israeli Arabs while in the “occupied” territories Jewish settlers should leave?
Jews shouldn’t be in Hebron, the site of Abraham’s tomb, nor in Nablus, where Joseph’s tomb was gleefully desecrated recently?
Nor should they even share the Temple Mount with Muslims, even though that is the most sacred site for religious Jews?
What kind of tolerance and wish for peaceful co-existence does this display?
Why were Israeli soldiers responsible for killing so many rioters?
Because the soldiers or other civilians were being attacked by the rioters.
If Israel did not have a strong army, the fate of Israeli Jews would be another holocaust.
Meanwhile Israel is still a tiny island in an Arab sea that stretches from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean, and whose rapidly proliferating Arab population is about 200 million. Nevertheless you portray the Palestinian Arabs who share the same language and religion as those in other Arab states as if they were the isolated minority, which indeed is the role in which they like to portray themselves. They are even willing to create dead martyrs to win over the sympathies of the international public. For that reason they do not want the killings to subside. It is the means to getting their demands granted.
