Mark Silverberg
Analysis of Terrorism in America and Middle East
Saturday, Jul 04, 2009, 10:21pm (GMT-5)
  Home
  FAQ
  RSS
  Links
  Site Map
  Contact
 
Decoding Netanyahu ; America's Two-State Fantasy ; Israel's Annapolis Nightmare ; Obama’s Faustian Bargain ; The Tangled Webs We Weave
::| Keyword:       [Advance Search]
 
All News  
  Academia
  Anti-Zionism
  Court of Justice
  European Islam
  Jewish History
  Media / Middle East
  “Peace” Plans
  Perceptions on War
  September 11, 2001
  US Foreign Policy
 » Appeasement
 » Democratization Efforts
 » Hamas
 » Intelligence
 » Iran
 » Iraq
 » Islamic Terrorism
 » Israel
 » Israel Lobby
 » Saudi Arabia
 » Syria
 » Unilateralism
 » Yassir Arafat
  Wahhabism in America
  War on Terror
  Video / Audio
  ::| Newsletter
Your Name:
Your Email:
 
  ::| Appeasement
  More ++
  ::| Democratization Efforts
  More ++
  ::| Hamas
  More ++
  ::| Intelligence
  More ++
  ::| Iran
  More ++
  ::| Iraq
  More ++
  ::| Islamic Terrorism
  More ++
  ::| Israel
  More ++
  ::| Israel Lobby
  More ++
  ::| Saudi Arabia
  More ++
  ::| Syria
  More ++
  ::| Unilateralism
  More ++
  ::| Yassir Arafat
  More ++
 
 
US Foreign Policy
 
Decoding Netanyahu
Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009, 11:32pm

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech at Bar-Ilan University on June 14th was more than an exercise in judicious phraseology. It returned realism to Israeli foreign policy and set out a clear and precise diplomatic formula that reflects the worldview of the Israeli majority.

 

America's Two-State Fantasy
Tuesday, Jun 02, 2009, 12:26pm
The problem with the insistence on a "two-state solution" is that a Palestinian peace partner doesn't exist and has never existed and no amount of rhetoric, Israeli concessions or Arab pandering can make it so. The Palestinians have consistently rejected the concept of a Jewish state in the Middle East and until that changes, all talk of a two-state solution is not only irrelevant but dangerous.
Obama’s Faustian Bargain
Wednesday, Apr 15, 2009, 09:59am

The assumption that the Obama administration’s diplomatic initiative to our enemies will enhance America’s image in the world and allow us to achieve our goals in Afghanistan and Pakistan has yet to be proven. What should be of more concern to us, however, is the price our enemies will exact as part of that rapproachement, and whether it is really and truly worth the cost?

Advice for George Mitchell
Tuesday, Jan 27, 2009, 08:29pm

Despite the belief of President Obama and his advisers that not talking to our enemies is a mistake, and given the pressure the Europeans can be expected to exert on Mitchell to negotiate with Hamas, the Obama administration had best tread carefully before engaging an organization that is the ideological cousin of al Qaeda and the Palestinian offspring of the Egyptian Moslem Brotherhood. Granting Hamas legitimacy and access to the prerogatives of state power in conjunction with the Palestinian Authority will prove to be a costly strategic error for all parties concerned - except Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and its terrorist proxies throughout the Middle East.

Gaza's Quandary
Tuesday, Jan 20, 2009, 08:25pm

With a new President assuming control of Middle East policy, Israeli forces withdrawing from Gaza, and the Europeans and the Egyptians discussing ways and means to restrict Hamas’s ability to re-arm through the Philadephi corridor bordering Egypt, there is rising optimism in Washington diplomatic circles that such actions will preempt future conflicts between the Israelis and the Palestinians in Gaza.

 

Scant attention, however, is being paid to the continuing role the UN is playing in sowing the seeds of future discord. Separate and apart from the strategic error of leaving Hamas’s missile launching capability intact in the wake of the conflict, a far greater problem continues to fester in Gaza – a problem which, if not resolved, will inevitably lead to future conflicts.

The Strategy of Defeat - Lessons for Israel in Gaza
Wednesday, Jan 14, 2009, 08:17pm
What happens when the alternatives fail? What happens when all the negotiations, sanctions and compromises fail to dissuade an aggressor? What happens when a nation is forced into war as a last resort? When is "victory" over an aggressor truly achieved? The answer can be found in an analysis of American strategic war doctrine in the late 19th and 20th centuries.
Seeking Andalusia
Friday, Jan 02, 2009, 08:02pm

The odyssey that has carried the Arab Muslim world from the heights of its ancient glory to its modern day abyss is a story that spans fourteen hundred years and innumerable humiliations most of which can be traced to its own failings.

Those who support radical Islam fail to appreciate how their ancient Andalusian Empire in southern Spain a millennium ago achieved its greatness. In their zeal to exact revenge and to punish infidels for past transgressions (real or imagined), they have placed their faith in an interpretation of Islam that renders tolerance, independent thought, debate and all creative, scientific experimentation heresy unless carried out solely for the purpose of waging jihad (holy war) against the perceived enemies of Islam.

As a result, the radical Islamists of today are caught in a self-imposed religious prison. The kind of society that produced Andalusia – one that encouraged scholarship through the study of science, learning, independent thought, debate and discussion - represents the very antithesis of the kind of society they seek to impose on the world by force and submission. If Taliban Afghanistan is the best they can do, it is a far cry from the glories of their past. Without an Islamic Reformation, their quest to restore the dignity of Arabia will fail.

Israel's Conundrum
Wednesday, Dec 31, 2008, 07:53pm
If the EU and Human Rights Watch are correct in their interpretation of international law (and they are not*), Israel’s targeted killings of Hamas leaders and its destruction of Hamas’s terror infrastructures in Gaza constitute a violation of international law because such actions, by definition, “endanger civilians”. If so, we have handed our enemies virtual immunity from attack because no war can be conducted without endangering (or even killing) civilians – especially those being used as human shields to protect that enemy.
Pakistan's Dilemma
Tuesday, Dec 09, 2008, 07:47pm
Pakistan may well be the single largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, possibly even greater than Iran, yet it has never been listed by the U.S. State Department as such, even in the wake of the 9/11 Commission Report and the recommendation of the State Department's counter-terrorism director. That is because the prevailing attitude in past U.S. administrations has been that such a designation would destroy U.S. influence in Islamabad. That attitude, however, seems to be changing. In August 2007, then Presidential candidate Barak Obama issued a pointed warning to then Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf saying that as president, he would be prepared to order U.S. troops into that country unilaterally if it failed to act on its own against Islamic extremists. The 11/26 Mumbai attacks have now brought Pakistan’s dilemma onto center stage. 
  » The Final Reckoning
  » The Grand Bargain
  » The Tragedy of Arabia
  » Israel's Challenge
  » America’s War on Words
  » When Dialogue becomes Dangerous
  » Why the Dutch are Wrong
  » Changing the Rules of War
  » The Folly of Realpolitik
  » Betrayal or Deception (The National Intelligence Estimate)


 
  ::| Events
July 2009  
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
 
::| Hot News
Decoding Netanyahu
America's Two-State Fantasy
Obama’s Faustian Bargain
Advice for George Mitchell
Gaza's Quandary
The Strategy of Defeat - Lessons for Israel in Gaza
Seeking Andalusia
Israel's Conundrum
Pakistan's Dilemma
The Final Reckoning

Mark Silverberg © 2008 | Brought to you by
Jewogle
[Top Page]