Iranian-backed Iraqi Militias Sent Reinforcements To Syrian-Iraqi Border Following ‘Israeli Strikes’ On Al-Bukamal

Types of targets: Strategic bombers such as the B-1, B-2,FB-111 and B-52H Electronic warfare airplanes such as the EF-111A and EA-6 Reconnaissance airplanes such as the TR-1 Early-warning radar airplanes such as the E-3A and E-2C Fighter airplanes such as the F-15, F-16, F-35 and F-22 Strategic cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk Ballistic missiles (range up to 3,500 km)

Everyone knows it.

We can hope and pray. Imo, Russia would not make a preemptive first strike; that is rather US gov’t-type thinking.Compared to the US, Russia imo has shown the most reason, and compassion, in terms of foreign policy.The “self interest of those that hold power” in the US imo, are short-sighted, and only include the interests of the elite, and do not include the interests of their own people, much less the interests of the world’s people.

Thank you for your reply. I do not understand all the talk about missiles, and military strength from the well-informed men on this site. All I know is what seems to me to be right or wrong from a standpoint of the interests of innocent humanity, i.e. unarmed civilians who don’t make the decisions but who suffer the consequences.

The people are not innocent if they allow themselves to remain ignorant of what their elected leaders do in their name. The citizenry have a responsibility to be reasonably informed and engaged and I commend you for making the effort to be so informed.

Forums such as this one provide a platform for debate that you will find informative on a diverse range of topics and expressing a diverse range of opinions. I encourage you to keep learning as we all are including me. Of course there are opinions and statements that are in error but that is to be expected in open debate and gives opportunity for you to separate truth from the multitude of perspectives.

Such discernment is best developed by yourself and yes, I may be able to help point out falsehoods, but I can be wrong too. Best to rely on your own discernmen of what is true and what is not while listening to what others have to say.

The preemptive action could be conventional to take out the missile systems and Putin has warned the US and NATO of such a possibility. However, a conventional strike will start a major war involving nuclear states that could easily escalate. The dissolution of NATO would definitely cool things down on the Russian front as well as an emerging multi-polar world bringing some needed sanity to international relations. So all and all, some very promising developments stand to give us hope for a better tomorrow.

We have a strong fate that whatever needs to happen will happen, no matter how things are played. The Israeli-Iranian conflict is not about the Palestinians as some may think, it’s about their hate to the state of Israel as an entity, regardless of the West Bank or Gaza. Thus, the conflict can only be solved when one side is defeated and accept being surrendered, or when both sides have so many losses that they sign a peace deal. Right now we are closer to war than peace, the only question that’s left is when.

We have a strong fate that whatever needs to happen will happen, no matter how things are played.

True. Israelis have been brainwashed into accepting death. A sad reality that isn’t any different than Islamic Jihad. The deep indoctrination Israelis and Jihadists go through since birth has been effective.

The Israeli-Iranian conflict is not about the Palestinians as some may think, it’s about their hate to the state of Israel as an entity, regardless of the West Bank or Gaza.

True, Palestine is only a pretext but neither is it about their hate of Israel. Both the mullahs in Iran and the zealots in Israel have been groomed by the same malthusian degenerates in Europe. They will sit back and enjoy the chaos while you to destroy each other.

I think Iron Zion’s statement regarding fate is the acceptance of what comes to be, but human agency still plays a role as what needs to be done, in the eyes of the Jewish State, gets done and acceptance of the consequences. I strongly disagree with many Israeli policies, especially under Netanyahu which I think have been harmful also to Israel and my debate with Iron Zion it look at this from a different perspective so that what is seen as needed to be done is recognition of mutual security in the region and not just Israeli security.

This is a major departure from long standing Israeli doctrine but I am arguing on the necessity to avert a coming confrontation that puts every nation in grave danger. Dialog with those that support Israel may be unpopular but the satisfaction of hurling insults and threats will only increase the likelihood of a disastrous war.

Dialog is not enough on its own. The myths about Jews need to be discarded. They are not homogenous robots indoctrinated to think and act the same and certainly not accepting death – the premise of security doctrine is survival. Perhaps doctrine predicated on survival is taking them to the cliff’s edge but many Jews see this, they are not blind. But the politics reveal a highly divided society that has struggled over the shift right even though many Jews oppose hardline government policies.

Comparison to Jihadists in regard to indoctrination seems somewhat hypocritical. Yes, Israel has assisted terrorists and Haretz has been vocal about this error in judgement. But the Western nations have also created the Jihadists and on a much larger scale. As democracies, why are the people permitting their government to arm and train terrorists that commit atrocities? Could it be due to indoctrination since birth to accept blindly the governments explanations of the good they do abroad while dealing out death to the citizenry of nations that dare to not submit to the supremacy of the US and allies. Can we excuse the indoctrinated public of any accountability for the murderous acts of their democratically elected leaders? If we do, should this not apply equally to the Jewish citizenry of Israeli?

I do agree with you that it is not about hate for Israel per se but I do not see it either as manipulation by European ‘degenerates’. Iran sees Israel as an illegitimate instrument of US hegemony, acting as a regional enforcer in the ME that opposes Iranian influence in the region. Given the history between the US and Iran, the animosity is no surprise.

Add to this Iran is part of an axis of resistance to US world dominance along with Russia, China and others. Israeli policy has long advocated a strong alliance with a global power which became after the 6 Day War the United States – this alliance is closely linked with Israeli security strategy that dominates her foreign policy. So Israel has supported US dominance and arguably as many a time acted as the tail wagging the dog.

Despite claims Israel runs US foreign policy, it does not stand up to scrutiny although I would agree Israel has a great deal of influence, hitting well above the small nations weight. As for European’s grooming Israel and mullahs to fight and destroy each other, you contradict this in a posted reply above that Israel carefully planned and has controlled events to its liking. I point out that I saw the partition plan as setting up Jews to fight the ‘mullahs’ but the odds weighted heavily against any prospect of the newly formed Jewish nation state surviving the conflict.

What you think of his statement differs from what I think because you’re not aware of the indoctrination Israelis undergo from a young age and throughout their lives. Everything about their propagandist education (at home, in school, at work) is centered around fear. Their kindergarten school books teach them that the “poor little lamb Israel” is surrounded by “big bad wolves”. This goes on in virtually in all aspects of their lives. They are the forever victim and every one is after them; all the time. This is by design. And I don’t blame the average-joe Israeli for that but the ones at the top controlling the state. To contrast further, when Ben-Gurion, supposedly, (I say supposedly because all Israeli “leaders” were/are puppets), wanted a nuclear arsenal for Israel, it caused major commotion among Israelis as they considered it as suicide. It led to the purge of high ranking military officials who opposed it and the entirety of the Israeli atomic energy commission resigned. How did the Israelis end up accepting the idea? They were endlessly bombarded with the mythical story of the suicide of the 960 zealots at Masada (which became Israel’s national symbol) and memories of WW2. It worked. “Never Again”. Many Israelis, especially the religious ones, have accepted the idea of death. If the “Samson Option” isn’t clear enough, I don’t know what is. That is not to say that all Israelis think alike and as you wrote, they are divided – I’ve said this before many times: most want to live in peace and prosperity. They, however, won’t have the last word. My comparison to Islamic Jihadists was strictly about accepting death for whatever cause – not Israel and/or others supporting them.

I know you mean well. Iron_Zion, however, does not. Just read his comment. It’s bow to us or face death and destruction. Regardless and putting his emotions aside, Israel never had and still does not have a mind of his own. It was created as part of the British Imperial design. Ideologically speaking, it goes to the Venetian oligarchy spreading the idea, through poets, that Northern European royalty were descendants of the “Lost Tribes” – which gave rise to British Israelism and later official British governmental policies for the creation of such state. It was that same ruling class who instigated the two world wars.

I too don’t believe that Israel runs US foreign policies. My opinion is that the Anglo-Saxon ruling class of Europe (which include Jews) does through the Israel it created. I never said “Europeans” groom Israelis and Mullah to fight. I wrote the “the same malthusian degenerates in Europe” in reference to the Anglo-Saxon ruling class. It’s only when one understand the who created Israel and the relation between the Muslim Brotherhood (tied to British intelligence and the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry) and the mullahs that dots connect. Rouhani didn’t slam Trump for wanting the push the MB as a terrorist organization for any reason.

Aside from furthering the hegemony of that ruling class, Israel is an experiment – one to test the limited nuclear warfare. This was alluded to by Kissinger and Schlesinger in the 1950s at the London’s Royal Institute for International Affairs and the London International Institute for Strategic Studies. This is where your comment to Hasbara Hunter (which I read) comes into play.

Thank you and I read your response carefully. I think you are correct that there is heavy indoctrination of Israelis from an early age. I grew up in the US and indoctrination was evident in Saturday cartoons including ‘school house rock’ a blatant animated cartoon vehicle for US centric propaganda. So indoctrination is everywhere. In Israel the public pessimism of making peace with Arabs is getting stronger as a result of a hard shift to the right and this plus lifetime indoctrination is a challenge to overcome.

Israel made peace before and did give up land to do so – Sinai. Sadat was the arch enemy in Begin’s eyes and Begin founded the precursor to Likud with the mantra ‘no land for peace’. Begin did give land for peace and paid a political price for betraying a major party position. Sadat paid with his life, and he knew this as he signed the peace accords. The impossible happened and given the risky path ahead, it needs to happen again.

The part about testing limited nuclear war is intriguing as I was not aware of this, although the times then were pretty belligerent given Dulles style of brinksmanship and massive increase in size of atomic arsenal. The Cuban Missile Crisis hopefully dispelled notion of trying to control a situation to keep a nuclear war limited – JFK and Khrushchev came to the realization they were losing control and came to a diplomatic solution before things got even more out of hand as it came more than once very very close to nuclear war breaking out despite intentions not to go that far.

Lastly, the Samson Option is predicated on assessment that Israel is in imminent danger of defeat whether by conventional or nuclear means. I do not see much difference between the Samson Option and US and Russian nuclear doctrine of massive retaliation also known as MAD.

I will try to research some of the points you make, cheers.

You know what happened to Pres. Kennedy.

Likewise, thank you for your comment(s). American and Israeli indoctrination share a lot in common (both being the design of the same deep state). It conveys a delusional sense of exceptionality and an imposed/ imagined sense of threat to justify the crimes committed under the umbrella of foreign policy. Others are after us so we must bomb them before they attack us. That said, I am not aware of a similar kind of indoctrination elsewhere.

I agree that the right-far in Israel is responsible for the lack of peace with the Palestinians and other’s but I (strongly) disagree that Israel ever made peace – at least not willingly. In 1956, Israel refused to leave the Sinai (England and France accepted). It was only after a very lengthy process involving a series of incentives, that Eisenhower managed to force Israel out. The peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in the 1970s, as I said, was part of a geopolitical plan (see link below). Besides, Israel returning lands it stole is anything but an act of good grace – it’s simple justice.

“What Really Happened in the “Yom Kippur” War?” https://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/22/what-really-happened-in-the-yom-kippur-war/

The Cuban missile crisis, the US and Russia’s nuclear doctrine and Israel’s Samson Option all share the same degenerate malthusian deep state in common. The Cuban missile crisis was orchestrated to milk the US military-industrial complex. During the Cold War, hundreds of US companies transferred ballistic technology to the USSR – this was uncovered by historian Anthony Sutton (ref.: “Western Transfer of Technology to the Soviet Union”). If I recall correctly, officials linked to the CFR confirmed the information and stated that most historians were too afraid to touch the truth. Israel’s nuclear weapons was also facilitated by Zionist circles in France and England linked to the deep state. Luckily, and as you inferred to, officials on both sides stepped in to prevent the unimaginable.

Nasser and Saddat were never a danger to Israel – they represented a threat to the Anglo-Americans hegemony in the region. To rewind briefly in order to make a point: when Egyptian leader Mohammed Ali (who had secured the technologies that had made of Europe an advanced continent and who had made allies throughout the region) wanted to take the region out of it stagnation, Britain unleashed war on him via Henry Churchill as Ali threatened the centuries-long British hegemony on the land (British East-India Levant Company). Technically speaking, Ali also threatened the Ottoman Empire. Britain offered the Ottoman Sultan to thwart Ali’s uprising in exchange for a diplomatic post inJerusalem (which fit Britain’s long term plan of partitioning the region and the creation of Israel). The secular likes of Nasser and Saddat were akin to Ali: they represented the prospect of modernization (which gets rid of religious fundamentalism) and threatened the Anglo-Americans. Lets remember how Nasser had overthrown the Muslim Brotherhood (who has always served British, and now Anglo-American, interests). Israel had teamed up with the MB in order to get rid of Nasser in a botched operation where explosives were planted inside American and British offices in the hope to trigger a civil war. Saddat (who vehemently opposed the Ayatollah Khomeini) wasn’t any different. He was a threat to the Anglo-Americans and it should be safe to suggest that the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood and Mossad were behind his assassination.

On the related topic here, I believe that once the masonic-modeled organizations in the Middle East (Muslim Brotherhood, Fedayeen-e Islam, Zionism, Islamic Mullahs et al.) serving the interests of the Deep State are eradicated; peace will prevailed. Until then, those organizations and their zombified members will continue embracing the idea conflicts, chaos and death.

Bonjour Omega,

J’espère que vous allez bien et que vous avez un automne aussi beau qu’a Genève… Mes pensées vont au Moyen-Orient

que l’on peut tristement resumer en pensant au fameux “Vea Victis” de Brennus en 390 BC

Dans le meme ordre d’ idée ci dessous un article qui confirme mes soupçons de toujours… !

https://russia-insider.com/en/ww2-war-crimes-churchill-and-americans-were-far-worse-hitlers/ri27969?ct=t(Russia_Insider_Daily_Headlines11_21_2014)&mc_cid=26a01f6eea&mc_eid=b06795de9c

The WW2 War Crimes of Churchill and the Americans Were Far Worse Than Hitler’s

“… the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be left gasping in awe.

Bonjour Alex; merci pour vos pensées. La situation est précaire au Liban. L’analogie au Vea Victis est à point. Merci également le lien. L’état profond doit être éradiqué une fois pour toutes.

Bonjour Alex. Malgré la situation précaire au Liban, je vais bien merci. L’analogie au Vea Victis est à point. J’espère que vous allez bien également. Je me souviens de la saison en Suisse comme si c’était hier. Ici, c’est encore chaud mais agréable. Merci pour les liens dans vos deux commentaires. Vivement la fin de l’état profond diabolique.

Bonjour Omega, Un article avec de nombreux liens qui pourraient vous intéresser. ================================================== https://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/le-sionisme-bon-pour-israel-219643

Le Sionisme : Bon pour Israël, Mauvais pour les Juifs ?!

par JPCiron

samedi 14 décembre 2019

L’Historien Israélien Ilian PAPPE affirme que la politique de soutien effréné à Israël du Président Trump fera sûrement du mal aux Juifs de par le monde :

« Je dis aux Juifs Israéliens : vous pensez aujourd’hui que le Sionisme est bon pour vous car vous êtres les privilégiés. (…) Mais sur le long terme, ce sera mauvais pour vous. (…) Israël n’a rien à voir avec les ”Valeurs Juives”. C’est un état d’idéologie ethnique basé sur le pouvoir et l’oppression. » ref. Article Middle East Monitor (1)

Ces affirmations ”fortes” méritent un examen, que je fais faire -si je puis dire- au célèbre journaliste Israélien Gideon LEVI (2), au Président d’Israël Reuven RIVLIN, et au ”Pape” du Sionisme Theodor HERZL, outre quelques autres intervenants d’envergure.

L’interaction des contributions de ces auteurs fait émerger une image originale du Sionisme : un mouvement politique nationaliste ethnoculturel qui opère dans l’ombre du Judaïsme, sans toutefois adhérer à ses Valeurs. Ce qui crée des ”malentendus” et des problématique du type de ceux à peine évoqué.

Note : le Sionisme Chrétien se distingue du Sionisme Israélien (15).

JPEG

« Sionisme et Judaïsme ne sont pas la même chose, mais deux idées différentes et sûrement contradictoires. » (8) (évocation florale)

« Il y a des Américains non-Évangéliques, des Français non-Catholiques, des Allemands non-Protestants et même des Arabes non-Musulmans. Il y a quelque 1,8 millions de Canadiens d’origine Chinoise et au moins 80.000 Suédois d’origine Serbe. Ils sont tous considérés membres de la nation de l’État dans lequel ils vivent. » (3) (Gideon LEVI) Mais Israël fait exception.

Ce texte de Gideon LEVI me semble épouser la vision exprimée pour Israël par le Président d’Israël Reuven RIVLIN, en 2015. Cette vision correspondrait au souhait de parvenir à un État Israélien démocratique et équitable pour tous les citoyens. C’est-à-dire un État tel qu’il ressortait des résolutions de l’ONU de 1947, et tel que transcrit dans la Déclaration d’Indépendance d’Israël de 1948 (= aucune différence selon la religion, la race, le sexe, etc) Ref. texte du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères Israélien : (6)

Le contraire donc d’un État Ethnique. Et le Président RIVLIN insistait sur le risque de ”catastrophe” si Israël prenait le chemin d’un État qui discriminerait les minorités d’aujourd’hui. Voir Article “Israël en danger ?” : (5f)

C’est pourtant la voie de la discrimination qui a été choisie… Gideon LEVY le confirme : « Il n’existe pas d’Israéliens non-Juifs. » . Voir aussi l’Article sur les “indiens” de Palestine (5g)

Bonjour Alex. Merci pour le lien. C’est un sujet, très intéressant (mais aussi opaque), que j’étudie depuis plusieurs années (lorsque le temps me le permet). La preuve que le sionisme n’a rien à voir avec le judaïsme s’était fait clairement ressentir avant la deuxième guerre mondiale lorsque les juifs rejetaient le sionisme entant qu’idéologie irréligieuse. Le nazisme (planifié) changea leur ton. Le nazisme et le sionisme sont les pile et le face de la même pièce.

Bonsoir, bonjour Omega,

Sur ARTE TV 17 décembre il y a un documentaire sur l’eau et la speculation, ca devrait surement concerner nos cousin Israélien ….

======================================= if interested by water question

tomorrow on “THEMA” ART TV in French or German

you have a documentary on water speculations on the way in the world….

============================================================

https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/082810-000-A/main-basse-sur-l-eau/

Main basse sur l’eau

Main basse sur l’eau

88 min

Disponible du 10/12/2019 au 13/06/2020

Prochaine diffusion le mardi 17 décembre à 20:50

Le prometteur marché de l’eau s’annonce comme le prochain casino mondial. Les géants de la finance se battent déjà pour s’emparer de ce nouvel “or bleu”. Enquête glaçante sur la prochaine bulle spéculative.

Réchauffement climatique, pollution, pression démographique, extension des surfaces agricoles : partout dans le monde, la demande en eau explose et l’offre se raréfie. En 2050, une personne sur quatre vivra dans un pays affecté par des pénuries. Après l’or et le pétrole, l’”or bleu”, ressource la plus convoitée de la planète, attise les appétits des géants de la finance, qui parient sur sa valeur en hausse, source de profits mirobolants. Aujourd’hui, des banques et fonds de placements – Goldman Sachs, HSBC, UBS, Allianz, la Deutsche Bank ou la BNP – s’emploient à créer des marchés porteurs dans ce secteur et à spéculer, avec, étrangement, l’appui d’ONG écologistes. Lesquelles achètent de l’eau “pour la restituer à la nature”, voyant dans ce nouvel ordre libéral un moyen de protéger l’environnement. En Australie, continent le plus chaud de la planète, cette marchandisation de l’eau a pourtant déjà acculé des fermiers à la faillite, au profit de l’agriculture industrielle, et la Californie imite ce modèle. Face à cette redoutable offensive, amorcée en Grande-Bretagne dès Thatcher, la résistance citoyenne s’organise pour défendre le droit à l’eau pour tous et sanctuariser cette ressource vitale limitée, dont dépendront 10 milliards d’habitants sur Terre à l’horizon 2050.

Le prix de la vie

De l’Australie à l’Europe en passant par les États-Unis, cette investigation décrypte pour la première fois les menaces de la glaçante révolution en cours pour les populations et la planète. Nourri de témoignages de terrain, le film montre aussi le combat, à la fois politique, économique et environnemental, que se livrent les apôtres de la financiarisation de l’eau douce et ceux, simples citoyens ou villes européennes, qui résistent à cette dérive, considérant son accès comme un droit universel, d’ailleurs reconnu par l’ONU en 2010. Alors que la bataille de la gratuité est déjà perdue, le cynisme des joueurs de ce nouveau casino mondial, au sourire carnassier, fait frémir, l’un d’eux lâchant : “Ce n’est pas parce que l’eau est la vie qu’elle ne doit pas avoir un prix.”

Réalisation : Jérôme Fritel

Pays : France

Année : 2018.

Un autre sujet très intéressant, merci. J’ai noté la date de diffusion. Ça me rappelle d’un livre que j’avais lu au début des années 2000 (“Blue Gold” si je me rappelle bien). Effectivement, l’eau est d’une importance vitale pour les “Israéliens” qui due à géographie en grande partie désertique de la Palestine sont devenus (ou plutôt ont due devenir) expert en désaliénation. Notons aussi qu’ils détournent l’eau destinée aux palestiniens depuis des siècles. Ils n’ont pas non plus essayé de s’accaparer du sud du Liban (qui comme le reste du Liban est très riche en eau) pour rien. Le politiciens libanais quant à eux ne font rien pour préserver la richesse du pays (pollution, etc).

Quelques liens qui pourraient aussi vous intéresser sur l’aventure Coloniale de Pearl Harbor :

http://www.unz.com/article/pearl-harbor-unmasked/

https://www.globalresearch.ca/pearl-harbor-revisited-dispelling-surprise-attack-mythology/5696980

https://www.globalresearch.ca/provocations-as-pretexts-for-imperial-war-from-pearl-harbor-to-9-11/9063

https://www.globalresearch.ca/remember-pearl-harbor-provoking-japan-provoking-north-korea/5621411

Citizens often don’t know the actual motives of politicians (they all talk a good line) or in whose interests their governments are actually working.Especially now with mainstream media working hand-in-glove with the CIA, in the case of the US. And truly religious Jews in Israel and elsewhere are Anti-Zionist, imo.

I replied to Omega’s comment in response to you. Just as I am interested in Omega’s rebuttal, I am also interested in yours – be as frank and blunt as you want, I prefer honesty over ego massaging.

With due respect, your depiction of the creation of the Zionist state known as Israel and its “progress” is a gross distortion of both facts and real history. Israel exists because it planned, created and given unconditional political, economical and military support by its Anglo-Saxon-American-Zionist overlords while others around around have been destroyed for decades.

As far the Partition goes, Zionist Jews never had any intention to share the land. Their aim was and still is to steal the entirety of Palestine. A first partition was envisioned by Lord Peel, who in 1937, suggested to split the land 20% to the Jews (since they were a tiny minority) and the rest to non-Jews (mostly Muslims). It made sense but Zionist Jews realized they would never get the whole cake. It was then that Grün, aka Ben-Gurion, unofficially set in motion the forcible transfer of non-Jews out of Palestine. He had even met with British industrialists in the early 1940s to follow up on the progress. A whole decade of terror was waged in Palestine in the hands of Zionist Jews – blowing up civilian infrastructures, markets full of people using children, attacking British soldiers, etc. It was so bad the British army couldn’t contain them. This lasted until the last months of the British mandate where the same Zionist Jews attacked several hundred Palestinian towns and villages (80+ of which were Christian) before self-declaring independence. Needless to say, Israel played the victim. In 1956, Israel (with the support of England and France), attacked/invaded Egypt in the hope to steal the Sinai. In 1963, Israel surprised attacked Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Gaza and the West Bank to steal lands it couldn’t in 1948 and 1956. Needless to say, Israel has played the victim since then.

With that in mind, when has Israel made and/or ever wanted peace? In 1938, the aim was to kick all non-Jews out. In 1948, same. In 1956, Eisenhower went to great length to make Israel leave Egypt (who destroyed everything on their way out (billions in damage)). In 1968, Israel stole lands and still have most of it. The war of 1973 was orchestrated by Kissinger for the different parties involved (Israel, Egypt, US) to reach specific objectives. Peace is not profitable to the ruling class. Defense contractors rely on chaos, conflicts and wars. Peace would mean that Israel would have to make concessions (give lands back). What peace? Israel has thrived on enemies – real or imagined.