32. There would be know wars because all of a sudden everyone would respect the kahanist like never before and by extension, Israel (cough cough)
Listen i am a right winger on most issues to do with Israel but the country of 6.5 million can't get involved in a full scale war.. make no mistake if a Kahanist Israel over reacts to attacks then not only will it be bogged down from the frowned upon west, it will also be plunged into warfare which it can ill afford to get involved in... anyone who has any doubts i can throw a scenario out there to prove where i am going with this..
there is just no other way getting around it.. THERE HAS TO BE A HEALTHY MEDIUM THAT WON'T END IN BLOODSHED.
Firstly, there are many ways to define "overreaction." This term has a broad range of meaning. To me, overreaction would be to nuke in response to hezbollah rockets. I think that would be considered overreaction by most people. But if you think that guided missiles, Air force bombing campaign, massive shelling, and annexing territory from which attacks are launched at Israel is called "overreaction" I have to disagree. This would be a NORMAL reaction to acts of war in warfare, in any other case of historical example, and for every other nation this would be considered such except Israel which the world wants to handcuff. But with leaders of Israel strong enough to not listen, the world couldn't really do anything about it despite all their pouting and temper tantrums. Israel has nukes and therefore cannot be blackmailed or bullied. This is a fact of life. The fact that leadership for many years has been a combination of spineless, corrupt, and bribed with material gain does not change that a strong leader could at any time have resisted the world's meddling. They could have. Those meddlers would have been forced to adapt to the new reality on the ground.
The fact of the matter is, the Israeli army could easily flatten any of these pathetic Arab and terrorist forces if it tried. They are nothing. It is self-restraint and 'concern for civilians' that keeps Israel bogged down in conflicts and inviting more attacks on its sovereign land. Once you show a willingness to flatten these groups and really hit them hard, these attacks will most likely stop. The Moslem Brotherhood was "taught" in this way by Syria in Hama. Unfortunately this is the only way Muslim Arabs 'learn' anything. Through strength, excessive violence, bloodshed, death.
If their attacks persist, then you wipe out their force easily and take more land. If not enough people to fill it with, then keep buffer zones, demilitarized zones, or at least completely disarmed areas with "apartheid" like policies to encourage civilian Arab emigration. This will be a slower process since it will take time for Jews to come and live in these areas. The exile imposed upon Israel-proper Arabs on the other hand must be immediate, in my opinion.
This won't require a full-scale war, and with good PR and very clear messages (hasbara has been pitiful in Israel) to show the world the scenario that you have been invaded, stating clearly your intentions, then carrying them out, responding will not result in Russia firing a nuke or the US sending troops. This is simply unrealistic. They will stomp feet and talk down in press conferences, then admit to themselves they really don't care one way or another, especially not about Arabs, and get on with life in their own country. Politics is mostly talk, gesturing, opportunism, and public appeal. But many Americans will have no qualms with such a powerful Israel. The American president will have to decide on which demographic he will alienate. Will he appeal to conservatives and the everyday man by applauding Israel, giving tacit approval, or staying neutral (for implied approval), or will he appeal (by condemning in the 'strongest possible terms') to the liberals, leftists, antisemites, arabs, muslims, most blacks, academics, and the liberal-driven media who will try as always to manipulate the common man to disagree with these acts? It will depend solely on calculations of voter potential and chances for re-election. Either way, the words will mean relatively nothing. With a republican in office, they would most likely pander to the republican base, but with Mccain who knows. Any candidate if the results would benefit him, could easily twist the situation to be a "front in the war on terror" and call it a 'favor to the world by Israel.' Like anything else it will come down to potential political gain.
It will not come down to an all-out invasion by the UN and EU and nuclear powers. Then again, what if it did? That would just mean the days of the Messiah are here. It's Israel vs. the World and we've already been told by Hashem that we win.
Topic: If Chaim becomes Prime Minister of Israel... a summary of implementations: (Read 6301 times)