The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Remember the Golan Heights?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Syrian forces had surprised Israel and were fast approaching the edge of the steep Golan Heights, captured by Israel during the 1967 war. It seemed as if Syrian armor and infantry would retake Golan, then pour down into Israeli Galilee.

Soviet recon satellites observed Israel moving its nuclear-armed, 500km-range Jericho missiles out of protective caves and onto their launch pads. At the same time, Israel was seen loading nuclear bombs on their US-supplied F-4 fighter-bombers at Tel Nof airbase.

Believing Israel was about to use nuclear weapons against Syria and Egypt, Moscow put huge pressure on both to rein in their advancing forces. Damascus, already in range of Israeli artillery on Golan, ordered its armored forces on Golan to halt, allowing Israel to mount powerful counter-attacks and retake the strategic heights.

In 1981, Israel formally annexed the 580 sq. mile portion of Golan that it occupied. This illegal annexation was condemned by the United Nations, the United States and Europe’ powers. But Israel held on to Golan and implanted 50,000 there in some 41 subsidized settlements.

The world has pretty much forgotten how close it came to nuclear war in 1973 over Golan. The heights became a primary nuclear trigger point along with Kashmir, Germany’s Fulda Gap, and the DMZ, Korea’s inner border.

Golan recently resurfaced in the news when Israel’s rightwing prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, told Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, that his nation would never return Golan to Syria. In a speech soon after, Netanyahu vowed Israel would hold on to Golan for “all eternity.” He also admitted for the first time that Israel had made “dozens” of cross-border attacks on Syria.

The long basalt plateau is indeed a valuable prize. It extends from snow-capped, 9,200 ft. (2,814 meter Mt. Hermon in the north to the Sea of Galilee and Yarmouk River in the south. Golan supplies 15% of Israel’s scarce water and may contain gas or petroleum deposits.

Israeli artillery on Golan can hit Syria’s capitol Damascus; Israeli electronic sensors blanket Damascus and cover all Syrian military movement below. Having walked much of the Golan on both Syrian and Israeli-held sides, I can attest to its remarkable military importance and thick defenses.

After the 1967 war, Israel ethnically cleansed Golan, leveling the capital, Kuneitra, with bulldozers and expelled almost all Golan’s 130,000 Druze and Arab inhabitants. Jewish settlers were brought in to replace them. The US shielded Israel from UN action and world-wide protests.

Before 2011, Israel hinted that it would return Golan to Syria as part of a comprehensive peace agreement – provided Damascus ceased supporting Palestinian claims to their lost lands. But once the Syrian civil war conveniently began, there was no more talk of Golan.


In fact, it’s pretty much clear that Israel has been quietly fueling the Syrian conflict by discreet arms and logistics support to so-called “moderate” Syrian rebels and lobbying for the war in Washington and with the US media. Netanyahu has even said – with a straight face – that Israel cannot return Golan, or even negotiate, until calm returns to Syria and Iraq.

Netanyahu is clearly following the grand strategy of the founder of his rightwing Likud Party, Zeev Jabotinsky, a militant Russian Zionist. Jabotinsky asserted that the Arab states were an artificial, fragile mosaic of inimical Arab tribes.

Hit them hard enough, claimed Jabotinsky, and they will shatter into small pieces, leaving Israel master of the Levant (central Arab world). The destruction of Iraq and Syria have confirmed Jabotinsky’s theory.

Accordingly, Israel is delighted to see Syria, a primary foe, lying in ruins as a result of a US, British, French, Turkish and Saudi-instigated civil war. Damascus is in no shape to demand the return of Golan, and the rest of the world does not care.

The destruction of Syria as a unitary state offers the expansionist Likud government many opportunities to extend influence into Syria – as was the case in Lebanon during its bloody 1975-1990 civil war. Or even carve off more Syrian territory “to protect Israel’s security.”

The words of Israel’s founding father, David Ben-Gurion, still resonate: the state of Israel is a work in progress and its borders should not be fixed or even defined. Notably the borders with Syria and Jordan.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Israel, Syria 
Hide 24 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Rehmat says:

    During the 1973 Syria-Israel war, Pakistani air-force pilots flew Syrian fighter planes and destroyed 10 Israeli jets, but you will not read that in Western military archives. It was many decades before Lebanese Hizbullah rockets demoralized the Jewish army in Summer 2006.

  2. Mark Green says: • Website

    Average Americans sometimes wonder why the US is constantly at war in the Middle East. After all, there are plenty of authoritarian and undemocratic nations all over the world that we could attempt to ‘democratize’ by force. So why does Washington ‘export democracy’ so incessantly and so aggressively in the Middle East?

    Might their be an unadvertised agenda?

    The Zionist-dominated Left in America claims that US wars in the Middle East are “all about oil”. But that view is clearly false.

    In fact, even after Washington spent over one trillion dollars annihilating Saddam’s Iraq, US oil companies got shut out of that oil-rich country by Chinese and Russian oil concerns.

    Today, due to a worldwide oil glut, US oil rigs are being decommissioned all over America and throughout the world. There’s simply too much oil on the world market today.

    Yet US militarism (and favoritism) in the Middle East remains unchanged. But why?

    Wouldn’t the reduction in US ‘reliance’ on foreign oil permit our scaling back on military operations in that oil-rich area?

    Theoretically, yes.

    But US policies in the Middle East are not primarily about oil. Never have been.

    Israel always takes precedence.

    America’s power has been–and is still being used–to destabilize and/or transform the Middle East in Israel’s favor. The war-for-oil theory is a Left-Zionist red herring.

    Indeed, following Washington’s 2003 destruction of Iraq, that nation’s oil revenue gradually returned to the Iraqi government, the Iraqi people (and the Kurds in the north) while the contracts to drill for oil went primarily to quasi-private companies out of Russia and China. No agency in Washington ever secured oil contracts in Iraq for Exxon or Chevron because those specific business interests do not move official Washington the way that Israel does–especially since there’s no shortage of oil and none is anticipated.

    US wars in the Middle East have simply never been about oil. Not one war.

    Even the first Gulf War (1991) in Kuwait was not about oil. It was merely an opportunity for Zio-Washington to humiliate and weaken one of Israel’s most dangerous foes.

    After all, Iraq did not attack Washington or direct any hostilities towards America. Iraq simply went into Kuwait in order to secure disputed oil there that Iraq intended to sell on the world market. US interests were never threatened. But Iraqi aggression provided a fig leaf for Zionist-dominated Washington to attack Saddam Hussein in the name of ‘freedom’.

    So Washington went to war, even though this needless conflict killed tens of thousands of Iraqis and pushed the price of oil way up, harming US consumers.

    Back in 1973, Washington also had a clear choice involving oil and another Mideast state. But this time the state was Israel. Washington chose Israel over oil. And we Americans paid a heavy price.

    The crippling oil embargo (1973) was an Arab response to Washington’s intervention on behalf of Israel during the ‘Yom Kippur War’. America got punished. Incredibly, few American understand this even now.

    Could such a widespread level of ignorance be achieved by accident? No way.

    The first Arab oil embargo sent America into deep recession. But Israel was saved.

    A later, the Iran-related embargo also damaged America. All these conflicts can be easily tied to Israel’s shadowy–but powerful–role in Washington. This ongoing blowback is a price Americans have been forced to pay to keep Israel ‘safe’.

    But there is no evidence that US-based oil companies ever lobbied for any war in the Middle East. Not one. After all, oil companies need prolonged periods of stability and peace in order to lay the foundations for oil exploration and drilling. Similarly, every Arab regime needs time to secure the contracts and build the infrastructure that’s needed to extract oil and sell it on the world market. This is how international energy markets operate. But this is not how Washington’s political market operates.

    The various US wars on Iraq and Libya, as well as the proxy wars on Syria, Lebanon and Palestine, and even the economic war on Iran; all rotate around Israel’s pernicious plan to divide, weaken and eventually dominate the Middle East. Washington is just an essential tool

    Does this scenario seem unbelievable to you?

    Then just look at what Israel has accomplished over the past 40 years. London, Brussels and Washington are all under its thrall. Take a look at our mainstream media. Hollywood. Wall Street. The Federal Reserve. It’s amazing.

    But it is real.

  3. Rehmat says:
    @Mark Green

    I agree. America’s wars on the Muslim countries have nothing to do with bringing democracy, because all the kings and military/civilian dictators in the ME and Africa were installed and supported by the Western colonial powers.

    The Zionist regime is paranoid of democracy in the Arab World. American leaders know but afraid to admit that democratic regimes will be good for American interests in the Arab world and the Muslim world in large.

    In May, 2011 American Jewish philosopher Noam Chomsky admitted that the US and Israel are scared of democratic regimes in the Muslim world as those brings anti-Israel Islamists in power.

    “Across the (Arab World), an overwhelming majority of the population regards the United States as the main threat to their interests. The US and its allies will do anything they can to prevent authentic democracy in the Arab world,” said Chomsky. Watch video of his speech below.

  4. Sean says:

    Barak admitted that there were contacts with Syria and the prospect of the Golan being discussed “It was an opportunity to disconnect Syria from the Axis of Evil, which includes Iran and Hizbullah, and it was worth looking into. This is a step that would have had a positive and clear effect on Israel’s security, and it was worthwhile to consider many things for something like this.”

    Israel’s critical problem is not the Golan or any conventional balance, it’s the West Bank Arabs and the official US policy continues to be a peace process for the creation of (another) Palestinian state( in addition to the already existing one of Jordan). Of course, the process is a sham to allow Israel to keep on as it is. A neocon foreign policy, which the US certainly has, concentrates on freezing the current Middle East

    Mearsheimer :-
    This situation, however, is unsustainable over time. Once it is widely recognized that the two-state solution is dead and Greater Israel is a reality, the righteous Jews will have two choices: support apartheid or work to help create a democratic bi-national state. I believe that almost all of them will opt for the latter option, in large part because of their deep-seated commitment to liberal values, which renders any apartheid state abhorrent to them.”

    He made a serious offer to the Arabs for a final settlement

    Barak government resumed peace negotiations with the PLO, stating that “Every attempt [by the State of Israel] to keep hold of this area [the West Bank and Gaza] as one political entity leads, necessarily, to either a nondemocratic or a non-Jewish state. Because if the Palestinians vote, then it is a binational state, and if they don’t vote it is an apartheid state.”As part of these negotiations, Barak took part in the Camp David 2000 Summit which was meant finally to resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict but failed. Barak also allowed Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami to attend the Taba Summit with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority, after his government had fallen.

    He was rebuffe, and it became clear to Israelis such as Benny Morris that as he put it “When the Palestinians rejected the proposal of [prime minister Ehud] Barak in July 2000 and the Clinton proposal in December 2000, I understood that they are unwilling to accept the two-state solution. They want it all: Lod and Acre and Jaffa”.

    Israel could have taken the rest of the Golan and as much of Syria as it wanted at any time and it could overthrow Assad right now by, staging a military build upon the Golan which would force Assad to transefer his main forces to the Golan.

    It is Assad who is assisting Islamic State’s slow crushing of the Free Syrian Army in the south.

    Assad is using ISIS as a cats paw against the US and its client (Assad’s southerly neighbouring family dictatorship in Hashemite Jordan. Assad and his russki condor legion are creating the possibility of a radical Sunni takeover of Jordan. The US is desperately trying to stop this, see and

    Jordan is an American client and no threat to Israel In fact the Jordan frontier is so safe it is where most Israeli women combat soldiers are stationed, see

    But Israel cannot keep Arabs in the west bank without full rights and they will rever be reconciled so it will go on . The mentionable option is withdrawal from the West Bank, see

    But there is another

    Fueling the conflict are the Saudis who will oppose anything the Iranians support. Too cowardly to send in their own useless army, they are trying to get rid of Assad by heavily subsidizing his enemies.
    With so many interests, native and foreign, involved, a way out does not seem in sight. Nor can the outcome be foreseen any more than that of the Thirty Years’ War could be four years after the beginning of the conflict, i.e. 1622. In fact there is good reason to believe that the hostilities have just begun. Additional players such as Lebanon and Jordan may well be drawn in. That in turn will almost certainly bring in Israel as well. Some right-wing Israelis, including several ministers, actually dream of such a scenario. They hope that the fall of the Hashemite Dynasty and the disintegration of Jordan will provide them with an opportunity to repeat the events of 1948 by throwing the Palestinians out of the West Bank and into Jordan.

    In a country of over 20 million people, most of whom loath Assad, he can’t win, but he is willing to burn down the entire region if it comes to that. So Assad would be Israel’s ally (if they only were ruthless enough to take advantage) and the people of the West’s too.

    • Replies: @Wine
    , @anti_republocrat
  5. Israel’s revenge on the German people for allowing Hitler: inundating Germany with the Syrian refugees displaced by Israel’s clandestine war.

    Ah, those diabolically clever Jews. As some Israeli politician said during the Iraq scud missile attack, “The book is open and the hand is writing.” They never forgive or forget.

    • Replies: @Sean
  6. Wine says:

    Israeli proposals have been and will remain nothing but mirage including Barak’s proposal
    Batak offered Bantustan of the 92 percent of the 27 % of the original 1947 partition .America of Clinton acted as ” Israeli lawyer” according to the insider to the Camp David .

    Israel will not allow its leaders to make peace . Sharot Israeli. PM knew it in 65 and Robin knew it quit well.

    Israel does not have to look for peace partner . It can walk away like Saddam did in 1990, Soviet did in 1991, Midfle east keeps American anti Arab culture profitable for Hollywood, FOX and WSJ and CNN,provides job PNAC and post PNAC crowd and brings billions dollars to every few months to Israel.
    Without war, Israel would be like any other ally like Pakistan,Colombia,Hondurus, Latvia,Poland, Rwanda or Indonesia or Singapore in a difficult neighborhood .
    It also means Israel will have to work and produce staff that needs engagement in manual labors to make a living . Without US,it won’t be able and wouldn’t have been able to produce medicines and arms and software . Peace will destroy Israel The history of Hashmonean kingdom and the history of Jehu the petty warlord supports the fact that war,friction.violence are its method of survival.

    • Replies: @Sean
  7. Sean says:

    Why doesn’t Israel send all the former Palestine Arabs to Germany then? And by the way Germany has engineered a situation whereby the 70 million Muslims of Turkey will heve the right to come to Europe.

    Turkey and Germany were allies in WW1, see McMeekin’s The Berlin-Baghdad Express: The Ottoman Empire and Germany’s Bid for World Power, 1898-1918.

    “This is the story of Germany’s plans to bring the Ottomans into World War I and then to play the jihad card against the Allies, which held most of the Muslim world in colonial thrall. It is good, old-fashioned history as biography. Kaiser Wilhelm II, the mercurial archaeologist Max von Oppenheim, and ‘the Three Pashas,’ Cemal, Enver, and Talat, loom large. But many others—friends, foes, and would-be Muslim recruits to jihad—are also well delineated. In telling the story of the Central Powers’ less-than-successful recruitment of locals, from Libya to Arabia to Afghanistan, McMeekin demonstrates the fragility of this jihadist dream. And his accounts of the victory over the Allies at Gallipoli and the failure to complete the Berlin–Baghdad rail line nail down the greater importance of military skill and geopolitical givens in determining outcomes.”—L. Carl Brown, Foreign Affairs

    Germany is the great world-destabliser, it always has been. Now it’s up to its old tricks with soft power from within a US subsidised NATO cocoon.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  8. Sean says:

    Barak’s government publicly stating that “Every attempt [by the State of Israel] to keep hold of this area [the West Bank and Gaza] as one political entity leads, necessarily, to either a nondemocratic or a non-Jewish state”.

    You don’t deny that the time bomb status of Arabs in the West bank terrifies far sighted Israeli leadership (ie war hero Barak). And the fact that top Irseal Lobby agent who was also the senior official on the Middle East Dennis Ross (who I think you were referring to) was unable to do anything to get them out the quandary just shows how nothing can be done to save Israel through current US policy.

    • Replies: @wine
    , @anti_republocrat
  9. wine says:

    I really believe that Israel as a state for Jewish people will not survive the dismantling
    Ing of the military suprastrucre of USA . The educated and not so religious will leave as their predecessors have done before and after the Roman conquest . They would do so in search of a better life once the money train stops at the water’s edge of America. It will implode .

  10. KA says:

    “Similarly, in 1949 the Syrian regime of Husni Zaim proposed a settlement with Israel: if Syria was granted permanent access to the waters of the Jordan River and Lake Tiberias, the Zaim government would not only sign a peace agreement but would permanently resettle 300,000 of the Palestinian refugees in its own territory. Despite urgings from U.S., UN, and even some leading Israeli officials, David Ben-Gurion refused even to discuss the offer. Zaim was succeeded by a military government headed by Adib Shishakli, who renewed the Syrian proposal on even more favorable terms, offering to resettle most of the Palestinian refugees (500,000) in Syria. Again Ben-Gurion refused to negotiate.”



    J Slater of University of Buffalo—”
    I am a professor (emeritus) of political science, currently holding the position of University Research Scholar, State University of New York at Buffalo. Since 1963 I have taught and written about U.S. foreign policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, both for professional journals (such as International Security, Security Studies, and Political Science Quarterly) and for the general reading public, such as Dissent, Tikkun, and (many years ago, as might be imagined), New Republic. I also write many lead foreign policy columns for the Sunday Viewpoints sect ion”

  11. Rehmat says:

    In 2012, Barack Obama’s former special envoy for Lebanon and Syria, Frederick Hof, had claimed that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak conducted intensive secret talks with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad through him.

    According to Frederick Hof, the negotiations were based on Netanyahu’s willingness to return to June 4, 1967 lines, giving Damascus full control of the Golan Heights which was occupied by the Jewish army during its 1967 invasion of its neighboring Arab lands. What Netanyahu demanded in return was a comprehensive peace deal that would include an Israeli “expectation” for the severing ties between Damascus and Tehran. However, according to the US sources, the deal fell-apart as Bashar refused to severe his friendly ties with the Islamic Republic….

  12. artichoke says:
    @Mark Green

    Your idea definitely makes sense, and most of our presidents have been pro-Israel at least to some extent.

    But what I don’t understand is this. The Arabs have no strong allies. Russia and China don’t care deeply about them. They are only military states because we sell them arms and show them how to use them. Without us they are vast stretches of sand with some oil wells, and prayers 5 times a day.

    If we want Israel to have more land, why don’t we (the USA, top military power in the world) just go in there and get the land and give it to them? The guys with cloths on their heads, wonderful as they are, can’t and won’t stop us. If we want Israel have a wall or other permanent fortification, our guys and their guys can certainly build it.

    Rather than putting up with this endless skirmishing, why not just correct the situation to Israel’s benefit (for example the Gaza beachfront is far too valuable for those Palestinians and they have been shooting rockets out of it) and be done with it. We’re on the UN Security Council so we can stop any significant backlash from there.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
    , @KA
    , @a.z
  13. Marcus says:

    It was the death of Syrian general Omar Abrash that halted the Syrian advance.

  14. Rehmat says:

    If you had removed your skullcap chap – you would have noticed the US, Russia and Britain did go in Middle East and gave the Europe’s ‘unwanted Jews’ 56% of historic Palestine in late 1940s. Then in 1967 those Jewish occupied so-called ‘world powers’ went there in 1967 and gave the Zionist Jews 22% of Palestinian land.

    Arabs have the ‘oil wells’ – but what the Israeli Jews have – other than 280 brothels in Tel Aviv and a big bowl in hand to beg donations around the world especially from the American and German taxpayers (over $3 trillion so far).

    Now you know why the westerners love Jews and hate Muslim and Christian Arabs.

    However, you will never read in Israeli and western school books that it were Arabs who saved Jewish-butts in Spain, Sicily, Greece, and Malta.

  15. KA says:

    Didn’t the west try it in 1956? France Britain and Israel attacked Egypt precisely to reoccupy land ,buy influences and get Suez canal back. Had UK went there in cahoots with US,as it went to Iran things would have been a little different .

    Leaders are human , they carry human foibles and frailties on which dreams are built on . George Bush saw the war as the ultimate redemption as long he was not flying . Long time ago some one told( from Defense) that more hawkish one sounds the more to success,money,and fame open up

    But why are you thinking of a solution? War is a business .Solution will deprive people of job, fame and further careers moves .

    Second empire cant explain and hold the forces in its favors against the malevolent and manufactured cross-currents . Doesn’t conspiracy against Iran prove this? Obama /Clinton denounced Brazil and Turkey and spurned Iran’s overtures the moment Iran agreed to the demands of Obama/Clinton in 2011. Even today it is difficult for average Joe to figure out whta is happening and wonder why it is still such “a bad deal ” for US.

  16. Blaming the Arab conflicts on the West or Israel is redundant, the Arabs are more than capable of wrecking their own nations and turning on each other without any outside assistance.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  17. Rurik says:
    @Mark Green

    London, Brussels and Washington are all under its thrall. Take a look at our mainstream media. Hollywood. Wall Street. The Federal Reserve

    well said as usual Mark

    the Fed is the center of it all

    it’s their fount of infinite money = infinite power

  18. a.z says:

    first of all iran does not fit that description. as your adventures in iraq and afghanistan showed it is not so easy. there is a belief in the core of all the right wingers in the western world that they only need to mount up a real effort like total mobilization and absolute ruthlessness like willing to do tactical nuclear strikes and every one will roll over but in this brave new world with individuals having the ability to cause havoc it is not so easy to carry out mass slaughter with abandon and get away with it without any crippling blowback. and once euro american nation states are fully engaged in total war and are facing millions with backs against the world russia and china can just swoop in and roll usa over(remember how usa in world war1 just blew away germany).

  19. Rehmat says:

    “Why doesn’t Israel send all the former Palestine Arabs to Germany then? And by the way Germany has engineered a situation whereby the 70 million Muslims of Turkey will heve the right to come to Europe. ”

    Why doesn’t Native Palestinians dump all foreign Jews in the Dead Sea then? And by the way German Jews collaborated with Nazis to kill and expel hundreds of thousands of fellow Jews whereby the 5.5 million Jews living occupied Palestine should have the right to establish a Jewish state in Germany.

    Late rabbi Wolf Gunther Plaut, former president of Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) and Chief Rabbi at Toronto’s Holy Blossom Temple, in his 1990 book, ‘The Man Who Would Be Messiah‘, Plaut wrote that Frankist Jews were responsible for the Holocaust. The book’s ‘Foreword’ was written by no other than Elie Weisel, the father of ‘holocaust culture’. Weisel did not disagree with Rabbi Plaut. The book is biography of Polish Rabbi Ya’akov Frank (1726-1791), who claimed being the biblical Messiah of Jews and thus part of Trinity.

  20. @Mark Green

    Mark, you’ve smacked me up side the head with your comment.

    I’ve been a critic of Israel for over 30 years, and I’ve believed for most of that time that the Israel lobby has inordinate influence. Still, I chalked US foreign policy up to the institutional imperatives of the MIC. I have long thought the avowed noble goals of US foreign policy — democracy, stability and human rights — are never achieved and that the more cynical but also sometimes espoused goals — control of resources, hegemony — are likewise seldom achieved, but that the institutional imperatives of the MIC are always achieved (through the chaos). I therefor assumed that the sole cause of our FP was the MIC.

    I’ve long been aware of the Yinon Plan, Bernard Lewis’s “arc of crisis” before that and “A Clean Break” after, but I myself have never explained US foreign policy in general as resulting primarily from Zionism or the Israel lobby as you did. I still think the institutional imperatives of the MIC are a significant driving force, but Zionism and MIC imperatives do indeed have congruent imperatives, and Zionism definitely has a heavy influence not only on policy toward Israel itself but toward MENA in general. I’m not sure why I’ve shied from this truth before. Perhaps it’s simply due to the cleverness/deception of neo-con/Zionist lobbies in never, ever mentioning, or allowing the media to mention, how Israel always benefits from these policies. I never bought into Chomsky’s argument that AIPAC isn’t really that strong, but serves the interests of US Elites and essentially follows their orders, but perhaps there was an unconscious fear of being labeled an “anti-Semite” (or even unwittingly being one).

    Your comment comes at a particularly opportune time for me. I just finished a series of comments/responses with a Zionist troll at another site, where I mentioned the Yinon Plan. He came totally unglued, claiming I could only have learned of it through Stormfront or some other anti-Semitic site, how it’s been totally debunked as the basis of Israeli policies (by Israeli policy-makers and government agencies, of course) etc., etc. His ridicule was practically endless. He did protest too much, methinks.

  21. @Sean

    Rubbish. Here’s a flash presentation from Gush-Shalom debunking graphically the lie of “Barak’s generous offer”:

    If you want a little more detail and analysis, go here:

  22. @Sean

    nothing can be done to save Israel through current US policy

    True. Enabling will not cure an addict. The only cure will be either collapse of the US economy or US gathering the political will to force Israel to dismantle all settlements and return to its 1967, or better yet its Nov. 30, 1947, borders as specified in the partition plan:

    The partition was verbally accepted by the Zionists, but immediately violated, long before the Arab invasion of May 15, 1948 (which initially “invaded” only the areas designated as Arab). The Arabs, on the other hand, verbally rejected the plan but did not violate it through their actions.

  23. Rehmat says:
    @C H Ingoldby

    Well, for your information, many western historians have claimed that Jews started WWI and WWII, killing over 90 million people. Can you invent a single Jewish source that claim Arabs killed that many people – Arabs or non-Arabs?

    In fact Zionist Jew ‘Orientalist’ Dr. Bernard Lewis acknowledged that Arabs created ‘Golden Age’ of Jews in Spain during 711-1492.

    The best way to come out of your Zionist bigotry of Arabs, to study Professor Philip Khuri Hitti (Princeton University) 1937 book, ‘History of the Arabs’.

  24. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Eric, did you take your haldol today?

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.