I offer this small geographic note to any among my legion of fans who might for whatever reason find themselves in a friendly, open, intellectual exchange regarding the country of Israel and its future. I ask that you begin your participation by noting that the population of the state of Israel is about 100 to 120 times less than the population of the world’s Moslem states. The area difference is much greater. The Moslem countries of the world have between 700 and 800 times the dirt that Israel has. Math is hard. I often go to the CIA’s World Fact Book for ease and some consistency, but that too has become a propaganda sheet. For instance, it includes ‘West Bank’ as though it were a country with its own population of over three million. Tough to decide how large a majority of Moslems is needed to include a country as Moslem. I did not include Maylasia in my tabulation. But it does not matter. There is no way to get a calculation that does not show but one small Jewish state and a lot of large Moslem ones. Any notion that Israel is not the besieged underdog is, well, questionable. Is there some obvious, practical need for there to exist another Moslem country bordering on Israel, maybe to lend another vote at the UN? I’m thinking not.
Meta
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Holmes Oliver on Where Will It End? (In Ukraine)
- Cullen on Where Will It End? (In Ukraine)
- Holmes Oliver on A Federal Tax Lottery — Now
- Cullen on A Federal Tax Lottery — Now
- Holmes Oliver on A Federal Tax Lottery — Now
Categories
Archives
Calendar
-
I just went back to the CIA World Fact Book to read its Gaza entry. Go check it out, make sure I’m not seeing things. Gaza Strip – The World Factbook (cia.gov) Under the ‘Background’ section of the ‘Introduction’, the site states that “Israeli Prime Minister NETANYAHU formally declared war on Gaza.” That sounded fishy to me, so I asked Chat GPT-4 the following question: “Did Israeli Prime Minister NETANYAHU formally declare war on ‘Gaza,’ or did he formally declare war on Hamas?” The ChatGPT-4 answer was: “Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has not formally declared war on Gaza or its entire population. When Israeli officials refer to military actions or conflicts involving Gaza, they are specifically targeting Hamas, the militant group that governs the Gaza Strip. Hamas is recognized by Israel, the United States, the European Union, and other countries as a terrorist organization. The distinction is significant because it underscores that military operations are directed against Hamas and other militant factions, rather than the civilian population of Gaza.”
What is your opinion of the CIA’s opinionating via ‘facts.’??
Can you expand more on the CIA’s opinion of West Bank? Are they actually recognizing it as a country?
It is not yet the official policy of the United States government, but it is no secret that the owners of the Democratic Party and of relevant parts of the US Deep State, to include the CIA and DoS, favor what they style as the “two state solution.” That solution greatly demotes security of Israel as a place where Jews might live and thrive in peace. The progressive left goes well beyond arguing in favor of a “two state solution” to adoption-by-chant the idea of “from the river to the sea,” which for any Jew with the slightest sense of self-preservation can only mean a one-state solution (not a Jewish one). The progressives (via the US deep state and current open state) finesse an argument for the existence of a Moslem Palestinian country by assuming its existence as a linguistic fait accompli. Note, for instance, that under the “countries” tab in the World Factbook, Gaza and West Bank are entries apart from Israel. Were I the President (which could happen at any time), I would have these areas incorporated for statistical analysis and description under existing country entities. Correspondingly, I would not recognize “Palestinians” as a separate identify or representable group at United Nations or other international agencies. As for the CIA, I don’t know what the agency thinks. I think that agency should not be authorized to opine on the matter, or if some analyst at that agency is to be allowed to opine, he or she should keep it inside a secret folder.