Robert, thanks for the reference to "Pity the Poor Antisemite." It is an intelligent and thought-provoking piece, and I will refer others to it as well.

I never thought I'd say it about a political series of yours, but I find myself agreeing with much of what you've been saying in "What Was Sharon Thinking?" As you know, I believe (unlike you) that most Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza would prefer at least a long-term cessation of hostilities to a continued cycle of terror and response, and that evacuating the settlements would strengthen this moderate element in the Palestinian population. However, my position is also based on an analysis similar (though not identical) to yours: evacuating most of the settlements is in my own self-interest as a Jew living in Israel. The borders of my country will be truly defensible when they are defined, as they are not now. And defensible borders are best defined along relatively straight lines such as the 1967 ceasefire lines (with possible adjustments). Defending large numbers of small settlements drains precious resources: military resources that would best be used to counter existential threats such as those posed by Iran; and economic resources that would best be used to develop our physical and educational infrastructure to create and maintain a strong, prosperous and (dare I say it?) socially just society.

Finally, as a religious Jew, I don't think that any of us knows 100 percent what G-d and His Torah want the State of Israel to do, but I think we can be pretty sure that He does want there to be a State of Israel. Therefore, you don't need to "set Torah aside" to come to your conclusions.

Sara, I'm so glad you left a comment regarding Robert's series about Sharon. I was hoping to hear the "other" side, and I find it all the more fascinating that you are in (mostly) agreement with Robert.

Thanks for adding your thoughts.

While you were at Sinai, I hope you told Rabbi Wolpe he really made the right decision to stay there instead of going to JTS. There's only one tougher and more hopeless job on Morningside Heights: Columbia Head Football coach.

Sara:

Thanks for writing.

Let me emphasize that I am attempting to make a mental leap into Sharon's military mind. However, at no time do I believe that he took into account any notion that any Arabs in Gaza or Judea or Samaria are "moderate." This is a population that names their schools and streets after homicide bombers. This is a population that runs their grade schools like brainwashing acadamies to hate Jews. This is the population that just elected Hamas--and please don't tell me they did it because they were fed up with PA corruption. This is like saying the Germans elected the Nazis to make the trains run on time.

The facts on the ground are simple and all too clear. The Israelis want peace, the Arabs want to annihilate the Israelis. We have to defend ourselves in the best way we can. So the only argument really is, how do we do that?

Not for a second did Sharon or any of his responsible colleagues believe that the Arabs are moderate. The last politician who tried that was Barak and that brought us the second infitada and more death than Israel has seen in a long time.

The first responsibility of any government is to defend its citizent from aggression. Social justice is meaningless if the state is in peril.

It remains to be seen if Sharon gambled correctly or made a terrible error.

Robert, I think you misunderstood my comment. I wasn't saying that Sharon (or you, for that matter) believe in the moderation of the Palestinian side. The real gist of my argument is that even if the Palestinians are all extremists (and you and I certainly disagree about that), evacuating the settlements makes military sense. On that, interestingly, we do seem to agree.

Also, my comment referring to social justice referred to justice within Israeli society. In my opinion, the huge and growing gaps in educational achievement and (consequently) economic opportunity in Israel are every bit as much an existential threat to our country as are the threats posed by our external enemies.

In any event, I look forward with interest to reading the continuation of your series.

Sara:

Thanks for writing. I want people who read this blog to be aware of our history. Both you and I have lost children and our friendship is based on common tragedy. You were kind enough to visit with us when you were in Los Angles and we plan on visiting you when we are next in Israel.

And though we are on opposite end of the political spectrum, me on the right, you on the left, we can agree to disagree and discuss our differences without insulting eachother.

Though I will lower myself every once in a while and accuse you of singing (oh, the agony!) Kumbaya.

Which, I would like to point out to all you 60's folk singers out there, sounds to my tone-deaf ears exactly like that other 60's horror: "Michael Row Your Boat Ashore, Hallelujah."

I mean, same tune, right?

This is neither here nor there, just another observation I just can't help making when observing the somewhat whacky cultural landscape some of us are descended from, namely the grubby and unfortunate 60's.

Anywhooo.

Sara: I wasn't saying that evacuating the settlements makes military sense. I was saying that I think Sharon was thinking that. You get the difference? I'm making a huge (for me, anyway) leap into a military frame of mind, trying to understand the withdrawal and trying to see if it makes strategic and tactical sense.

Besides, Olmert has just made it pretty clear that Kadima plans on withdrawing from about 88% of Judea and Samaria not from every settlement. Big blocks will be left intact. Why? Is it a military decision? I have to look at some maps and sit down and think.

As for social justice being just as much as an existential threat to Israel as outside threats, as you claim. Well there I just have to disagree.

Were you watching TV this week. Hamas premiered their first BIG SHOW. It showed two Arabs drinking a cup of what they called: "Jewish blood" and announced their intent to destroy every Jew who occupies their land, ie: Israel proper. Read Hamas' covenant. It calls for the death of all Jews everywhere.

If I've learned one thing from history it's this: when someone says they want to kill you, you best believe them.

No big protest marches in Gaza or Judea or Samaria by the "moderate Arabs" protesting this vile TV propaganda, right?

I think that on a scale of 1-10 Hamas and the Palestinian people score about a 50 in terms of existential threats.

In short, you have to be alive to worry about social justice.

Again, thanks so much for writing. Dialogue is what this blog is about.

I've just begun a fascinating new book called "The Rise of the American Democracy" by Sean Wilentz. In the fantastic preface and prologue, he makes the point that our democracy, (as opposed to a Republic of elites controlling the nation), was forged by ordinary farmers and merchants who put their life's blood into their work and businesses, and thus demanded equal representation more than what people like John Adams, John Hancock, and even Thomas Jefferson were willing to give them pre-1789. In other words, these new Americans had MADE something, sweated over it, and wanted a bigger say in protecting it.

One of the things that frightens me most about the Palestinian people, and the people of most Arab countries, is they have little or nothing vested in their own societies. Yes, there are some merchants and farmers. And yes, the wars of the last several decades have hurt economic development. But look what the Israelis have done in the same period. The lack of economic or societal progress is something that plagues the entire Arab world. I don't think there is one more-than-two-story building in the entire Arab world that wasn't designed and basically built by Westerners.

For statehood to work, the people of that state need a tangible economic stake in things. A religious stake, or belief in a G-d-given right to democracy is nice... but it's NOT ENOUGH.

I think the uprisings of 2000 proved to Sharon's opponents that the Palestinians who mattered would rather destroy themselves than have their own state. Thus, the greatest-living military leader in Israel's history won the premiership. But military-savvy leadership is a lot different from the purely-political concerns of a Netanyahu or Rabin-like government. In other words, core supporters are gonna get screwed at some point.

The connotations of this reasoning are troubling vis a vis Iraq. I think we've pushed elections far too early and would have done much better with McArthuresque military rule for a decade or so first. That would be a hard, hard choice, and nearly impossible for President Bush to sell to the public. But I think it would have been better than what we face now, which is a decade of religious factional violence.

Jake,

I think that we have grown very comfortable and that as a populace we lack the drive to support such a venture as you propose.

But conceptually speaking I think that you may be right. Culture is not changed over night and I have a hard time believing that we are going to witness some sort of sea change.

Robster, They're not all extremists. There are many working, middle, and upper class folks who have good jobs and businesses, who are not terrorists. I worked w/ such people, and there have been cases where Arabs helped to save a Jewish life, you should not ignore this imo

There is no reason to be Hitlerian about them.

There is a terrorist element yes, but not all as are as you continually state. It makes your arguments and postings seem maniacal.

Jack:

I know all the evidence does seem to be to the contrary, but I still think the American people are ready to make far greater sacrifices than the liberal and conservative "leaders" in our country are ready to ask of us.

I've lived in every major region of this country save the Pacific Northwest, and I have rarely met any Americans who didn't seem to have an inherent understanding of how good we have it here and how we should be ready to do without some of our fortunes if it all were ever threatened. I know that sounds too general, and maybe too optimistic, (not to mention impossible to "prove"), but I know it as well as I know anything.

It's not fair to single out President Bush for not asking more of Americans. No one really has in many decades. But not only do I think it's necessary, I actually think that if presented properly, it would be a politically expedient thing to do. In other words, asking Americans to sacrifice for our war against civilization, (which works so much better for me than "War on Terror"), would WIN votes, not lose them.

OK, one last little argument for my side.

Without a minimal level of social justice, our society will not be able to maintain an internal coherence and dedication to each other and to our country. The lack of such a coherence and dedication, in turn, weakens us and makes us all the more vulnerable to attack from without. Indeed, why should our enemies bother, if we're willing to do the job for them from within?

In addition, in order to be able to maintain our technological edge, we need to use all the brainpower we have - including that of the children who are now getting an incredibly raw deal, both economically and educationally. When I speak of social justice, I do not mean redistributing resources, but rather creating the conditions under which all of our citizens will be able to reach their full potential. That, I believe, is not a luxury but a necessity.

Whether Israel has that minimal level of social justice at this point is a matter of a debate, but few would dispute that we are unfortunately moving in the wrong direction.

And now for my encore (join me, Randi):

Kumbaya, my Lord, Hallelujah!

OK, one last little argument for my side.

Without a minimal level of social justice, our society will not be able to maintain an internal coherence and dedication to each other and to our country. The lack of such a coherence and dedication, in turn, weakens us and makes us all the more vulnerable to attack from without. Indeed, why should our enemies bother, if we're willing to do the job for them from within?

In addition, in order to be able to maintain our technological edge, we need to use all the brainpower we have - including that of the children who are now getting an incredibly raw deal, both economically and educationally. When I speak of social justice, I do not mean redistributing resources, but rather creating the conditions under which all of our citizens will be able to reach their full potential. That, I believe, is not a luxury but a necessity.

Whether Israel has that minimal level of social justice at this point is a matter of a debate, but few would dispute that we are unfortunately moving in the wrong direction.

And now for my encore (join me, Randi):

Kumbaya, my Lord, Hallelujah!

I see that came to two arguments. Technical blip - it'll never happen again, I promise!!! :)

I will not even attempt to get into the middle of this political discussion...but I will be happy to sing along with Sara..."Kumbaya, my Lord, Kumbayah..."

Sara:

I don't know if Israel is moving in the wrong direction or not. Is that in realtion to the Arab world? To Europe? To America? To a Platonic ideal?

Can Israel do better for its citizens? Sure, who would argue otherwise. Is Israel in danger of collapsing becasue of social inequalities, I doubt it.

In any case, now I can't get that darn song out of my cerebellum.

Help.

Jake,

I think that we are capable of seeing more, but presentation means everything. Right now the polarization is such that some people are unwilling to believe anything that comes from this admin. That is a significant problem.

But let me tell you why I agree with you. These are not new issues. America has been complacent before and come out of it.

One of my favorite authors contributed to this change in thought. Dr. Seuss Went to War

Jack:

Yes, WW II was a big wake up call to what Steven Ambrose and many other historians have called a "slacking, sneering generation of Americans."

Robert has written about how our war against these guys is more covert than most of us know and we're going for a leaner, meaner and quieter response. Tactically, that may be great. But politically, it's adding to our laxity. We're not going to win this war by buying flat screen TV's and getting obsessed with "American Idol."

We're not going to win this war by buying flat screen TV's and getting obsessed with "American Idol."

You'd be surprised how much damage you can do to someone with a flat screen. Distract the bad guys with some really bad American Idol contestants and then drop the flat screen on their heads.

Jack:

Now, why didn't I think of that?

Because you are far more practical than I am. ;)