A Different Time
On September 10th, 2001, the Washington Times published an article that clearly illustrates what our country and our foreign policy looked like prior to the horrible terror attacks that would play out the next day in New York City. It shows a more reserved United States; which is truly odd, considering we have always been the world’s policeman since the end of World War II. The War on Terror extended that role to the point where the U.S. now dictates all world affairs. Prior to 9/11, that mentality was not in the American consciousness: “There are no plans by the Bush administration to put American soldiers into the Middle East to police an agreement forged by the longtime warring parties.” The article continues: “In fact, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is searching for ways to reduce U.S. peacekeeping efforts abroad, rather than increasing such missions.” We now know that this could not be further from the truth.
The piece focuses mainly on a 68-page white paper by the Army School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) that examines “the daunting task that any international peacekeeping force would face… if Israel and Palestine ever reached a peace agreement.” SAMS is located at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas and is both a training ground and a think tank for some of the Army’s most intelligent officers. It is notable that the study’s cover page says it was conducted for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. However, Major Chris Garver a spokesperson for the base said the study was not requested by Washington.
Overall, the study examined both sides of the entanglement in an objective manner so that viable military peacekeeping options for the U.S. Army would remain viable. The critique of Israel is a unicorn when compared to today’s journalistic reporting on the State. The report makes several interesting observations about the Israeli armed forces:
The Israeli armed forces are a ‘500-pound gorilla.’ Well-armed and trained. Operates in Gaza. Known to disregard international law to accomplish [their] mission. Very unlikely to fire on American forces. Fratricide a concern especially in air space management.
The report also makes several damning observations regarding the Israeli intelligence agency, the Mossad: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has [the] capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”
Finally, the report concludes that for peace between Palestinians and Israelis to exist, there must be the creation of a permanent, sovereign Palestinian state. It also recommends “heavy U.S. financial investment in Palestine,” to “encourage reconciliation between entities based on acceptance of new national identities” and “build lasting relationship based on new legal borders and not religious-territorial claims.” The article also notes that “the Palestinian Authority is pushing for this as part of its strategy to internationalize the conflict. Bring in the Europeans and Russia and China.”
Obviously, we know this strategy would be a direct affront to the current world order. To have the U.S. and United Kingdom work together with China, and Russia to develop peace in the region would be considered insane by any modern geopolitical standard. Why? Because it might actually work to create a lasting peace, at least in the case of working with Russia.
The Two-State Solution
When examining the two-state solution that the SAMS report recommends, today’s analysts have concluded that Israel’s constant expansion of their settlements has blurred the lines of where the borderlines should be drawn, making a two-state option impossible. In other words, Israel is making it impossible to achieve peace due to their selfish intentions to control the region. Both peoples claim Jerusalem as their capital, which also has made any resolution problematic. The obvious solution would be an international coalition to maintain and operate the city, as the religious implications across almost every monotheistic religion have laid claim to the region.
Ultimately, this report contradicts everything that we are told today by the mainstream media regarding the State of Israel. Most Americans view Israel as a state comprised of a modest Jewish population who have constantly been victims of oppression throughout history. Much of this assessment is accurate, especially considering Hitler’s “final solution” prior to and during World War II. Yet, since the creation of the state of Israel in 1947, the region has been embroiled with constant conflict. One only has to look at a territorial map of Israel to see its consistent expansion from its previously allotted territory.
When examining the history of Israel’s foreign policy and their actions on the ground, it paints a much different picture of a bunch of victims from World War II simply trying to live in peace in “the only true Democracy of the Middle East.” There have been constant atrocities committed by both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israeli is constantly bombing the Gaza strip, and the poorly organized militias in Palestine have consistently reacted by sending bombs over Israel’s borders. According to this report, they have undoubtedly received support from Iran, Egypt, and Syria. Without a doubt, both sides have acted egregiously. Yet, there is only one country involved that seems to be constantly expanding their borders with no regard for the Palestinian people or the goal itself of achieving a lasting peace. It is quite the hypocrisy for a group of people persecuted by the German Reich in World War 2 to start persecuting another group of people solely due to their religion. In fact, it should make you sick to your stomach. The Israelis have also been caught violating international law with the use of white phosphorus bombs, which are known to torture victims with fire that is nearly impossible to extinguish. One could argue they are replicating the characteristics of a “holocaust” which literally translates to a “great fire.”
Overall, from my historical analysis, the placement of Israel in that region was a mistake in the first place. It could have been handled much better if Israel had kept its original borders, or if a permanent two-state solution was developed at the onset. It is that simple. National sovereignty is always important to maintain one’s culture and society, no matter who the group of people is. In an area that has strong religious implications, the only solution is to recognize that the region is important to more than one religion, and all religions must be allowed to worship in that area. Sure, Israel has done a great job allowing Muslims to pray in Jerusalem, however putting the star of David over the region is akin to planting a flag at the religious site, staking a claim as Judaism being the “most important religion.” This discussion requires much more devotion than a paragraph, and we will examine this assertion at a later time.
The Article’s Timing, and its implications
As they say, “hindsight is always 20-20.” There are a few interesting observations about this report:
1. The SAMS report was 68 pages, yet the Washington Post chose to quote the portion that mentioned that Israel’s Mossad is “cunning and ruthless” with the ability to injure U.S. forces in order to paint the Palestinians as terrorists. In other words, they have no problem committing what we would label today as a “false flag attack.”
2. The SAMS report also pointed out the problems for finding lasting peace, no party involved was left without being critiqued. It specifically mentions that Israel is the main roadblock to developing a two-state solution with its policy of territorial expansion.
3. The article covering this report was released on September 10th, 2001. What are the chances that the discussion of Israel’s willingness to commit false flag attacks against US forces is published before the day before America’s worst terrorist attack, where many have alleged the possibility of a false-flag committed by state and non-state actors?
Although it may be conjecture, one only has to read other policy documents from the CIA or watch any of the Jason Bourne films to know that intelligence agencies often use the media to leak certain information to warn of an impending event/attack. The timing of the release of this report and its wording is suspicious at the very least and it warrants further investigation into the CIA and the Mossad’s tactics.
In summary, the strongest observation made from this report is that SAMS, comprised of the Army’s brightest officers, indicated that Israel’s Mossad has no problem killing US forces in the name of their war against Palestine, and now, the War on Terror.
Editor’s note: we are in no way implicating Israel for the attacks on 9/11 at this time. We are merely recognizing their ability to injure US forces to promote their own agendas. We will be examining their overall approach to Islamic extremism, their support of certain think tanks that supported an attack on the US to promote a specific foreign policy agenda, and their own foreign policy as it relates to the world and the United States. Conclusions will evolve as more research is completed.