Mr. Rubin is exactly wrong, of course. Ariel Sharon is imposing statehood on the unwilling Palestinians to avoid this fate and two states is the destination of the Road Map, because the President recognized the necessity before Sharon did. (Actually it was likely explained to both by Natan Sharansky).

Bringing back Arafat was the biggest blunder that Israel could have made, and has caused untold misery for the Palestinian people as well.

The Palestinians continue, with extraordinary patience, to teach those who insist they must agree to a state---or else have one rammed down their khaffiyehs (for their own good)---how one goes about just saying No.

Israel will topple. It's only a matter of time. So why settle for anything less than the whole hog?

(Especially since it all belongs to you anyway---or at the very least belongs not at all to the Yahoodi; and especially since so many of the literati, gliterati and politicos in the West absolutely agree with your position---and more can be expected to join them the longer the conflict "persists"; and especially since your Mullah pals are developing nuclear power---for peaceful purposes of course.)

It's truly a win-win proposition (especially since for the Palestinians, lose-lose is just as good as win-win; since the only important thing, no matter how long it takes, is Israel's obliteration. And if Palestinians have to die for that, well gee, there's always Israel to blame for that.

Of course the proposition that Israel will topple might be the wrong bet to make. But it's such an enchanting dream. And so persuasive. It's impossible that such a thing should not happen. Eventually.

Peter B:
In reading your commentary, I was struck that, with slight modifications, your description also uncannily describes the modern Democratic Party, i.e.:
Having eliminated moderate party members over the past few decades and ensured so many constituents remain mired in the cesspools of welfare and urban blight, the Democratic Party, despite its egregious blunders of the past few years, can still spew out its unredeemed drivel and terrorize with political correctness anyone with the temerity to challenge it. Of course, it helps to have so many useful idiots as friends, as well as the sympathetic ear of the New York Times.

The notion that the Muslim Arab subhumans are ever going to be able to live in a civilized society is just laughably embarassing. The only thing they understand is the business end of a gun and the quicker the US realizes this self-evident proposition, the sooner there will be peace in the region.

Its not constructive to call them subhumans. They are humans, they just have been systematically degraded by their leaders, circumstance, and their deathcult religion.

If they behave like subhumans, they are subhumans. The causation is irrelevant. The world would be an infinitely better place if every single Muslim Arab were dead, dead, DEAD.

Bart: What in the history of the human race makes you think that the Islamists are failing to make the cut?

What makes us thing that the other side "are failing to make the cut" is that they remain mired in primitive ways of thinking that hold them back economically and more importantly, militarily. Their backwardness has placed them in a situation in which every breath they draw is drawn at our forbearance.

While it's true that Arab culture has failed spectacularly, the same can also be said of most African and South Pacific cultures.
That the people raised in these incompetent cultures are merely unlucky, and not "subhuman", is evidenced by the fact that when placed in a superior society, such as that of the US, people from all races, cultures and places are successful.

Not necessarily all to the same extent, but better than where their ancestors came from.

Bart:

You seem to have quite a few categories of subhumans you would like to see dead. Let's see Arabs, the retarded, violent youth. Any I've missed?

Peter,

It's very simple. I live my life by one basic rule: You don't bother me, I don't bother you. The groups you mention all impinge on my life as they do those of ordinary people for no good reason whatsoever. People who fly planes into office buildings in NYC, who set off bombs in pizzerias in Tel Aviv and those who cheer them on or fund them deserve death. Period. Paraphrasing Hyman Roth,'This is the life they have chosen.'

As far as violent people, why should we use my money to keep anyone alive who can't function in society? If you want to fund violent people, that is your business. As for me, I'd rather we kill them at 6 or 7 than at 21 when they can really cause damage and any decent schoolteacher or child psychologist can identify those violent youth who will never be redeemable. A $50 injection beats hundreds of thousands of dollars of penal care by a long shot.

As far as the mentally retarded are concerned, why should my money be used to maintain them alive when they serve no purpose? At least my dog gives me companionship. The mildly retarded should be sterilized because they can function at a low level, but not one that economically justifies their existence. Our society simply has no need for people with IQs under 75 and this is a relatively painless way of avoiding the problem. A similar approach should be used for people with genetic diseases that are incurable.

Welfare recipients should have Norplant while they are on welfare. If taxpayers have to take monetary considerations into account when they decide to have a child, certainly the freeloading underclass should. It is also far more humane than booting people off welfare after a date certain.

Now you may read all this and say that I'm a greedy, misanthropic self-centered sociopathic bastard, and my response would be 'And your point is?'

Bart -

No, I'd read all that and say that you're a Monty Python sketch.

Easier to scoff like a 6 year old than to make an intelligent retort, eh?

Bart:

Smile and the world is your friend :-)

Indeed. And I'd further go on to speculate that you are a lonely person with a huge collection of disturbing photographs in your basement, with which you spend most of your time when not browsing the web looking for more people to hate because none of the girls at your college would go out with you.

It's called a "grievance culture"; a society that has defined itself only by its grievance (real and/or imagined) and lives only for revenge. All grievance cultures can be summed up in three lines:

1. Once we were Lords of the Universe and everything was perfect in every way.
2. Then THEY came and took it all away from us.
3. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!

Examples:

The Ku Klux Klan:
1. The antebellum South.
2. Those Yankees and abolitionists.
3. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!

The Nazi Party:
1. Mythic idea of Germany and its past.
2. The French, the Versailles Treaty, and Das Juden.
3. SEIG HEIL!

Afrocentrism:
1. Mythic Africa.
2. Whitey.
3. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!

Christian Reconstructionism:
1. Mythic Christian America (with emphasis on an idealized 1776 and 1950s).
2. Secular Humanists, etc.
3. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!

Islamic Fascism:
1. The idealized Caliphate of 1000 years ago, when Islamic civilization was the most advanced in the world.
2. The Infidel (especially the Jews and Americans).
3. ALLAH-U AKBAR!

Ken:

You left out generations of Red Sox fans.