Letters to the Editor – 7/15/16
Not With Trump
In response to Bernie Marcus (“Why I’m With Trump,” June 10), here’s why I’m not with Trump:
- His Supreme Court nominees do not provide balance. These Scalia-type nominees take our country backward.
- His positions on many women’s legal family planning and health care choices are punitive.
- His complete lack of common sense in being open to restricting or controlling the sale of certain assault firearms shows no concern for the violence that is occurring far too often in our communities.
- Coarseness, vulgarity and total self-promotion are not welcome virtues. This is not the direction I would take, and I am not a member of the media or academia.
— Livvy Kazer Lipson, Atlanta
What About Crooked Hillary?
Elliot Levitas’ guest column (“Reject Vile Trump; Make America Greater,” July 1) has many questionable statements that describe Donald Trump as some sort of really bad person.
The writer has the right to share his words in our wonderful country with freedom of expression. However, he left out any description of Hillary Clinton’s history of political actions and failures, the words of multiple writers who have published books on the Clintons’ personal forays, the FBI’s investigation of her personal server, which could have been hacked, her proposed spending plans that would increase our national debt to $30 trillion or more, her desire to kill our own energy industry, her support for trade plans that will keep jobs out of America, and much more that would hurt average Americans and their families.
The rest of us don’t get the same opportunity for getting our politicians to listen to us and do what they were elected for. So if we keep going in the Obama direction, as Clinton wants to do with vigor, how can you call America great as it is when there are ways to make America great(er) again?
What we need to do is elect Donald Trump our next president so he can fix the leaks in America’s lifestyle and economy. We have all had enough lies and know that we’re tired of “hope and change.”
— Don Memberg, Sandy Springs
J Street’s Approach Wrong
Daniel Arnon wrote about the difficult choices facing Israel (“2-State Solution: A Fantasy Worth Pursuing,” June 3). He lamented perceived racism in Israeli society and Israel’s apparent failure to take bold moves for peace. He concluded that this situation leads him to support J Street leader Jeremy Ben Ami’s vision for change.
Those who want Israel to survive, and those who want a two-state solution, should not be backing J Street. It calls for one-sided pressure on Israel and more aid to Palestinians while ignoring unwavering Palestinian rejection of a permanent Israel of any size. A two-state solution in that tiny area can only come about when Palestinian desire for statehood replaces the obsession with destroying Israel.
Advances in peace have been driven by Arab leaders such as President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, who was actually prepared to make peace. Israeli leaders of every stripe have taken courageous and risky initiatives when there actually is a peace partner. Mahmoud Abbas has shown that he is not a peace partner, and his likely successors could be worse. Palestinian leaders are given a free pass for racism and incitement to violence that would be the target of immediate international excoriation if uttered by any Israeli leader.
One-sided “bold moves” such as the Gaza handover led to the election of Hamas and thousands of rocket attacks. The handover of much of the West Bank to Fatah led to more attacks, combined with more demands and intensified political warfare.
Faced with an implacable foe, Israel has very limited options. It cannot survive the West Bank becoming a base for rocket launchers as did Gaza.
Rather than call for pressure on Israel, those who want peace should call for Palestinian leaders to be held responsible for their actions. Aid should be made contingent on ending incitement and replacing indoctrination for endless conflict with education for peace. In addition, there has to be a realization that it will take decades to resolve the conflict, and “bold moves” could well make things far worse.
— Doron Lubinsky, Sandy Springs
Arab Steps Toward Peace
That Mahmoud Abbas asserted that the “only solution is the 2002 Arab peace plan with no changes” is convincing evidence that he does not seek peace with Israel (“EU Opening,” Our View, July 1).
Even the Saudis have realized that Israel must have some say in the numbers of Palestinian refugees (mostly grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Arabs who fled the 1948 Arab-initiated war against Israel) whom Israel will allow to move into Israel. This is especially true given that the Palestinians have been raised on a constant diet of anti-Jewish invective and taught that Israel’s rebirth was the cause of all of the Palestinians’ problems.
The truth is that real negotiations are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for achieving peace. Israel cannot be expected to withdraw from territory and dismantle Jewish communities for the promise of recognition by the Arab nations of the Middle East. The Arab nations need to admit, openly, that they are willing to ally with Israel against Iran’s threats toward both Israel and themselves; they need to cease anti-Jewish incitement and stop funding Islamist terrorism.
They also need to repeal their laws that deny Palestinians citizenship and economic opportunity, and they must institute programs to guarantee that aid to the Palestinians is used to build the infrastructure required for a viable state willing to live, peaceably, beside the nation-state of the Jews.
— Toby F. Block, Atlanta
Write to Us
The AJT welcomes letters sent to editor@atljewishtimes.com. Include your name and town and a phone number for verification. We reserve the right to edit for style and length.
comments