A Brief History of the Israel-Palestine Conflict

The modern Israel-Palestine conflict begun at the fall of the Ottoman Empire. When the empire fell at the end of World War I (WWI), there was a power vacuum which the French and the British attempted to fill throughout the Middle East. They were unsuccessful at filling the vacuum of power left by the Ottoman Empire, and the when they divided up the land boundaries they did not consider the people groups in the Middle East. The conflict boils down to land, both who is controlling it and who is living in it. There have been at least five major wars between the Israelis and other Arab nations. The current and most recent issues are the Israeli settlements in the west bank, lack of a Palestinian State, Palestinian Refugees from the 1948 war, religious buildings, control over the City of Jerusalem, and security of Israel.

Before the end of WWI, in 1917 the British occupied Palestine. At the end of WWI, when the French and the British divided up the land; the British gained control of the British Mandate of Palestine in 1922. This land included Israel, some of Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. This was formally established by the Balfour declaration, Balfour was a Zionist and wanted there to be a place for the Jews to return too. During the time that Palestine was under British control the Jewish population was growing due to growing persecution in Europe.

The five major wars involve Israel and at least one Arab nation. The first war was in 1948 when Israel was facing forces from seven different Arab nations and several militant groups. This was known as their War of Independence. Despite being severely outnumbered Israel managed to do much better than anyone expected, they did lose the Gaza Strip to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan, but they gained the Sea of Galilee. The Sea of Galilee is important because, “Israel views the sea as its one great natural reservoir and so will protect and control at all costs the sources that feed this sea.” (Burge pg. 20) The next war was in 1967 known as the six day war. In this war the Israelis were outnumbered yet they managed to gain large amounts of territory. The six day war was between the Israelis and the forces of ten nations in addition to militant groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). During the six day war Jordan lost Jerusalem and the West Bank; Syria lost the Golan Heights; Egypt lost the Gaza Strip Suez Canal, and the Sinai Peninsula. The War in 1973 also known as the Yom Kanpur war, Egypt lunched a surprise attack on Israel. Egypt broke through the Israeli defenses at the Suez Canal and moved into the Sinai Peninsula. Once the Israeli forces reorganized they surrounded the Egyptian forces and forced surrender. At the conclusion of this war Israel gave back the Suez Canal and the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt in exchange for the Egyptians to recognition of the Nation of Israel. In both 1982 and 2006 there were rockets and shells being fired into the nation of Israel from southern Lebanon. The people responsible for these attacks were organizations; specifically the PLO and Hezbollah, Israel invaded southern Lebanon in order to stop the attacks on Israel. The plateau of the Golan Heights, “continues south around the east side of the Sea of Galilee and towers over it from 2,500 to 3,000 feet. Considering that the Sea of Galilee is about 650 feet below sea level, the Golan offers a huge strategic advantage over the region.” (Burge pg. 19-20) This is why Israel considers the Golan Heights important for their security.

One of the main issues the Israel-Palestine conflict has is a security problem for Israel. Before The Six Day war the distance from the Israel border to Tel Aviv is well within the range of rockets and artillery fire. Whenever Israel is attacked by in-direct fire (rockets, mortars, artillery) their reaction is to invade the area it came from and create a buffer zone so the indirect fire cannot reach Israeli territory. Currently Israel has a peace treaty between Israel and its surrounding neighbors and the PLO. The PLO has not been a major threat since the war in 1982. The PLO and Israel signed their peace treaty called “Declaration of Principles”. The main objective of these organizations like the PLO is for a recognized Palestinian state, Israel claims a Palestinian State would be a base of operations for terror groups. A two state option is disliked by both extremes, Hamas and Zionists. Due to the many wars there have been many thousands of Palestinians who have been displaced from their homes, yet Israel is slowly building Jewish settlements that were destroyed by the same wars.

The problem with attempting any kind of peace treaty is the large diversity of population and religions. The land of Israel and Palestine includes Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze. The Christians many denominations the Catholics, Syrian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Armenians, Holy Sepulture, COPTS, and Ethiopians. Trying to get all these groups to agree is almost impossible, especially when they can just start a new radical organization.

These are just some of the many issues involved in the Israel Palestine Conflict, which has had a very long and bloody history. This brief summary of events does not even begin to cover the religious side of the conflict. Many international organizations such as the U.N. attempt to find resolutions to these issues but there are two ways at looking at the conflict. One is to take it purely as a legal one with no religious or empathic perspectives. The other view is to take it as a religious conflict and become emotionally involved, taking empathy for those who this conflict has displaced. While the first one seems cold and heartless it is the best approach because once emotions and religion are involved nothing will be resolved.

Works Cited

Burge, Gary M. Whose Land? Whose Promise? Cleveland, Ohio: The Pilgrim Press, 2003.

Eisenhower Soldier and President By: Stephen Ambrose

Stephen Ambrose’s book Eisenhower Soldier and President is a very well written and well researched book. There were many different ways that this book revels the attributes that made Eisenhower such a great military commander and president. While Ambrose gives many dates and details of Eisenhower’s life the important part is focusing on the character traits. These character traits and experiences that made him such popular and good leader should be understood for future reference.

Eisenhower’s mother was one of his greatest influences while Eisenhower was growing up. Eisenhower’s parents “taught the simple virtues of honesty, self-reliance, integrity, fear of God, and ambition.”[1] These are many of the same values which the Army requires of its soldiers and officers. These values are even more important in those seeking high office within the United States. To build on the values which Eisenhower’s parents instilled in him his home town of “Abilene was cautious and conservative in its social outlook, religion, and politics. Everyone was Christian, of European descent, and nearly all voted Republican.”[2] Due to these influences and a influences form a good friend he grew up wanting to go to Annapolis. He did not get the appointment but got one to West Point.

While at West Point he played football, and took many of the good lessons that the academy has to offer. “Hazing, the uglier side of West Point, had little appeal to him, obviously not as a recipient, but not as a Yearling either… He took from West Point what was positive and rejected that which was negative.”[3] One of the many positive experiences that West Point offered was football. Eisenhower played two games as a very promising running back but was injured and could no longer play. He then begin to coach the junior varsity team. “The act of coaching brought out his best traits –his organizational ability, his energy and competiveness, his enthusiasm and optimism. His willingness to work hard at a task that intrigued him, his powers of concentration, his talent for working with the material he had instead of hoping what he did not have, and his gift for drawing the best out of his players.”[4] This experience was one of the opportunities Eisenhower had to show his leadership potential while at West Point.

After Eisenhower graduated from West Point he had a number of assignments as a junior officer, some had little influence on him while others gave him very influential people. His first appointment was to Fort Sam Huston, where he met his wife, “her name was Mary Geneva Doud, but she was known as Mamie.”[5] During World War I (WWI) Eisenhower was an infantry training officer and was promoted up to the rank of Captain. Towards the end of the war he was transferred to a tank battalion, which had no tanks. All during WWI Eisenhower never saw action in France, and he resented that fact, but his superior officer “recommended him for the Distinguished Service Medal. The award finally came through in 1922. It praised Eisenhower for his ‘unusual zeal, foresight, and marked administrative ability.’ To Eisenhower, it was more a bitter reminder than a welcome award.”[6] These qualities are very important to both a commander and a President even though he never saw action Eisenhower learned valuable lessons during WWI.

Eisenhower did not like politics but the time between the wars involves lots of politics. “Army officers were supposed to be above politics.”[7] Eisenhower’s main dislike of politics is the controversial issues which he naturally avoided. During the time between the wars Eisenhower was under the command of General MacArthur, who embraced controversial issues. While this meant they did not get along well MacArthur saw the value of Eisenhower and the need to keep him around. “MacArthur embraced controversial issues; Eisenhower avoided them. When Eisenhower became President, the nation paid a price for his avoidance of controversy, as in desegregation crisis or in dealing with Senator Joseph R. McCarthy.”[8] This lack of dealing with controversy is a problem throughout Eisenhower’s military and political career.

One of the other problems Eisenhower had throughout his life was an anger problem. While under the command of General Marshall the Army’s Chief of Staff he had a very bad experience when he was not getting the field commands that he desired. After this experience he wrote in his journal “anger cannot win, it cannot even think clearly.”[9] But this experience lead to his promotion to major general and general Marshall said he was “was really not a staff officer.”[10]

When Eisenhower got to England he “proved to be outstanding at public relations.”[11] This is a very important quality for a President to have and it proved useful when “Eisenhower manipulated the press, for his own purposes and for the good of the Allied cause.”[12] For the same reasons the press liked him so did the British leadership especially Prime Minister Churchill. “Throughout the war, Eisenhower’s good relations with the British leadership would be one of his greatest strengths.”[13] These relations proved useful beyond the war when dealing with both the British and French governments while he was in office.

One of the strongest leadership qualities which allowed Eisenhower succeed both during the war and after, was surrounding himself with strong, competent leadership. “Eisenhower believed the most crucial appointment was his chief of staff.”[14] He believed “Officers that fail, must be ruthlessly weeded out.”[15] Before Operation Overlord, Eisenhower commanded Operation Torch, this operation was the invasion of North Africa. In this operation there was a battle called Kasserine Pass, in this battle the Americans were defeated. “Kasserine was Eisenhower’s first real battle; taking it all in all, his performance was miserable. Only American firepower, and German shortages, had saved him from a humiliating defeat.”[16] While direct responsibility fell on General Fredenall, “the man most responsible for American shortcomings was Eisenhower himself, because he was not tough enough. He had allowed Fredendall to retain command, despite his serious and well-founded doubts.”[17] Once again Eisenhower’s dislike for controversy caused problems. Although Torch was not one of the Allied’s best moments, “Eisenhower learned which of his subordinates could stand up to the strain of battle and which could not. Had it not been for torch… the allies would have gone ashore with an insecure Eisenhower in command of inexperienced troops led by Lloyd Fredenall.”[18] This would have turned Operation Overlord into a complete failure. After Operation Torch and Operation Roundup, Eisenhower was named as the commander for Operation Overlord; the invasion of Normandy, France.

While Eisenhower may have been uncomfortable with those under his command he knew how to act around subordinates. “He had learned how critical it was for him to be always cheery and optimistic in the presence of subordinates, how costly caution can often be in combat.”[19] He knew that “nothing pleased the footslogger struggling in the mud of Italy more than hearing that Eisenhower had put Spaatz or some other general in his place.”[20] Knowing the morale of his men and what they like is very much like knowing what the populist want and how to get it to them. Although while he was President he was very spot on with what the populist wanted he didn’t always do it.

Eisenhower’s first campaign for president was mainly over fiscal responsibility. After the war he was a very decisive man and because of that “Eisenhower ended up fiscal 1960 with a surplus of a billion dollars.”[21] He did this because he believed in the cause he was fighting for but when the country wanted a massive nuclear arms race with Russia he did not agree and therefore did not support an arms race. Instead he gave statements such as, “How many times do we have to destroy Russia?”[22] He did this because Eisenhower was a visionary and thought that “we must address this problem in terms, not of six months, but of forty years.”[23] Eisenhower always placed the importance of the nation before himself. Even though he lost Eisenhower still had a meeting with Kennedy at the Oval Office where “Kennedy listened carefully and intelligently as Eisenhower explained the wary the White House functioned.”[24]

Up until the end Eisenhower always was a loyal servant to the people of the United States, both as a soldier and as a President. His life experience gave him the leadership tools necessary to run major military operations as well as the country. These tools was a natural ability when it came to public relations, honesty, ability to surround himself with competent people, self-reliance, organizational ability, integrity, foresight, enthusiasm and great interpersonal skills. These attributes and virtues enabled him to the kind of President and statesman he became.

---

[1] Ambrose, Stephen E., Eisenhower Soldier and President (New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 1990), 16.

[2] Ibid, 17.

[3] Ibid, 23.

[4] Ibid, 27.

[5] Ibid, 30.

[6] Ibid, 35.

[7] Ibid, 47.

[8] Ibid, 47.

[9] Ibid, 65.

[10] Ibid, 65.

[11] Ibid, 72.

[12] Ibid, 73.

[13] Ibid, 75.

[14] Ibid, 77.

[15] Ibid, 95.

[16] Ibid, 94.

[17] Ibid, 94.

[18] Ibid, 119.

[19] Ibid, 119.

[20] Ibid, 112.

[21] Ibid, 479.

[22] Ibid, 479.

[23] Ibid, 484.

[24] Ibid, 531.

Many of the issues addressed within the book Personal Faith, Public Policy have religious conservatives as their base of advocates. Chapter nine directly addresses the issue of religious freedoms. There are many of people who believe this nation has many people religious fanatics who wish to manipulate the Declaration of Independence in order to create a theocracy. The objectives of the chapter are to address the issue of Church and State, Christianity’s effect on the democracy, the battleground of religious liberties, and the biblical approach to religious liberties. Then after Jackson and Perkins present a defense of the religious freedoms, they then go on the offensive and address issues which are currently being debated. According to Jackson and Perkins the Christian faith has benefited our nation as a hole.
American culture has created an environment which people believe the church played no role in the history of the United States. This is incorrect, in fact “that without Christianity, America would never have become the great power it is today.” Within the United States there has been a slippery slope effect. This started “at the time the First Amendment was written and ratified, a number of the fifteen states had established state churches.” Ending with “liberals who misread America’s original document are really saying is the federal government should not only silence churches but also exclude their members from any influence on government.” One of the large steps taken in this slippery slope is when the Supreme Court misinterpreted Thomas Jefferson.
The Supreme Court misinterpreted the term separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson was the first person to use the term when writing a letter to religious leaders. He said, “Legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” This has been interpreted to the benefit of the churches. The current interpretations of the Supreme Court has had many major impacts on the why which the government conducts its business. This is explained later when Jackson and Perkins tackle the battleground for the Religious liberties. In order to provide a defense of Christianity for the liberals there must be given examples of a positive impact on Democracy.
By providing evidence that Christianity has a positive impact on Democracy gives the American public reasons not to believe the Liberals. As a group the Founding Fathers of the United States they wanted freedom of religion. “Freedom of religion was established to protect the free exercise of the Christian faith without the interference of an overly intrusive government.” This was created out of frustration with the King of England who required a certain belief system. In the past there have been many attempts to connect Christians with radical Islamic terrorists. The Muslim track record with freedom of religion is appalling. They conquered many nations by Jihad, forcibly limiting the practicing of other faiths. Currently worldwide the United States State Department has identified eight countries with limited freedom of religion.
There are not very many Biblical scriptures which have dealt with freedom of religion. Jackson and Perkins use many examples from the life of Daniel. Daniel is a particular good example because of his position within the Government. There were two things which Daniel did to benefit him, the first was do the best job he could; second was to not hide his personal relationship with God. His enemies were “unable to find fault with Daniel’s professional and personal life, they decided to make a wedge issue of his religion.” By doing this Daniel was trusted and he flourished within the positions he was given. “America has prospered not because it forced everyone to be a Christian; it has not, but rather America has recognized that we each have a choice.”
Within America the religious freedoms have been infringed upon. The main way which Jackson and Perkins express this infringement is through their analysis of the local law enforcement hate crimes prevention act of 2007(LLEHCPA). This law would give the Attorney General the right to aid local law enforcement with resources. These cases would include only hate crimes, the law also had a clause of crimes against someone’s sexual orientation. The law according to Jackson and Perkins would go beyond the crimes and extend to opinions contrary to the political correct ideology. There are three reasons why the bill was not liked by Jackson and Perkins. The first is the bill did not define sexual orientation. LLEHCPA also contains the phrase bodily harm, “the legal ramifications of this phrase can present a huge loophole through which speech can be included under the hate crime legislation.” The authors also are worried about the government pressing charges and indicting churches. Many government buildings have had the Ten Commandments removed from the walls or statues. This also applies to religious symbols such as nativity scenes and crèche.
America has had a history of religious freedoms which it extends to all faiths and beliefs. The current political climate is attempting to change the religious liberties of the nation. Watching its religious liberties be destroyed is the churches current role, when what they need to be doing is taking an active role in their government. “We cannot allow Christians to be forced to check their faith at the gate of the public square.” The church must push back and give an defense for their religious liberties much like Jackson and Perkins did in chapter nine.

Jackson and Perkins tackled the problem of racial equality within the church. As always they gave the biblical perspective of racism. Then history of black evangelicals is the result of the separation of the white evangelicals from the blacks. Where the church is now and how integration is happening within the church. While also addressing the policies supported by both blacks and whites evangelicals. There was a plan made in 1973 to level the playing field for minority groups. This plan is called affirmative action; Jackson and Perkins give the benefits and shortcomings of this plan. Blacks still think the government is against them because of the criminal justice system and the black poverty. Within one chapter Jackson and Perkins attempt to address many different issues within the church’s response to racism.
The Bible teaches on subjects relating to racism but not the direct topic. There are three biblical principles the authors listed which impact the church’s opinion on racism. First “True freedom comes from God.” Resulting in a improper since of freedom for those who seek it elsewhere. The bible also teaches, “Equality among believers comes from Jesus Christ.” Jesus teaches us to love our neighbors as ourselves, it also refers to believers as brothers and sisters. The last one is “True brotherhood is achieved only in Jesus Christ.” For these reasons the white evangelical need to reach out to their black brothers and sisters. The church needs to take the biblical principles that Jesus taught and apply them to their life. “The unity that we are referring to must come from within us spiritually and then affect our approach to life, relationships and politics.” It will only be in this manner that the church will achieve racial reconciliation.
There is a long history of black evangelicals within America; they have shaped the current image of the United States. “Racism is one of America’s original sins and one of the toughest problems to overcome.” The first blacks to come to the United States were on the Mayflower, as slaves. The Republican Party was the driving force during the civil war to abolish slavery. “Churches became the anchor of the black community in the reconstruction era after the Civil War.” Somewhere along the way there was a splitting of this support from the Republican Party. This support was during changed the civil rights movement. “This lack of support put a wedge between the strongest branches of the Christian movement.” During this movement the white and black evangelicals separated. The price of this separation was the L.A. riots; “This kind of race riot could happen again if we do not address racism within the walls of the church.” This division within the church must be overcome for the entire nation to gain the unification many minority leaders desire.
As a church we are to a point where the black and white evangelicals want to voice the same concerns when it comes to voting. Currently; “Black church leaders in those states began to lead their flocks toward a unified Christian front.” The republicans should acknowledge the black values voters and support them. The process of integration is not easy because the church is filled with fallen human beings. Yet “many pastors no will no longer speak of the white-led church versus the black-led church.” The church is slowly addressing this topic of racism; it is still not at the point where Jesus teaches us to love our brothers. “The church must deal with racism, or God will deal with the church.” This is a very important role for the church to figure out so it can present a united front to the nation. The book uses a example of a white church who opened their doors as a relief shelter to individuals fleeing from Hurricane Katrina. The church was majority white and the majority of the refugees were black. This was a great benefit to the church and the refugees.
Historically the black population has voted for principles which are of a “social justice” nature; where as whites historically vote for “personal righteousness issues”. These are the different opinions of policy which divide the two evangelical movements. “It’s important to remember that we need both perspectives-righteousness and justice-to allow the glory of God to be seen.” The nation needs both of the different issues therefore it is not a problem of who which issues they emphasize.
When the civil rights movement hit the nation in the 60s and 70s; one of the policies thought up was affirmative action. This policy is designed to benefit minorities by “leveling the playing field.” Though this policy was a good idea, once it was implemented, the results have been less than desired. “Sadly, after affirmative action was formally instituted, the 1970s yielded only one more percentage point of poverty reduction among black families.” On the flip side the labor force has increased in both women and minorities. “Between 1982 and 1995, the percentage of female managers in the United States rose from 40.5 percent to 48 percent.” The policy of affirmative action while unproductive at reducing poverty; it has bolstered the amount of females and minorities within the workforce. Churches need to follow this example and “open their hearts and their organizational charts to train the next generation of minority and female leaders.” Those who are young now will follow in the paths of those before them so if their parents are in a life not pleasing to God the children will blindly follow.
“Nearly two-thirds of the African Americans surveyed believed that the criminal justice system is rigged against them.” This statistic is extremely disappointing if it were false but the statistics prove they are correct. “Blacks make up 43.9 percent of the state and federal prison population, which totals 2.1 million inmates.” The truth is blacks are more likely to go to prison; Jackson and Perkins want to not incarcerate non-violent criminals. While these inmates are in prison they learn things that create worse human beings. Non-violent criminals should go to treatment.
The book mentions poverty, yet because it is within another chapter they do not address it directly. They mention The Black Contract with America on Moral Values; this is a six point plan which will assist the black man to overcome poverty. The six principles are: family reconstruction, wealth creation, educational reform, African relief, prison reform and, health care.
The goal of reuniting the church is to transform our nation through a unified body of believers. This can be done by churches first accepting each other as brothers and sisters in Christ. Their need to be evangelicals who are willing to reach out to those minority groups in their community. This goal will only be achieved by seeing one color the red blood of Jesus Christ. Once the church has reached a point of reconciliation they can then spread it out to their community. Black and white evangelicals once worked together for a propose of the kingdom of heaven, we need to restart that work.

One of the issues concerning the American public when voting this year is health care system. Citizens want heath care to become more affordable and accessible. Chapter seven addresses the current health care system, biblical perspective on health care; the political perspectives on how to fix the current health care system.
First the chapter addresses the problems with the current health care system. There are three problems highlighted first is lack of access to healthcare. Jackson and Perkins both believe that many patients do not get access to the best care because their insurance company will not pay for the best care. The book gives the example of when Jackson was personally over coming esophageal cancer. For the treatments and test Jackson underwent his medical bills were high but other costs were above “$100,000 in unexpected personal costs including special food, clothing, and preventive health treatments.” Most individuals do not take preventive measures when it comes to their health. As Americans we have a country which does not care about preventing sickness because our doctors are so readily accessible.
As in every chapter the biblical perspective is given; the old testament is full of preventive measures the Israelites were so post to undergo in order to adhere to the religious laws. “The Jewish dietary code was aimed at sustaining health.” Although “there is no real scriptural directive about modern health care;” followers of Christ established the first medical schools in Europe.
There are two opposing schools of thought when trying to solve the healthcare system within the United States. Both liberals and conservatives have different perspectives. Both agree “the best health-care plan will be a public/private commitment based upon biblical values.” The United States spends “17 percent of our gross national product. The most other nations spend is 10 percent of their GNP.” Both sides also agree the United States has some of the best doctors and hospitals.
Democrats are pushing to change the current health care system to that of a universal health care. This creates health care for all American citizens regardless of the economic status. This eliminates one of the current perks Americans love, the ability to make an appointment and receive quick treatment. Under universal health care the book addresses three problems “Endless lines to see physicians… Large numbers of underprepared “cheap doctors” and less qualified nurses and support staff… Fewer innovations in substantive techniques and particles.” In order to achieve universal health care some citizens have to limit their perks so others can receive them.
Republicans wish to give tax credits in order to allow citizens to purchase their own private health insurance. This idea is to allow more citizens to receive the benefit of health care without cutting into the coverage. The republicans want a free market approach to the solving the health care system within the United States. They also wish the
Jackson and Perkins are also afraid the universal health care system will infringe on the morally questionable practices. They give examples of “abortions, sex change operations, and other morally objectionable services.” The goal of a reformed health care system “will protect the moral consciences of the health-care providers as well.”
Christians must be accountable for maintaining their personal health and hygiene. The book outlines eight steps to take preventive measures when it comes to their health. They are focused on maintaining on fitness, healthy eating habits and proper rest.
This chapter assumes every person in the United States is deserving health care. The chapter provides a good historical biblical analysis to the problem of health care. While not endorsing any particular opinion on how to fix the current health care system, there is a very good summarization of the proposed solutions.