US Military States Israel Must Keep their Indigenous Lands of Judea and Samaria

Security First

December 13, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz

In the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War, after three Arab armies converged on Israel's nightmarish borders, even the United Nations was forced to recognize that Israel's pre-1967 Six-Day War borders invited repeated aggression. Thus, UN Resolution 242 - which formed the conceptual foundation for a peace settlement - declares that all states in the region should be guaranteed "safe and secure borders."

Lt. General (ret.) Tom Kelly:

"I cannot defend this land (Israel) without that terrain (West Bank) ... The West Bank Mountains, and especially their five approaches, are the critical terrain. If an enemy secures those passes, Jerusalem and Israel become uncovered. Without the West Bank, Israel is only eight miles wide at its narrowest point. That makes it indefensible." ^[i]

The late Admiral James Wilson "Bud" Nance:

"No logical reason for Israel to give up one inch of the disputed areas. Quite to the contrary, I believe if Israel were to move out of the Golan Heights, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, it would increase instability and the possibility of war, increase the necessity for Israel to preempt in war and the possibility that nuclear weapons would be used to prevent an Israel loss, and increase the possibility that the U.S. would have to become involved in a war." ^[ii]

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Earl Wheeler:

"The minimum required for Israel's defense includes most of the West Bank and the whole of Gaza and the Golan Heights." ^[iii]

 

---

[i] Tom Kelly, chief of Operations during the Gulf War in 1991, Jerusalem Post, November 7, 1991.

[ii] Former Commander of USS Forrestal and former Chief of Staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Congressional Record, July 29, 1991.

[iii] A study done by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff June 29, 1967 under Gen. Earl Wheeler points to the minimum territory Israel required "in order to permit defense against possible conventional Arab attack ..." The study content was considered so explosive and contrary to State Department policy, it was stamped 'Top Secret' until the Wall Street Journal revealed it in 1983.