Israel need not occupy Cairo—or Egypt for that matter. We don’t want kibbutzim outside Cairo. In fact, we don’t want the socialist abominations in Israel, either. We can take a lesson from America’s example in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and similarly unfortunate places. Israel should demilitarize Egypt, force a peaceable constitution on it, exact territorial concessions, and destroy it totally to fear Israel for decades to come. The Americans did it in Germany and Japan. We would have peace in the Middle East. Yes, peace under the gun, but peace nonetheless. The world won’t be faced with Egyptian nuclear weapons in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. A win-win situation, even perhaps for the common Egyptians.

We won’t occupy Cairo to trade it for Sinai. Land for peace does not work, as any appeasement. That principle, however, is misspelled. For many nations, Arabs peace is not all-important. They do not trade land for peace. They, however, trade some land for assurance of no further annexation. Arabs stopped aggression against Israel after 1967 because they realized that continued aggression could lead to more territorial losses. When Israeli army stood at the Suez Canal, Egypt would have agreed to give up Sinai, as it had given up land to so many nations during its history, to prevent Israeli expansion to her biblically mandated border, the Nile. Yes, Egypt would remilitarize when Israeli government is weak. Yes, the war would renew. But there is no everlasting peace, anyway. Europeans share largely similar culture. Their economies are integrated. But how often they fight? Every few decades, and certainly every century. There will be no eternal peace in the Middle East. The real choice is between short, brutal, and efficient wars, and dragging conflict which bankrupts the economy, damages morale, and leads nowhere.