babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Gaza withdrawl and alterior motives

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Gaza withdrawl and alterior motives
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 13 April 2004 12:46 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Beware of Ariel Sharon bearing gifts

quote:
Disengagement should be encouraged by the United States, Europe and the Arab world. But only if they understand how Sharon got this far, and undertake to channel his energies with serious pressures and constraints in the coming year. Disengagement, and the security fence, began as proposals by Israeli "security doves" who recognized that there was no viable Palestinian leadership to negotiate with. They sought ways to reduce Israel's military commitment in the territories, keep out suicide bombers and maintain Israel as a Jewish and a democratic state. Under conditions of conflict, only disengagement appeared likely to break the disastrous demographic-geographic interlock created by the settlements and the burgeoning Palestinian population under Israeli control.
Since 9/11 and the occupation of Iraq, most strategic military threats to Israel have been radically reduced by an enhanced U.S. presence in the Middle East, leaving Palestinian terrorism and the demographic threat looming large.

The original advocates on the Israeli left and center of disengagement and a security fence along the 1967 border viewed it strictly as a security measure, designed to improve both Israel's and Palestine's situation, without precluding renewed negotiations over all extant issues - further territorial withdrawals, Jerusalem, refugees, etc. - once the security situation improved and the Palestinians came up with a more realistic leadership.

...

Sharon began to co-opt the idea about half a year ago, when it was clear that the public was fed up with his lack of a political program. But he advocates a limited disengagement, and conceives of it as a political rather than security program: Israel will withdraw from Gaza and a bit of the West Bank and effectively declare the political process over, or at least frozen for the indefinite future, thereby enabling it to strengthen its grip on greater Jerusalem and most of the West Bank.

etcetera and so on


So, in the view of this author (Yossi Alpher), Ariel "the Butcher" Sharon's offer of withdrawl is suspicious, and is really being made for Washington's benefit, not Israel or Palestine's. He is withdrawing (or pretending to want to withdraw) from Gaza in order to get Washington's blessing on Israel's claim over much West Bank land and on Jerusalem. Thus we see the original purpose of the apartheid wall come to fruition - it will act as the barrier between Ariel "the Butcher" Sharon's Israel and his vision of Palestine. This Palestine is much reduced, both areally and in terms of arable land and water resources, than that mandated by the Green Line. Needless to say, no right of return will ever be considered under such a unilateral decree.

Edited to fix quote - and to add a warning to other babblers: cutting and pasting from The International Herald Tribune should be done with great care.

[ 13 April 2004: Message edited by: Sarcasmobri ]


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
o
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4435

posted 13 April 2004 12:49 PM      Profile for o     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ariel "the Butcher"? Then how would you describe Arafat?
From: toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 13 April 2004 12:52 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's your response?
From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 13 April 2004 12:54 PM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The lamb? The innocent? The wrongly-accused? The David Milgard of the Middle-East? The courageous leader who leads his people to the promised land?

(aargh..... what have I become?!!!!)


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 13 April 2004 12:59 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Then how would you describe Arafat?

How about "the figure I can mention to fake sounding like I have something to contribute when in fact all I have is opinion". Of course, you can criticise the term "Ariel the butcher" all you want, but simply stating "yeah, well what about...?" is hardly original nor interesting.


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
o
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4435

posted 13 April 2004 01:16 PM      Profile for o     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No offense dude, but that was the only thing in your post that I found amusing
From: toronto | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 13 April 2004 01:17 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I only use the term Ariel "the Butcher" Sharon to avoid the confusion that using Ariel "the Butcher" Sharon's last name (as shorthand - Sharon) causes vis-a-vis a certain editor here on rabble. Now I'm off to fix that damn quote box...
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 13 April 2004 03:37 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mr. Sharon has talked about withdrawing from Gaza, and now he has talked about withdrawing from parts of the West Bank.
A few months ago, he talked about removing some settlements. As I recall, what in fact happened was that he very publicly turfed a couple of dozen angry settlers from one of those coupla-trailer outposts, which they promptly went back to a few days later. Meanwhile, he continued building more new settlements and expanding the old.
So all this talk so far would seem to be just that . . . talk. He might withdraw from Gaza and just make the barriers all the way around the place bigger, let everyone inside rot. Maybe. But I find the notion that he'll actually withdraw from any part of the West Bank without adding more in some other part frankly risible. I'll believe it when I see it, and even then I'll want to look closely to see whether it's just sleight of hand like last time.
Don't watch what Sharon says. Watch what Sharon does.

From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Bubbles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3787

posted 14 April 2004 07:52 PM      Profile for Bubbles        Edit/Delete Post
Maybe Sharon is just building those settlements on the West Bank as reparation for the hundreds of Palistinian settlements that were buldozed when current Israel was created out of Palistine. He is just keeping it a secret sothat he can play Santa later on.
From: somewhere | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca