Letters to the Editor
Publicola
Published Letters: 238 Editor's Choice: 8
-
"Arik Sharon" and other truths
[Read the article: Israel's failed-state strategy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"That's Rich" wrote: "[Y]ou're also under the impression that the former Prime Minister of Israel was named 'Arik Sharon'?"
As Israelis and others who follow Israeli politics know, the former Prime Minister of Israel was commonly known and referred to as Arik, in addition to Ariel, Sharon.
"That's Rich": "So, 'Aron', you're a 19-year Israeli citizen and IDF vet who only recently learned about the history surrounding the establishment of Israel from a single book called 'Iron Fist' by some fellow named Jabotinsky?"
Aron's didn't say or imply that he learned Israeli history 'from a single book'. Also: Zeev Jabotinsky wasn't merely 'some fellow' - Jabotinsky was a founding father of the Zionist movement, including the founder of the Zionist-right Revisionist Movement.
"That's Rich": "And you think that 'Israel and its supporters' should fully expect (and presumably accept) terrorist violence from the Palestinians?"
Israel and its supporters shouldn't 'fully expect' (unlike you "That's Rich" I'll make no presumptions here about 'acceptance') terrorist violence from the Palestinians any more than Palestinians and its supporters should 'fully expect' West Bank settlements and other violations of international law.
Which isn't to say that I believe that either of these conflict-engendering actions justifies the other - to be clear I don't. I'm instead one of those "old fashioned" types who believe that two wrongs don't make a right. And I'm also one of those who believes that my country, the United States, should not provide the funds for any such activities.
"That's Rich": "Heh heh...I'm quite used to Palestinian 'supporters' lying about various historical facts as well as their own personal lives and stories to try and lend credibility to their claims, but you should try and make it a little more plausible next time, 'Aron'..."
Trying to assail someone's credibility by suggesting that "Arik Sharon" isn't a correct reference to the former Israeli Prime Minister, by suggesting that Jabotinsky is merely "some fellow" within the context of the founding of Israel, and/or by putting words and presumptions into the mouths of others is amusing, at best.
-
The IDF and the West Bank
[Read the article: Israel's failed-state strategy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]cardshark wrote:
I know you're smart enough not to deny that the IDF is no longer occupying the West Bank...
The West Bank is still under Israeli occupation (as is the Golan Heights). Moreover the Israeli Defense Force is still in the West Bank, where it will remain as long as the Israeli West Bank 'settlements' and the infrastructure that connects and supports them (all bankrolled by the United States), remains.
-
Senior Israeli Official: Disengagment stops Palestinian state
[Read the article: Israel's failed-state strategy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]bigdakine declared:
"As far as I know, [Dov] Weisglass actually favors a two-state solution."
Guess again.
----------------------------------
Haaretz, 10/11/2005
Top PM aide: Gaza plan aims to freeze the peace process
By Ari Shavit
"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process," Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior adviser Dov Weisglass has told Haaretz.
"And when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress." ...
"The disengagement is actually formaldehyde," he said. "It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians."
Asked why the disengagement plan had been hatched, Weisglass replied: "Because in the fall of 2003 we understood that everything was stuck. And although by the way the Americans read the situation, the blame fell on the Palestinians, not on us, Arik [Sharon] grasped that this state of affairs could not last, that they wouldn't leave us alone, wouldn't get off our case. Time was not on our side. There was international erosion, internal erosion. Domestically, in the meantime, everything was collapsing. The economy was stagnant, and the Geneva Initiative had gained broad support. And then we were hit with the letters of officers and letters of pilots and letters of commandos [refusing to serve in the territories]. These were not weird kids with green ponytails and a ring in their nose with a strong odor of grass. These were people like Spector's group [Yiftah Spector, a renowned Air Force pilot who signed the pilot's letter]. Really our finest young people."
Weisglass does not deny that the main achievement of the Gaza plan is the freezing of the peace process in a "legitimate manner."
"That is exactly what happened," he said. "You know, the term `peace process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen.... what I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did."
Sharon, he said, could also argue "honestly" that the disengagement plan was "a serious move because of which, out of 240,000 settlers, 190,000 will not be moved from their place."
_______________
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=485491