U.S. vetoes Arafat vote in U.N.

[kramadas]

Originally posted by tribal

At this point its hard to say who started the fighting, as there are many instances of Jewish terrorism against the Arabs in the early days.

this is utter non sense. it is completely obvious to me that you dont know your history nor do you understand the situation on the ground. take a flight to israel and visit the land because you are talking utter non sense.

do you want to know why peace in mid east isnt dependent on Israel? i will tell you why. Israel does not exist in the minds of most of the arab countries. if you go to any arab country, except for perhaps Morocco, you will not see Israel on a world map. Israel is not excepted as a nation because they are Jewish. this racist view did not begin post 1967, but post 1948. on any arab map, you will not see Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, you will only see Palestine, overlapping any boundaries that are currently part of the Jewish state. Peace will never happen until the arabs realize that Israel isnt some temporary stage of existence, but that Israel is a real country, with a real tradition, real people and real hopes and dreams. the vast, vast majority of israelis would kick all the settlers out of the territories tomorrow if only they would be assured of future security, end of cold blooded terrorism and end to the nazi-like encitement of palestinian children. but that hope does not exist because people like arafat are in power.

How could Egypt and Jordan have friendly relations with Israel if they do not recognize it as a country?

Just because one visits Israel and realizes how "beautiful" a country it is, does not mean that the person knows all about the history of the place. In fact, since you have only visited Israel (I'm assuming you haven't set foot in Palestine), it would be obvious your views would be slanted at best.

If you really believe its the problem of the other countries not recognizing Israel's right to exist, and these nations are using the Palestinian cause as an excuse; then how easy would it be to expose them for what they are. Give the Palestinians a state, withdraw and if the attacks persist, then the world would know Israel was in the right. That would seem the sensible course of action, instead of this bullshit shot for shot fighting, and inciting hate in the minds of normal Palestinians.

You would never believe that Israel is at fault, even partly, would you?

PS: You're telling me there were NO instances of Jewish terrorism against the Arabs pre-1940's?

[tribal]

How could Egypt and Jordan have friendly relations with Israel if they do not recognize it as a country?

think about what youve just said. youve answered your own question.

If you really believe its the problem of the other countries not recognizing Israel's right to exist, and these nations are using the Palestinian cause as an excuse; then how easy would it be to expose them for what they are. Give the Palestinians a state, withdraw and if the attacks persist, then the world would know Israel was in the right. That would seem the sensible course of action, instead of this bullshit shot for shot fighting, and inciting hate in the minds of normal Palestinians.

You would never believe that Israel is at fault, even partly, would you?

Israel has been doing this and trying to implement a lasting peace for the past 5-10 years, first with Oslo and then with Abu Ala, yet the breakpoint has always came from the Palestinian side. IDF withdrew from the majority of PA cities under the cease fire, curbed settlement expansions and unfroze PA financial assets to alleviate the Palestinian financial disaster. Instead of waging war against islamo-fascist terror scum like Hamas, Abu Ala chose to 'talk' with them, and 'persuade' them to stop blowing up women and children. evidently his persuasion wasnt very effective, as 17 victims of Hamas terror can now prove.

then came the Jerusalem bombing, inhuman in the worst aspects of all that is evil

http://www.up-in-flames.com/pages/terror.html

ive been to israel, PA areas and jordan and ive seen the situation. yes, its not a black and white matter, there are people on both sides that suffer, and people bleed the same color no matter what the race or religion, but you have to understand the elements that are driving this conflict, and the point im trying to tell you is that anti-semitism and islamic-fundamentalist racism did not begin after 1967 six day war. it began before Israel was even established

PS: You're telling me there were NO instances of Jewish terrorism against the Arabs pre-1940's?

perhaps there was violence by fringe elements, and if you name me some i would be interested to know. you are comparing grapes to watermelons when discussing Arab and Israel in terms of terrorism. Israel has never had any mainstream and majority-supported group that advocates purposeful killing of civilians, Palestinians do, and thats a fact. Last week a group of extremist settlers were arrested and sentenced to harsh prison terms for wanting to blow up arab school girls. Israel has law and justice. Since this bloody antifada began, not one, not one member of Hamas, IJ or Tanzim has been arrested nor tried by PA justice system. Terrorism flows freely in the territories.

[g420]

Originally posted by tribal

How could Egypt and Jordan have friendly relations with Israel if they do not recognize it as a country?

think about what youve just said. youve answered your own question.

If you really believe its the problem of the other countries not recognizing Israel's right to exist, and these nations are using the Palestinian cause as an excuse; then how easy would it be to expose them for what they are. Give the Palestinians a state, withdraw and if the attacks persist, then the world would know Israel was in the right. That would seem the sensible course of action, instead of this bullshit shot for shot fighting, and inciting hate in the minds of normal Palestinians.

You would never believe that Israel is at fault, even partly, would you?

Israel has been doing this and trying to implement a lasting peace for the past 5-10 years, first with Oslo and then with Abu Ala, yet the breakpoint has always came from the Palestinian side. IDF withdrew from the majority of PA cities under the cease fire, curbed settlement expansions and unfroze PA financial assets to alleviate the Palestinian financial disaster. Instead of waging war against islamo-fascist terror scum like Hamas, Abu Ala chose to 'talk' with them, and 'persuade' them to stop blowing up women and children. evidently his persuasion wasnt very effective, as 17 victims of Hamas terror can now prove.

then came the Jerusalem bombing, inhuman in the worst aspects of all that is evil

http://www.up-in-flames.com/pages/terror.html

ive been to israel, PA areas and jordan and ive seen the situation. yes, its not a black and white matter, there are people on both sides that suffer, and people bleed the same color no matter what the race or religion, but you have to understand the elements that are driving this conflict, and the point im trying to tell you is that anti-semitism and islamic-fundamentalist racism did not begin after 1967 six day war. it began before Israel was even established

PS: You're telling me there were NO instances of Jewish terrorism against the Arabs pre-1940's?

perhaps there was violence by fringe elements, and if you name me some i would be interested to know. you are comparing grapes to watermelons when discussing Arab and Israel in terms of terrorism. Israel has never had any mainstream and majority-supported group that advocates purposeful killing of civilians, Palestinians do, and thats a fact. Last week a group of extremist settlers were arrested and sentenced to harsh prison terms for wanting to blow up arab school girls. Israel has law and justice. Since this bloody antifada began, not one, not one member of Hamas, IJ or Tanzim has been arrested nor tried by PA justice system. Terrorism flows freely in the territories.

once again i applaud you on your knowledge on the situation, i've been through this with raver maniac or whatever his/her name is before & he's bound to come back with some distorted pro-"palestinian" propaganda that he gets from hamas.com or some crap like that

[alivak]

I must take offense to one thing stated early in this thread, that Raver Mania said Arafat was once a terrorist like Ariel Sharon was. That is the most outrageous thing you can say.

Sharon never ordered the murders of Olympic athletes, he never ordered the assassination of a US diplomat in Jordon, Sharon never paid an Israeli or anyone else for that matter to walk into a hotel lobby during a religious holiday and blow it up. Sharon was a soldier and defense minister before becoming Prime Minister, not some renegade who supports killing innocent women and childen on school buses, hotels, restaurants, etc. You do not have to like sharon or his politics, but do not compare him to a terrorist, who still is a terrorist and who still supports terror. Just ask Abu Mazan (sic)

I am impressed with the level of discourse on this thread, it seems that once trouble makers were weeded out, you can actually have normal conversation

[kramadas]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/israel_and_the_palestinians/profiles/1154622.stm

Ariel Sharon: Controversial hardliner

It once looked like Mr Sharon's political career was over

By Middle East analyst Gerald Butt

Ariel Sharon has a thick skin and is proud of it. He does not care who loves or hates him - be they Israelis or Arabs.

The one aim in life for the 74-year old former soldier and veteran politician is to ensure total security for Israel on his terms.

Sharon cares nothing for the cynics

That means keeping maximum land and political rights for the Jewish state and giving the very minimum of both to the Palestinians.

Mr Sharon was born in Palestine in 1928, when it was a British mandate.

As a young man he joined the Jewish underground military organisation Haganah and fought in the Arab-Israeli war in 1948-49 after the creation of the Jewish state.

In the 1950s he led a number of punitive military operations against Egyptian military units stationed in the Gaza Strip - one incident in 1955 resulting in the deaths of 38 Egyptian troops.

Mr Sharon rose to the rank of brigadier general and commanded a division during the Six Day war of June 1967 in which Israel captured East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The harsh occupation measures that he enforced there gave many Palestinians their first taste of a man who has become their sworn enemy.

Lebanon disaster

Mr Sharon was first elected to the Knesset in 1973, but resigned a year later to serve as a security adviser to Yitzhak Rabin.

He was later re-elected to the Israeli parliament in 1977.

Mr Sharon masterminded Israel's disastrous invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

As defence minister, and without explicitly telling Prime Minister Menachem Begin, he sent the Israeli army all the way to Beirut, a strike which ended in the expulsion of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) from Lebanon.

The move stopped the PLO using Lebanon to launch attacks against Israel, but also resulted in the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians by Lebanese Christian militiamen in two Beirut refugee camps under Israeli control.

Mr Sharon was removed from office in 1983 by an Israeli tribunal investigating the 1982 Lebanon invasion, finding him indirectly responsible for the killings.

Political come-back

For most politicians, an indictment of that kind would have meant the end of a political career.

But Mr Sharon remained a popular figure among the Israeli right, and he felt that if he bided his time, then another opportunity would present itself.

Ariel Sharon's mission - his enemies call it a dangerous obsession - is to fight for Israel's security, believing all the while that the end justifies the means

As housing minister in the early 1990s, he presided over the biggest building drive in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza since Israel occupied the territories in the Six Day War.

After Binyamin Netanyahu's right-wing coalition came to power in 1996, the new Israeli PM bowed to pressure to include the former army general in his cabinet.

On appointing him as foreign minister in 1998, Mr Netanyahu said Ariel Sharon was the best man for the job.

"We shouldn't deal with bygones," he said. "He has a record throughout his public life and during the past 15 years that people should be proud of."

Mr Sharon went on to become leader of the right-wing Likud Party in opposition after Mr Netanyahu's decisive defeat in the 1999 general election.

After the failure of last year's Camp David talks, Mr Sharon sought to stir a public groundswell against the then Prime Minister Ehud Barak, depicting him as a usurper ready to trade Jerusalem for a peace agreement.

''Barak does not have the right to give up Jerusalem, which the people received as a legacy,'' Mr Sharon said at a parliamentary session.

Security above all

His controversial visit in 2000 to the al-Aqsa mosque compound in east Jerusalem, a site which is also holy to Jews, was one of the sparks for the second Palestinian intifada (uprising).

Cynics say Mr Sharon knew the visit would trigger violence and gambled on the Israeli public turning to a tough leader like him who would know how to handle it firmly.

But once again, Mr Sharon is not interested in what cynics or anyone might say.

In the subsequent election campaign he said he was prepared to make peace with the Arabs, but not under threat.

Above all, he would do nothing that undermined "the rights of Jews to live safely in their own land".

Ariel Sharon's mission - his enemies call it a dangerous obsession - is to fight for Israel's security, believing all the while that the end justifies the means.

[kramadas]

http://www.merip.org/Palestine_Primer/primer_page3.html

Who Is Ariel Sharon?

A retired army general, Ariel Sharon, 72, has been a major figure in Israeli politics for decades. He commanded the infamous Unit 101 that massacred 53 Palestinian civilians at Kibya in 1953. In 1971, he led a systematic campaign to quell opposition in Gaza through massive repression, expulsions, and arrests. He was first elected to the Knesset in 1974 and, as defense minister in 1982, he led the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. An Israeli tribunal found Sharon indirectly responsible for the massacre (by Lebanese militias under Israeli control) of thousands of Palestinian civilians living in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. In the aftermath, he was removed as defense minister but retained a role in the Cabinet as "minister without portfolio."

In the early 1990s, Sharon served as housing minister and promoted a massive construction drive to increase Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. In 1998, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu named Sharon foreign minister. As current head of the Likud party, Sharon has vociferously criticized Prime Minister Ehud Barak for negotiating with the Palestinians. He maintains a residence in Jerusalem's Old City (draped in an Israeli flag) and his provocative visit to al-Haram al-Sharif on Sept. 28, and the harsh Israeli response to the protests that followed, helped ignite the current uprising.

Sharon became the Likud candidate for prime minister in Israel's planned February 6, 2001 elections when Binyamin Netanyahu withdrew. He currently holds a large lead over Barak in the polls. At a conference in Israel in late December 2000, Sharon discussed the "peace proposals" he might consider as prime minister. According to his comments, the IDF would withdraw from 50 percent of the Occupied Territories, but not to Israel's pre-1967 borders, as mandated by resolution 242. Israel would continue to occupy the Jordan Valley, as a "buffer zone" between the Palestinian entity and Jordan, with which country Israel signed a comprehensive peace treaty in 1994. Settlements, bypass roads and complete Israeli control of crossings between PA-controlled areas and Israel would remain in place. Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees would not be on Sharon's negotiating table.

[kramadas]

http://amconmag.com/01_13_03/buchanan7.html

Ariel Sharon’s Shakedown

by Pat Buchanan

“Tough Love for United,†exclaimed the Wall Street Journal, as it congratulated Uncle Sam for stiffing United Airlines’ plea for $1.8 billion in loan guarantees. Rebuffed, the beloved old airline had to declare its bankruptcy.

It’s all for the best, the Journal assures us, “maybe this tough love rejection will start a new government precedent, or at least we can dream.†Fine. May we now expect the Journal to call on Mr. Bush to reject the $10 billion in loan guarantees demanded by Ariel Sharon? Don’t bet on it.

Yet, Sharon’s demand is astonishing in its audacity. California and New York face huge budget shortfalls. The U.S. Treasury is running a deficit nearing $200 billion. Yet, Sharon, who ignored Bush when the president publicly called on him to pull his army out of West Bank cities, is demanding that U.S. taxpayers fork over $4 billion in new military aid and agree to pay off $10 billion Israel intends to borrow should Israel decide to default.

Why should we do this? What does America get out of this? What has all the $100 billion in aid we have shoveled out to Israel bought us, other than ingratitude and the enmity of the Arab world?

While Israel has a first-rate military, it is of no use to us. In Desert Storm, Bush I had to bribe Yitzhak Shamir with $5 billion in aid, $400 million in loan guarantees, and Patriot missiles to stay out of the fighting, lest Israeli intervention dynamite our coalition. Journalists and diplomats alike, returning from the Mideast, attest that our almost-blind support of Israel is a major cause of the anti-Americanism that is sweeping the Islamic world.

When the price of Israel could be paid in dollars alone, $3 billion a year, most members of Congress chose to pony up rather than face the retribution of an Israeli Lobby that has in its trophy case the scalps of two chairmen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, J. William Fulbright and Chuck Percy.

But now the price of the Israeli connection has begun to rise. U.S. weapons technology given to Israel has been sold to China. Only direct U.S. intervention prevented Israel from selling Beijing AWACS technology. The Patriot missile, the Phoenix air-to-air missile, the Lavi fighter, based on the F-16, have all been sold to Beijing.

In the Reagan era, Israel had the loathsome Jonathan Pollard, whom it suborned into treason, loot our innermost national security secrets, some of which are believed to have been traded to Moscow. Israel refuses to return the roomful of documents it stole and has pressured presidents for Pollard’s release so he can be brought to Israel where he is a hero.

Now Mr. Sharon has handed us Israel’s bill for abstaining from war with Iraq while President Bush is at maximum political risk. Not since 1957, when Dwight Eisenhower ordered Ben-Gurion to get his army out of Sinai, has a U.S. president faced down an Israeli Prime Minister.

To his credit, the president’s father tried. In 1991, having driven Iraq out of Kuwait, with his approval at 70 percent, Bush I was asked by Shamir for $10 billion in loan guarantees to bring a million Russian Jews to Israel. Bush assented, on one condition: Shamir must not settle them on the West Bank and must stop expanding settlements.

Shamir rejected the condition, and the Lobby went to work. Bush warned he would veto the guarantees. An Israeli minister called him an anti-Semite. While Shamir was defeated in June of 1992, Bush, his own election in trouble, eventually gave in and gave Israel the loan guarantees. Who was the Housing Minister who announced new settlements even as Bush I was denouncing them? Ariel Sharon.

Sharon now wants to repeat Israel’s victory over Bush’s father by making the son give Israel $4 billion in hardware and $10 billion in new loan guarantees as Sharon’s price for permitting us to crush Iraq while he holds America’s coat. It is a shakedown: Ariel Sharon’s big sting

What should Bush do? Tell Sharon the loan guarantees will not even be taken up until he begins to dismantle all the settlements he has begun to build since George W. took office. And if Sharon attempts to roll him in Congress, he, Bush, will go to the country and roll Sharon.

In short, stand up for U.S. national interests and declare America’s independence. Israel may be our ally in the war on terror. We are not Israel’s ally in its war on the Palestinians. Our commitment is to Israel’s security, not its settlements, which are the cause of the intifada.

Sharon’s opponent in January’s election, General Mitzna, has agreed to negotiate with the Palestinians on the basis of Camp David and to begin withdrawals from the West Bank and Gaza. If Israeli politicians can stand up to Sharon, why cannot U.S. presidents? If members of the Knesset can refuse to follow the suicidal path of Sharon & Netanyahu, why is Congress so cowardly?

[g420]

Originally posted by raver_mania

http://www.merip.org/Palestine_Primer/primer_page3.html

Who Is Ariel Sharon?

A retired army general, Ariel Sharon, 72, has been a major figure in Israeli politics for decades. He commanded the infamous Unit 101 that massacred 53 Palestinian civilians at Kibya in 1953. In 1971, he led a systematic campaign to quell opposition in Gaza through massive repression, expulsions, and arrests. He was first elected to the Knesset in 1974 and, as defense minister in 1982, he led the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. An Israeli tribunal found Sharon indirectly responsible for the massacre (by Lebanese militias under Israeli control) of thousands of Palestinian civilians living in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. In the aftermath, he was removed as defense minister but retained a role in the Cabinet as "minister without portfolio."

In the early 1990s, Sharon served as housing minister and promoted a massive construction drive to increase Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. In 1998, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu named Sharon foreign minister. As current head of the Likud party, Sharon has vociferously criticized Prime Minister Ehud Barak for negotiating with the Palestinians. He maintains a residence in Jerusalem's Old City (draped in an Israeli flag) and his provocative visit to al-Haram al-Sharif on Sept. 28, and the harsh Israeli response to the protests that followed, helped ignite the current uprising.

Sharon became the Likud candidate for prime minister in Israel's planned February 6, 2001 elections when Binyamin Netanyahu withdrew. He currently holds a large lead over Barak in the polls. At a conference in Israel in late December 2000, Sharon discussed the "peace proposals" he might consider as prime minister. According to his comments, the IDF would withdraw from 50 percent of the Occupied Territories, but not to Israel's pre-1967 borders, as mandated by resolution 242. Israel would continue to occupy the Jordan Valley, as a "buffer zone" between the Palestinian entity and Jordan, with which country Israel signed a comprehensive peace treaty in 1994. Settlements, bypass roads and complete Israeli control of crossings between PA-controlled areas and Israel would remain in place. Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees would not be on Sharon's negotiating table.

Sharon is a man who's too soft on the "palestinian" terrorists

[kramadas]

http://www.jafi.org.il/education/100/people/BIOS/sharon.html

Ariel Sharon (1928-)

Israel's 11th Prime Minister 2001-

By Neil Lazarus (updated by Steven Klein November 2002)

Ariel Sharon was born at Kfar Malal in 1928. His first military experience came when he joined the Haganah at the age of 14. He was only 20 in 1948 when he commanded an infantry company in the Alexandroni Brigade, during Israel's War of Independence.

Sharon's reputation as a military hero grew in 1953, when he founded and led the "101" special commando unit which carried out retaliatory operations following terrorist attacks in Israel. However, the unit remained independent for only five months and was disbanded after it raided the West Bank village of Kibya, killing nearly 70 innocent civilians.

His military prowess was demonstrated in 1967 during Israel's Six Day War, when he commanded an armored division. Two years later, Sharon was promoted to Head of the Southern Command Staff during the War of Attrition with Egypt.

Considering his chances of being appointed Chief of Staff to be slim, Sharon resigned from the IDF (Israeli Army) in June 1972, but was recalled to military service in the 1973 Yom Kippur War to command an armored division on the southern front.

Ariel Sharon entered political life after the Yom Kippur War. He was elected to the Knesset in December 1973 with the Likud party, but resigned a year later. Two years later, Sharon acted as a Security Adviser in Yitzhak Rabin's first government.

As a result of the Yom Kippur War and following the Rabin resignation in 1976, Sharon shared the prevailing disillusionment against the Labor establishment and decided to form a new party, which he called Shlomzion. His party gained two seats in the subsequent 1977 elections. In the same elections, the Likud Party came to power in Israel for the first time: Sharon disbanded the Shlomzion Party and joined the Likud.

Prime Minister Menahem Begin appointed him Minister of Agriculture and Chairman of the Ministerial Committee for settlements until 1981. With the rise of the political right in Israel and the growth of messianic Zionism, Sharon began to identify increasingly with the Gush Emunim movement and used his position to encourage the building of settlements. Despite the fact that he was involved in the return of Yamit in the Peace Agreement with Egypt in 1982, the settler movement considered him its champion.

Sharon served as Minister of Defense 1981-83, but his reputation was tainted during the Lebanon War. In September 1982, the IDF allowed a Phalange Militia to enter the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in Beirut to search for "militants". However the militia massacred hundreds of civilians. Public outrage forced the government to establish a commission of inquiry. Known as the Kahan Commission, it drew the conclusion that Sharon bore responsibility indirectly. Sharon was forced to resign, though he remained in the cabinet as Minister Without Portfolio.

From 1984-90, Sharon served as Minister of Industry and Trade, and from 1990-92 as the Minister of Housing and Construction. When Likud leader Yitzhak Shamir resigned following the party's electoral defeat in 1992, Sharon despite his experience was unable to escape the shadow of Sabra and Shatila, and was unable to make a successful bid to replace Shamir.

In July 1996, Sharon was appointed Minister of National Infrastructure in a compromise with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. After the resignation of David Levy, Sharon was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Sharon's inherited the Likud leadership after the defeat of Netanyahu and the Likud in the 1999 elections. He was influential in rehabilitating the party during its two years of opposition. Sharon was also able to recreate his image and shake off the stigma from Lebanon.

As the Barak government crumbled in late 2000, Ariel Sharon ran a successful campaign for Israel's first Special Election for the premiership, in February 2001, emphasizing the need for national unity. He won by a margin of 25% on an all-time low poll of 59% of the Israeli electorate. 15-20% of expected voters, including the vast majority of Arab voters, did not go to the polls. He fulfilled his campaign promise and established a broad-based National Unity government, including both the Labor party as well as the far right-wing National Union party. He appointed Labor Party leader Binyamin Ben-Eliezer as his Defense Minister and Deputy Prime Minister.

During his first several months in office Sharon demonstrated surprising restraint in dealing with Palestinian terror. He waited for the fact-finding committee set up following the Sharm el-Sheikh talks between former Prime Minister Barak and Arafat to deliver its findings, known as the Mitchell report, in May, resisting calls to strike at the PA immediately.

His first significant albeit symbolic step was to close the Orient House in East Jerusalem following the bombing of the Dolphinarium Discotheque in early June, in which 21 youths were killed. He then spent the summer in negotiations with the Americans, developing the Tenet Plan, which called for an immediate cease-fire by both sides. Sharon demanded "seven days of quiet" before implementing the plan, which Israel never received.

In the fall of 2001, Sharon became more aggressive, as Israel started making small, temporary incursions into Palestinian controlled areas and increased the pace of assassinations of terrorist leaders. However, he still showed too much restraint for the far-right party Yisrael Beitenu-National Union, which withdrew in October 2001. The settler movement grew frustrated that he was not as aggressive as its leaders desired, diminishing support for Sharon from this sector.

The violence spiraled to an all-time high in March 2002, when over 120 Israelis were killed. Terror peaked with the Seder suicide bombing of a hotel in Netanya, killing 29 guests. Sharon immediately launched Operation Defensive Wall, meant to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian Authority.

From April 2002 through November 2002 Israel has been engaged in a cycle of deep incursions into Palestinian areas to wipe out individual terrorist networks following attacks emanating from those areas.

Sharon had intended to see the National Unity government to its full term in October 2003. However, Ben-Eliezer, who had felt pressure from inside his party for months, withdrew the Labor party from the coalition. Sharon tried to establish a stable coalition without Labor but could not do so, refusing to change his government guidelines for the sake of readmitting the far right into the government. He therefore dissolved the Knesset and called for early elections, to be held January 28, 2003.

[kramadas]

Alivak - I've posted several articles on Sharon, most of them from conservative sites. Even these articles point out instances where Sharon has been responsible, both directly and indirectly, for the massacre of civilians. Sharon might have not been labeled a "terrorist" by the US, but he definitely was one for the the people he was killing. I have links to sites where there are claims he has been responsible for many more innocent deaths, but right-wingers on this board will come down screaming that the sites are biased.

I have also read numerous quotes from Sharon (in 60's or 70's) where he has expressed an interest in getting rid of "every last Palestinian child". Don't know if I can come up with links but will try.

Tribal - If Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel, it obviously recognizes it as a country. Same with Jordan. Leaders don't sign peace treaties with people whom they don;t think exist.

g-man24 - You really have not contributed much to this discussion other than to make snide comments, and stupid assumptions. I could as easily say your source is probably "killallPalestinians.il". Your anti-Palestinian stance is very obvious, and no amount of evidence and news is going to sway your hatred twoard a whole people. It is pointless to have a discussion with you - I might as well have a discussion with a suicide bomber.

[kramadas]

BTW, this is another site I lurk on...has *some* very educated views with links. Might want to check out this thread.

http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=28609695&m=7940941585

[igloo]

Regime Change in Ramallah?

Clifford D. May (archive)

September 25, 2003 | Print | Send

In one sense, Israel’s announcement that it intends to “work to remove†Yasser Arafat was merely stating the obvious. Arafat is an obstacle to peace. Anyone who is serious about peace recognizes that.

But in another sense, Israel’s statement was a stumble. It was a gift to Arafat. It caused Palestinians to rally around him just when they should have been asking themselves why they continue to follow him ever deeper into a valley of poverty, degradation and death.

And how does making such a statement benefit the Israelis? Although removing Arafat is a necessary condition for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict, it is not a sufficient condition. In other words, peace is not going to break out the minute the Israelis shove Arafat aboard a plane and send him back where he came from. (He was born in Egypt, and he was living in Tunisia when, a decade ago, the Israelis made the fateful decision to try to convert him from terrorist-and-archenemy to statesman-and-negotiating partner.)

Israel’s threat also prompted Arab dictators and even some European leaders to reflexively reaffirm their solidarity with Arafat. It’s not that they don’t understand that there can be no progress toward peace so long as Arafat wields power. It’s not that they don’t realize that Arafat orders the murder of children riding school buses. They simply aren’t that eager to settle the conflict -- and they don’t strenuously object to terrorism that is not directed at them and their fellow countrymen.

This mindset was vividly illustrated when the UN General Assembly “strongly condemned†the Aug. 29th bombing that killed more than a dozen UN civil servants in Baghdad. The General Assembly does not make it a practice to “strongly condemn†such bombings against Israelis – rather, it routinely condemns Israel’s attempts to defend itself against such acts of terrorism.

Some people will argue – as do several elite news organizations – that there is a huge difference between suicide terrorists murdering UN employees and suicide terrorists murdering Israelis. They’ll say: “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,†which is as logical as saying, “One man’s ax murderer is another’s man’s heart surgeon.†(Or to put it so simply that even a Reuters editor might understand: Freedom fighters fight against soldiers and for freedom. Terrorists deliberately murder innocent civilians to express their opposition to peace through compromise and dialogue.)

Washington’s response to talk of Arafat’s re-location has been creatively bifurcated. Essentially, the State Department addressed the Israelis, saying it “would not be helpful to expel†Arafat, while President Bush reminded the Palestinians that he was “committed -- solidly committed – to the vision of two states living side by side in peace and security†but that movement toward that compromise solution could only take place when there is a “new Palestinian leadership committed to fighting terror not compromised by terror.â€

Mix those together and you get this American position: To achieve peace requires that Arafat go, but the Israelis shouldn’t be his travel agent. However, if the Palestinians wanted to remove Arafat and take advantage of Bush’s offer, how would they go about it?

In theory, a coup is always possible, but the only organizations that operate independently of Arafat in the West Bank and Gaza are terrorist groups opposed to peace and a “two-state solution.†A Palestinian “peace movement†is something Arafat would never tolerate.

Palestinians could express themselves through the ballot box – except that a free and fair system of campaigning and voting was never established under the Palestinian Authority.

Isn’t it curious that at the same time that we’re working f*****shly to build basic democratic institutions in Iraq – the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a free press, property rights – we somehow expect these same institutions to materialize out of thin air in the territories ruled by Arafat. By what mechanism would that occur?

Even more baffling are the many Europeans who want the United Nations to be put in charge of “nation building†in Iraq, ignoring the fact that in all the years the UN has been involved with the Palestinians -- spending billions of dollars and deploying hundreds of international civil servants – the organization has made no attempt to create a democratic and civil Palestinian society. Instead, UN employees work cheek-by-jowl – and sometimes hand-in-glove – with such groups as Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

All of this, of course begs the central question: If Palestinians could express themselves freely and vote for what President Bush has offered – an independent state that would live side-by-side in peace with a Jewish state – would they accept peace and compromise? Or choose to continue fighting until the bitter end, until one side is vanquished and the other triumphant?

We like to think we know the answer, but we don’t, and maybe we won’t – until Arafat is gone from the scene.

Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism and a Townhall.com member group. This column first ran on the Scripps Howard wire.