NEWS: Israeli Settlers Rebuke Sharon's Pullout Plan

POLITICS: Israeli Settlers Rebuke Sharon's Pullout Plan

After roundly being condemned by the international community and the United States, its closest ally, lsraeli prime minister Ariel Sharon has recently changed his tune on supporting illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied lands of the Gaza strip and the West Bank and has advocated removing many of these settlements. This time, however, the opposition is coming from the settlers themselves who are threatening to refuse to leave occupied territories if the Israeli government orders them to do so.

Certainly two wrongs don't make a right, but I wonder if Mr. Lieberman felt the same level of indignation at expelling the original residents from their homes when the settlements were built.

Sharon is likely also keenly aware of the assassination of previous Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, a political moderate who advocated granting back large portions of the occupied West Bank territories to the Palestinians in a Bill Clinton-brokered attempt at resolving the Israeli/Palestinian crisis. Rabin was murdered by an ultra-right wing Israeli presumably opposed to these policies. But Sharon is no Rabin - there isn't a single person in Israel who could accuse him of being "soft on the Palestinians" in any way and keep a straight face while saying it. Which means that within the conservative coalition government that he's headed he has enough credibility to be able to offer a concession like a partial removal of settlements from the West Bank without making it appear as if he's capitulating to the Palestinians.

It's a shame that what is the first promising political move in this bloody stalemate in years is being fought by some of the people who will benefit the most from its resolution in the long run. If Sharon is able to swallow some of his pride to give up a few of these settlements in the hopes of ending the conflict, surely the rest of his citizens should be able to as well.

The various brands of nationalism die hard, I guess. I need to look this up again, but I was under the impression that the settlers were being offered pretty good reimbursement packages for having to move.

heheheh... pullout.... hehehe

It's like a giant family fighting over who gets the big bedroom... with ICBMs and Car Bombs

Both sides are about as innocent as the little boy with the slingshot... It's a big sigh there - If we see the situation resolved within our lifetimes, we'll be lucky

It seems silly to consider the settlements illegal. The territory in question was conquered in a war started by the Egyptians (who at the time owned Gaza if I'm keeping my timelines straight). So Gaza is spoils of a defensive war and Egypt-allied arabs lost all moral claim to it, as well as clearly any physical claim to it.

Correct me if I've mis-remembered which war the Gaza strip was obtained in. It could possibly have been the war in which Israel pre-empted against a massive arab buildup.

If we see any improvement in our lifetimes, we'll be lucky.

The Geneva Convention says that an occupying country can't move its citizens into a territory in order to push out existing inhabitants.

Israel's response to this has been to basically say, "well, there was nobody there when we got there." In any case, the UN has declared settlements there illegal several times over.

It isn't fair to say that either side started, or wanted the '67 war. It was more like a series of unfortunate events that started with Rabin's publically threatening to overthrow Syria because of their support for Palestinian guerrillas. In response to the defense pact they had with Syria, Egypt build up troops in the Sanai and closed off part of the straights to Israeli shipping. In response to this, Israel launched a war.

By the end of the war Israel had captured Gaza. It wasn't the first time as they had done so in the Suez war and before that in '48 but were forced to give it back under international pressure,

I don't know who "Egypt-allied Arabs" is supposed to indicate. I assume you mean the 1.2 million refugees and their descendents that have been packed into Gaza off all that empty land they didn't live on before '48.

By international law Gaza doesn't belong to anybody. But if it's part of Israel as you say it is, I suppose the Israeli government should have no qualms giving them all democratic rights and full citizenship right away.

"It's OURS, We stole it fair and square!" " my great great great great great great great grandfather once farmed lands that might have been somewhere around here, give or take a few thousand miles, therefore i have right to live here and condenm the previous residents to a life of oppression and imprisonment in refugee camps"

Absolute Bullshit.
Syria had been shelling Israel from the Golan Heights for years before the Israelis shot down 6 Syrian MIGs as, a response to yet another Syrian artillery attack on Israel.

Nasser and friends despite all their braggadacio, about soaking the sands with blood....got their asses handed to them in short order in a war THEY wanted and a war they LOST.

Not once ,but TWICE.



[Edited on Dec 21, 2004 by Racer_X]

Well of course in the official Israeli version of history, they are the victim and hero in every case, never the provocateur. You might want to actually look farther than an official state textbook to get your facts.

When Moshe Dayan, defense minister for Israel in '67, confessed his regret for invading Golan he said to an interviewer:

("General's Words Shed a New Light on the Golan," New York Times, May 11, 1997)

Not being Jewish, I have no particularly strong predisposition towards Jews.

As such, I attempted to examine the recent history of Israel (biblical history is irrelevant in this argument, except when used to attempt to argue against arab religious claims).

It is entirely impossible to determine the truth about anything important in Israeli history. There is no consensus opinion of history like there is with most of the world. Debates rage with all the authority of conspiracy theorists ... on both sides!

In the end, I was forced to conclude my opinions using the current state of affairs. Israel is highly economically successful in a region that is poor in most resources. It has fought and won many wars, against many enemies, where it seemed hopelessly outmatched. It has been a consistent and reliable ally (staying bought, unlike almost all other nations we give money to). All in all, I see no reason to support arabs, and all the reason in the world to support the israeli people.

Seperately, if you lose territory in a war that you started, you have no claim on that territory. This includes "innocent" citizens of the aggressor nation living in that territory.

With regard to the UN, their opinion on Israel is worthless, as is their opinion on almost everything else they've ever held an opinion on. I have no respect for the United Nations, and would like to see it disbanded and replaced with an international forum, removing from it any claim to power.

With regard to the Geneva Convention, it only applies to signatories, so I would have to see the wording in question, and the signatures of all involved nations before I could even consider an argument based on the Geneva Convention.

so basically you think israel is right because america gives them lots of money and so far they've been relatively loyal.
wow, that's a fuckin great reason.

Btw, Israel signed up to the geneva convention in 1950. they should be bound to respect human rights in Gaza. the geneva conention doesn't say that signituries only need to respect other signituries

Who would have expected such an answer from a man whose singular arrogance left Israel undefended against attack during the start of the Yom Kippur War ?

Oh and yeah sure I get everything from Israeli statebooks

I'm saying israel is right because of might (physical and economic) and that is all that matters in the international arena. As we have no world government, we have world anarchy.

The reason I think america should support israel is because they have remained a steadfast ally and trading partner. It is in our best interest to support Israel.

Maybe you should change your username to machiavelli.
Was saddam right to torture how own people because he had power to do so? Were the keimer rouge right to slaughter millions of people? is China right to occupy tibet? is indonesia right to committ genocide against the people of east timor?
These are all powerful countries bullying the weak.

"Might is right" is just a stoic argument that basically says that no matter what happens no matter how awful, you have to accept it because that's the way the world is and there is no point trying to change fate. perhaps it's all part of gods plan.

Israel isn't mighty, america is, Israel is sheltering under the wing of a larger predator.

Might does not make right in any ethical sense, if it does, then scot peterson should have been released.

The American political establishment supports israel for their own reasons and they are not necessarily the right reasons.


[Edited on Dec 22, 2004 by Akrasia]

Firstly, the Palestinians didn't own the land. It was British, before that it was Turkish and before that Roman.

Secondly, the Palestinians chose to leave - if there had been some huge ethnic cleansing along the lines of say....that perpetrated by the surrounding Arab countries on their local Jewish populations, there wouldn't be a sizable population of Israeli Arabs.

Thirdly, the fact that the Arabs that left Israel are refugees is because Jordan refused to accept them as Jordanian citizens and, together with the rest of the Arab world, kept them in refugee status.

Finally, they aren't kept in refugee camps and no "oppression" would be necessary if they didn't protect people who get their kicks by blowing up people in shops, buses, restaurants and discos.

Now that murderous cunt Arafat is dead, there is a real chance for Palestinians to reject the terrorists that stand between them and their homeland. Let's hope they don'y fuck it up again.

"Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." Golda Meir




[Edited on Dec 22, 2004 by Albion]

Not only that - Israel is the only democratic country in the area. Israel is the only country that upholds human rights for all regardless of their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

There is also a moral imperative for all decent countries to protect the State of Israel which is under constant threat from a huge continent of barbaric hatred that wants to wipe it off the face of the map.

First of all, the land belongs to the people who lived and worked there, not to whaich ever empire happens to claim ownership over it at any one time.
'Legal ownership' is meaningless other than as an object for distracting discourse.

Secondly, i find it very hard to understand how you can say the palestinian people left voluntarily. from the late 1800s there was a zionist movement trying to establish itself in palestine, there were jewish terrorist organisations operating from 1921 and mass immigration of jewish people into palestine under the zionist philosophy with the aim of displacing the palestinians aided by the British, hundreds of thousands of zionists entered palestine, set up the zionist party and organised for military action to secure their aims, violently expelling palestinian farmers from their lands.
by 1945 zionists are 30% of the population of palestine, up from less than 5% in 1900, mostly immigrants and there have been tens of thousands of palestine deaths as a result of zionist terrorism in palestine. in 1946 there are 70,000 armed members of three zionist terrorist groups Stern, Haganah and Irgon. they demanded to be given control of palestinian territory and in 1947 there is forced partition of palestine into jewish and arab sections.

Nowhere did the palestinians decide to leave and give their homes to the zionists.

Israel can take care of itself, as it has proven many times over. Compare our military victories in Afghanistan and Iraq, look at how easily the governments in those countries were removed. Were we to attempt that kind of attack on Israel, the battle would last for months, with high casualties on both sides.

My point is that they are a strong nation, and they have stood up to their neighbors without our aid, even without our approval. Your assessment of the situation is as wrong as the rest of your geopolitical views.

israel have no respect for human rights. They have a conscript army and any concientous objectors are imprisoned for up to 20 years. they have been systematically abusing the rights of the palestinian people for the last 50 years and they refuse to even allow palestinians the protection of the geneva convention. unarmed peace activists, pacifists and children have been shot by snipers and border patrols and people's homes are routinely bulldozed without notice or warning.

If you were forced to live under these conditions, you might consider stapping explosives to yourself also

I thought it was the Catholics who didn't believe in pulling out.

We should stop funding Israel, but maintain being allies. They need to fund their own country own their own like a big grown up country.

so what these people think god promised them really low rent?

israel wouldn't last 5 minutes without america propping them up

Religious Extremists in the Middle East.. who knew?