« Forgotten Fathers: Father’s Day 2007
Is it time to end our support for the Iraqi security forces? »
Palestine Updates
Here are some couple of interesting articles about the situation in Palestine / Gaza and the West Bank:
- Jules Crittenden makes fun of poor Yasser Arafat whose nobel peace prize was stolen by Hamas.
- “Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Sunday issued a decree outlawing the armed groups of Hamas and said its members would be prosecuted.” Abbas wrote he has decided to “consider the Executive Unit and the militias of the Hamas movement illegal, due to their military coup against the Palestinian legitimacy and its institutions.” As a result, “anyone who is involved in any of these two groups is going to be punished, according to the law and the orders of the state of emergency.” Hamas’ reaction: Abbas is a traitor who is part of some grand American-Israeli conspiracy to “bring down the Hamas government.”
- Israeli PM Ehud Olmert met with UN Secretary General Ban to discuss the situation in Lebanon and Gaza. According to the JPost, “Olmert asked that a draft plan be drawn up in Israel regarding the possibility of an international force on the Gaza border.” Sadly, “there was little likelihood that such a deployment would materialize.” Both Egypt and Hamas strongly object to such an international force (because such a force might make it impossible for Egypt to smuggle weapons into Gaza).
- Gazans, meanwhile, aren’t very positive. Asef Hamdi summarized the situation quite accurately: “In simple words… welcome to the Taliban lifestyle.”
- Meanwhile, incoming Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak is believed to be planning “an attack on Gaza within weeks to crush Hamas.” No one can blame Israel for attacking of course considering the fact that rockets are fired from Gaza every single day at Israel. However, it seems to me that Israel would be wise to refrain from attacking for quite a while. As I have said before, starve Hamas. Enforce the borders. Make sure that nothing comes in and that nothing gets out of Gaza. Isolate Gaza completely. Then, if Hamas decides to launch more than one terrorist attack against Israel (I’m talking about coordinated terrorist attacks), strike back hard or, better yet, strike against Hamas leaders in Gaza, but let time to its work – let Gaza collapse.
- A senior Fatah officer explained why he and his buddies did not fight against Hamas and, instead, surrendered: “we are very disappointed with our leadership.” He explained: “We decided to surrender to [Hamas's armed wing] Izaddin Kassam because we didn’t feel that our commanders and leaders were behind us. Many of our commanders had fled to Ramallah and Cairo, where they were issuing orders to us from air-conditioned hotel rooms.” It is quite remarkable that Abbas did not order his troops to fight back (until too late).
- Meanwhile, Israel says that it will not allow Fatah “to slaughter Hamas members in the West Bank like Hamas did to Fatah last week in the Gaza Strip.” My question: why not? Let it happen. Palestinians hate Israel no matter what Israel does. Let the Palestinians divide their land into two separate entities: Hamastan and Fatahstan.
- Outgoing Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz isn’t happy. “Peretz was outraged that Olmert and Barak were so quick to replace him. He told Olmert in a conversation on Friday that the telephone vote took him by surprise and that Barak violated a promise to him that the handover in the Defense Ministry would be coordinated in a respectful manner by the two of them.” Peretz (one of Israel’s worst Defense Ministers in the history of the country) said: “It’s not as if Barak is Rambo coming to save us. So why is [his appointment] being handled so hastily and disrespectfully?”
- And, lastly (from the JP that is), there is this column by Khaled Abu Toameh, called “Palestinian Affairs: Fatah’s final death blow.” Khaled explains why he believes Hamas was able to take control of Gaza so easily. In short: Palestinians believe that Hamas is the lesser of two evils. Fatah is incredibly corrupt. The problem: once Hamas rules, Hamas will become corrupt as well.
Next, lets go to the Haaretz:
- “Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayad said after being sworn in Sunday that his first priority would be to restore security to the PA.” He said: “The first piority of our government is security and the security situation. The mission will be difficult and hard, but not impossible.” That of course depends: if he includes Gaza, it might be a bit more difficult that he anticipates. If, on the other hand, he is strictly talking about the West Bank he’s probably right.
- Aluf Benn wrote an op-ed about Ehud Barak. Aluf explains why Barak changed role models: first, he was a big fan of Winston Churchill, nowadays, he looks at General Charles de Gaulle for inspiration.
Gideon Levy writes: “Slightly before Shabbat came in on Friday evening, U.S. citizen G. reached the Palestinian side of the Erez Crossing. G., the headmaster of a private school in Gaza, may have been the last Westerner to leave the Strip. The last one to leave did indeed turn off the lights: The Palestinian side was empty.” Read this column if you want to see a perfect example of the idiocy of the left on this issue.
- Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel conclude that Hamas is a wolf in moderate clothing. Really? I dunno, I don’t think that there is much ‘moderate’ about Mickey “the Martyr” Mouse.
69 Responses to “Palestine Updates”
One of the things that absolutely amazes me is the strong emotions this subject raises on all sides of the questions. Both here and at TPM cafe where I do most of my commenting, no other subject ever garners as many comments as IP. Even Daily Kos has tried to limit posting on the subject because of the animosity it raises.
Among Americans it seems like Israel raises more emotion than even our war in Iraq. Why? I know why it does for me, I have skin in the game with relatives in Israel and a grandfather who was a member of the Irgun from 1944 to 1947 and a part of the establishment of Israel. But why MVDG or Jason or any of the commentators here? What is your connection to Israel and why the visceral animosity toward all muslims? I’m curious.
jd,
In a democracy, having a personal connection to an issue has never been a prerequisite for being allowed to have or express an opinion about it.
Also, I have no “visceral animosity toward all muslims”. You just plain made that up.
Many of you are making comments that border on inhuman insanity. Yes, DLS I am talking about you. For people DLS to advocate genocide in Gaza is outrageous.
My, my, what misuse of words. Destroying HAMAS is not genocide, and neither that nor blockading or besieging Gaza to force surrender of HAMAS are insane.
Chris:
I understand. And the terrorists we have in Guantanamo have it too good; were Russia better it would bring back and let us use Kolyma. Heh, heh.
The innocent — unarmed — people are allowed to leave. There’s currently a problem because everyone (wrongly) expects Israel to handle all the refugees, which would overwhelm Israel, but the idea is sound enough. So is what else is being sought, bringing in food and medicine (ideally kept out of the hands of HAMAS).
No, it isn’t. It’s an accurate metaphor to describe what amounts to a deliberately chosen criminal human pestilence.
The odds are very high that you’ll outgrow your current phase eventually. We just need patience.
Using terms like vermin to describe muslims sure seems like visceral animosity to me. A blockade of food, water, electricity, fuel to gaza will result in possibly thousands of civilian deaths, especialy the old and very young. The young, strong Hamas members probably can hold out until the world stops the blockade.
This all brings me back to my grandfathers stories about life in the Irgun. The British considered them terrorists to be shot on sight. The Irgun planted bombs in arab markets killing soldier and civiian alike. My Grandfather left Israel for the US in February,1947 primarily because of his revulsion over the Irgun’s bombing of the King David Hotel and the killing of 90 people.
What goes around comes around.
.
Didn’t anybody read Scale’s writeups? (noooooo) It’s simply a real-world example of what might be conceived by naive idealists someday for UN peace-keeping and “defusing” (as well as, I had thought before the Iraq war began, what might be done in Iraq, or in this case, a better-capable Arab League):
“Instead of a conducting a direct assault and massive strike, coalition forces would establish a loose cordon around the city and establish control of the surrounding countryside. The cordon would eventually result in a complete isolation of the city from the outside world. All avenues to include air, sea and land arteries would be blocked. Moreover, the coalition would seek to control sources of food, power, water, and sanitation services. Any vital natural resources would be controlled. Finally, using technological means, all internal information sources, commercial, financial, and governmental nodes would be suppressed and only information emanating from the coalition would reach the city’s population. Throughout the cordon operation, coalition forces would demonstrate their absolute
mastery of the situation.”
“Let the City Collapse on Itself. As the coalition achieves control of the surrounding countryside, it will most likely collect resources to support the establishment of sanctuaries or safe havens around the city. Humanitarian organizations, both governmental and non-governmental will be encouraged to construct protected camps. The population within the city would be encouraged to leave and coalition forces would freely allow refugees passage through the
cordon to the relative security and safety of the camps.
For those who stay, the isolation of the city will in time create a refugee problem for the enemy. With the ever increasing depletion of resources, the remaining population will eventually see the government as an impotent entity that is incapable of providing basic services or providing for the welfare and security of the people. Inevitably, the
military forces and their leaders will be seen, particularly among the dispossessed within the city, as the real enemy.”
“Now, in order to defeat an urban enemy, even if time is on our side, we have to gain control of the urban mass. How do we do that? Well we do it like we did it in Vietnam, many times successfully: through the use of a cordon operation. A cordon operation is exactly what the name implies. It is a loose way to control the activities of the city from outside the immediate confines of the dense urban mass. We have the technology at our command, thanks to the information age, that allows us to do that today if we choose to. Control the city from
outside; establish a loose cordon; take your time; find the vulnerable points; and destroy them systematically in a discreet, surgical form of
direct action. The idea of pouring divisions into an urban mass to me is not wise. And the idea of carpet bombing is equally inappropriate. Remember that the decisive ingredient in urban warfare is the people. If we empty a city of its population, then all that remains is a militarily irrelevant urban shell.
Once we’ve established the cordon, and gained control of the urban masses, we’ve won. The war is over. We own the countryside. The enemy has no initiative. We’ve contained the enemy in the city. We
can only lose by becoming impatient again; we don’t want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It seems to me that those urban takedowns that have been successful in the past—the Siege of Paris
in 1870 comes to mind—have been the types of operations in which the army first gains the initiative; second, controls the countryside; third, contains the urban environment; fourth, reverses the relative advantage of time; and finally, allows the city to collapse on itself.”
Well, jd, since I never used that word to describe anyone, I guess you were wrong to include me among those that you describe as having a “visceral animosity toward all muslims”. I think it would be helpful if you were careful in responding only to people who have actually said the things you want to respond to.
Using terms like vermin to describe muslims
I have referred specifically to terrorists, not to Muslims. Please be more correct (or should I insist, more honest?).
As you all know, I am proud to be a Zionist. Nearly all of the screeching about Israel come from one of three qualities:
1) Ignorance
2) Stupidity
3) Anti-Semitism
I prefer to give most of you the benefit of the doubt and therefore suggest that you please go educate yourselves.
Israel is not perfect and makes many mistakes but it is far superior to any surrounding country or Arab organization.
Israel? Double standards, Holly, and political incorrectness — the latter, I suspect, goes back to the 1960s when the USA chose Israel’s side and the USSR chose the side of its enemies in Middle Eastern wars. And the Western Left?
Holly,
Rather than calling others ignorant, stupid, or anti-Semitic you should look at your own position and consider whether you are blinded by your own beliefs and ignorant to the validity of the positions of other peoples.
Holly – I am a proud post zionist. I am educated. I understand Israel very well and am intimately involved with her. Just because Israel is better than it’s arab neighbors is no standard I would ever espouse. Our faith requires more, much more. You, of all people, should understand.
My post zionist beliefs are not as radical as some. I do not favor the kind of secular vision that some in my camp do. I believe in a Jewish homeland. However, I do not agree with my settler relatives on either the desirablity or the religious imperative to annex Judea and Samaria and other lands of Eretz Israel. Until Israel grapples with truely coming to terms with it’s proper dimensions the dreams of zionists may never last.
“I guess you were wrong to include me among those that you describe as having a “visceral animosity toward all muslimsâ€.
Jason – You are correct. I went over dozens of your postings and comments and I was wrong about your attitude. My sincere apologies.
Holly,
My problem with Israel is the settlers and their disproportionate influence on Israeli governments. There cannot be a peaceful solution other than a two state solution. The entire goal of the settlements is to make that impossible. The overwhelming majority of settlements will have to be abandoned if there is to be a viable Palestinian state on the West Bank. I do not see any real movement in Israel to do this and I therefore question how much commitment to a lasting and just peace exists.
Does Holly ever back up anything she says with facts and figures?
I’ll admit to spewing platitudes from time to time, but Holly really takes the crown.
Does she realize that within Israel’s borders 3 million people live without many basic human rights or the right to vote?
Michael what you refer to is the Ledeen Doctrine.
AmCon
His daughter only screwed up with the CPA, she didn’t see the inside of an Abrams tank, only the Emerald city.