All Posts

post a reply | post a new topic

Author

Topic: Watch the Territory Terrorists break out in a sweat now............

topic by Posted by Lynette 5/6/2002 (15:50)

reply top 60 percent want to cut aid to Israel unless its invasion into Palestinian lands ends immediately. Backing for Palestine state increases in US By Barbara Ferguson, Arab News Correspondent WASHINGTON, 24 April — “There are only two countries supporting Israel right now: Israel and America,” an American Israel Public Affairs Committee member, Irv Shapiro told journalists yesterday. AIPAC is holding its annual conference in Washington, and, for the first time ever, thousands of demonstrators gathered outside the 3-day conference to protest Israel’s brutal reoccupation of the Palestinian territories. It appears, however, that Shapiro should have been specific. According to recent polls, the US public is voicing doubts about America’s role in the Mideast, and US support of Israel. Seventy-one percent of Americans tell a new Gallup Poll that the US government should not take either side in the Middle East conflict and 60 percent want to cut aid to Israel unless its invasion into Palestinian lands ends immediately. One-quarter of Americans in a new Time/CNN poll said Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is an enemy of the United States; 20 percent say he is a terrorist; and 65 percent say he cannot be trusted. Forty-one percent said Israeli actions in the Palestinian territories are “mostly unjustified.” And Americans strongly oppose — 71 percent to 20 percent — sending US troops to help end the conflict, because 81 percent fear US troops will be drawn into the fighting. According to a Washington Post/ABC News Poll published yesterday, 68 percent of Americans think the United States should recognize Palestine as an independent nation. That’s up from 55 percent in October 2001, over 13 percent in just six months. Asked if Israel “has done all it reasonable can do to try to avoid civilian casualties in Palestinian areas, 61 percent said Israel “should have done more.” The Washington Post/ABC poll found that many Americans question the motives of both Israel and the Palestinian Authority. More than four in 10 — 43 percent — believe Israel’s goal is to seize control of the West Bank and Gaza. But the public was equally suspicious of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority: 43 percent said the goal of the Palestinians was to “destroy the State of Israel.” Few blame Secretary of State Powell or President Bush for the failure of Powell’s recent Mideast mission. The overwhelming majority blamed either the Palestinians (31 percent) or Israel (15 percent) or both sides equally (30 percent), rather than faulting Powell (11 percent). About half of those interviewed said the United States would withhold military or economic aid from Israel, if Israel continues to defy Bush and refuses to withdraw entirely from the Palestinian areas it recently occupied. Just as many disagreed. When asked whether the Unites States should give economic aid to the Palestinian Authority if it makes peace with Israel, 47 percent said yes and 47 percent said no. The survey contained cautious messages for Bush. A small majority — 54 percent — fears that US support for Israel will hurt the broader US-led war on international terrorism. What remains, perhaps, most significant is the message to US congressmen and the administration — the survey found that support for a Palestinian state has increased 13 percentage points to 68 percent since early October. Even among those who are more sympathetic to Israel, 63 percent said the United States should formally grant the Palestinians recognition as an independent nation. www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=14639

reply by So What 5/6/2002 (15:52)

reply top The vast majority of Jews support a Palestinian state as well. WE WANT THE PALESTINIANS TO HAVE THEIR OWN STATE. We just don't want them to destroy Israel.

reply by Lynette 5/6/2002 (16:03)

reply top That is not strictly true. Most Israeli's want the Palestinian pushed into outlying countries to make way for a Greater Israel. Uncle Ariel keeps having 'wet dreams' about it. Those jews who REALLY want a peaceful end to the conflict are ridiculed by the right wingers. It is clear to a person such as myself that Israel's politcians hold a far different agenda's to the people on the ground. When we see massive joint rallies by Palestinians and Jews with arms linked DEMANDING a pullout- the misery wil continue for both of you. A least be honest about your countries politicans- they are leading Israel to become the most despised country on planet earth for their intractable stance on this issue.

reply by baruch shmulovitz 5/6/2002 (16:57)

reply top I believe that an only viable and strategic way of gaining peace is by having the jordan river as the real border and enough with the palestinian fabrication of nationhood and playing the pan-arab card at will.

reply by Objectivist 5/6/2002 (18:37)

reply top Viable for whom? By Michael Green May 6, 2002 A 'viable' PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza will not only render its two neighbors, Israel and Jordan, 'non-viable,' but can also be expected to unleash a fearsome wave of terrorism and subversion throughout the region as a whole. This week, as Israel's Prime Minister Sharon flies in to meet President Bush in Washington, he is likely to be presented with a vision of peace based on a 'viable' independent PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza, existing side-by-side with a secure and defensible Israel. Such a vision not only represents a clear contradiction in terms, but is deeply flawed and would inevitably drag the whole Middle East into a much bigger conflagration. Particularly with the detailed documents just being revealed on Yasser Arafat's deep implication as the undeniable Commander-in-Chief of Palestinian terror, any U.S. attempt to repackage him as a statesman and peace partner, besides making shambles out of the Bush Doctrine, would look as ludicrous as trying to fit Cinderella's delicate slipper onto one of her ugly sisters. Firstly, in terms of borders, any independent PLO regime bordering on Israel's narrow waistline, around Jerusalem, and in the strategic Jordan valley, would render Israel militarily indefensible against possible Arab attack from both inside or outside the confines of Palestine. Secondly, an independent PLO state with sovereign control of its borders, would inevitably turn itself into a stockpile of conventional and unconventional weapons. Think of a thousand Karine As, plus Iraqi-type mass-destruction capabilities only a few miles from Israel's population centers, industrial and transportation hubs! There will be no way to guarantee against such a deadly threat, and even the most comprehensive peace treaty will not be worth the paper it's written on. No Israeli government can accept such existential risks, particularly in light of the disastrous outcome of the gambles recklessly undertaken by Israel's Labor government in its haste to sign the 1993 Oslo agreements. Thirdly, such a PLO state, if allowed to control the Jordan Valley, will inevitably turn itself toward an irredentist takeover of Jordan and overthrow its Hashemite regime. With the exception of its ruling dynasty and a loyal Bedouin core, the overwhelming majority of Jordan's population consists of Palestinian Arabs from Western as well as Eastern (i.e., Transjordanian) Palestine. One signal from Chairman Arafat, and you can be sure that an unstoppable popular uprising ('Intifada') of hundreds of thousands of 'Palestinians' will be out in the street liberating 'Eastern' Palestine from its foreign Hashemite rulers. After all, this is a dynasty imported from the Arabian Peninsula, when Mandatory (or Greater) Palestine was divided into Western and Eastern halves by the British in 1922 to create the first Palestinian-Arab state in Transjordanian Palestine. Fourthly, if allowed to thus destabilize or incapacitate Israel and Jordan, a PLO state that dominates Greater Palestine will turn into the most subversive force in the Middle East. With or without the benefit of a like-minded Iraqi ally, it is bound to further inflict its blend of Islamist terror and revolutionary fervor toward a populist Intifada that will target the greatest plum of all - Saudi Arabia's vulnerable Wahhabi regime, and its neighboring oil sheikdoms. It is possible that not even precariously moderate Egypt or Alawite-dominated Syria could escape the wrath of such an Islamist-Populist tidal wave. The Jordan Valley is a scorching, semi-arid plain, roughly 50 miles long and 10 miles wide, dissected by the Jordan River flowing into the Dead Sea basin. Together with the hills commanding its Western approaches, besides being the lowest point on earth, this valley could very well be the most strategic piece of real estate in the world today. A PLO state that dominates the Jordan Valley would hold the key to controlling Western and Eastern Palestine extending on both sides of the valley. And such PLO control of Greater Palestine, at the crossroads of the Middle East and North Africa, would inevitably lead to unprecedented strategic power with regard to the whole region. Clearly, whether it's called Palestine or Jordan, between desert and sea, within the confines of Mandatory Palestine, there is no place for an Arab sovereign entity other than a single Palestinian-Arab state existing alongside the Palestinian-Jewish state (i.e., Israel). And the introduction of a PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza (i.e., a second Palestinian-Arab state) would constitute nothing but a zero-sum threat with regard to the viability, stability, and security of the two key Western allies in the area - Israel and Jordan. So where does this leave the vision for peace? Firstly, such a vision can only be based on a 'two-state solution' that incorporates nothing other than Israel and Jordan. Secondly, Arab-populated areas of the West Bank and Gaza -- with or without some type of federative relationship -- would be joined with Jordan and the Hashemite regime to form the 'viable' Palestinian-Arab state. Thirdly, the Jordan Valley and other strategic parts of the West Bank and Gaza will have to remain under permanent Israeli sovereignty. And fourthly, there can never be a sovereign PLO rule or 'Arafatistan' in Palestine -- west or east of the Jordan River. Arafat and his associated organizations are Israel's mortal enemies, sworn by immutable religious dogma as well as imperialist pan-Arab ideology, to the destruction of the Jewish State by all available means, ranging from relentless terror to diplomatic deception. To them, not only the West Bank and Gaza, but all of Israel will forever be the 'Dar-ul-Islam' of occupied Palestine that irrevocably needs to be 'redeemed and liberated'. Nobody would advise that the U.S. appease or rehabilitate Osama Bin-Laden and his Al-Qaida cadres by setting them up as friendly family homesteaders in the Delmarva peninsula, while instating Osama as lifetime Governor of Maryland with command of his own army. In a similar vein, and to paraphrase a popular slogan, friends should not ask friends to let such lethal enemies set up shop in their backyard. Prime Minister Sharon should be adamant in refuting the 'Clintonian' fantasy of a 'viable' PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza, as a definite non-starter. Instead, he should emphasize how such a course of action cannot lead to peace or stability with regard to either Israel or the region. It can only lead to an escalating flurry of war, terrorism, and subversion throughout the Middle East, further destabilizing and endangering the 'viability' of America's key Arab and non-Arab allies and interests in the region.

reply by John Calvin 5/6/2002 (19:09)

reply top In regards to the poll results, they simply reflect a growing consciousness on the part of the public about the issues. Supporting an Independent Palestinian State is and has been the policy of the U.S. government for some time. More people are learning that as a result of the present crisis, and so the polls reflect that. On the other hand, the administration and media have been sending mixed signals about the motives of the Palestinians, so many Americans still believe that the Arafat and PA wish to destroy Israel. They surely believe that about Hamas and Hezbollah, even though those groups do make certain qualifications in their statements about destroying Israel ( e.g. 'as it is presently constituted as an Apartheid regime occuppying Palestine') because Bush and the Times tell them that everyday. Generally polls reflect the desire of Americans to follow a 'consensus' line, the path of least resistance, to support the government in power,to conform to what is percieved as the opinion of the majority so as to not to 'stick out' or raise arguments during the course of their daily lives. Real leaders, in order to solve real problems, have to step out ahead of the polls, show people the way, take chances and fight it out with 'opinion leaders' in the world of NGO's and media, instead of participating in the reflexive behavior of 'conforming' to polls which has led us to this tragedy in the first place. Like I have said before, in using polls of the American people as a way to formulate their policies and determine how they vote, politicians turn every issue into an idiotic, autistic-like argument with themselves, leaving facts, circumstances, events- the real- in other parts of the world totally outside the orbit of their deliberations. So the problem of Palestine, the problem of Iraq, the problem of Taiwan , the problem of Afhhanistan, the problem of terrorism- all these problems are now no closer to being solved then when they first appeared. Americans are notreally concerned about these problems, but only about themselves: how to keep the economy and the'good life' here at home sailing along at an even keel. They are concerned about beating the Democrats in the next election or, if Democrats, beating the Republicans, though the actual differences in the behavior of the two Parties in the Legislature amounts to little less then a hill of beans. Polls are a crock and should be ignored even when they seem to favor your own arguments. What's so sacred or truthful about the opinion of the majority anyway. 9 times out of ten the majority is completely wrong: hence the creation of a Bill of Rights and and Independent judiciary in the first place!