Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00063)

Thanks for the news report. A comment and then a
question, if anyone can answet it.

Fact: Sharon has indicated there can be no Palestinian
state in the West Bank unless and until he decides
there can be a Palestinian state in Gaza.

English translation: By refusing to recognize a
Palestinian state in Gaza, he can ipso facto deny that
there can be one in the West Bank.

Fact: Ehud Barak says a key sticking point is that the
borders of the new state have yet to be defined.

English translation: Barak & co. want more land.

One would think they would merely displace a few
million more Palestinians (who cares about
Palestinians, anyway?) in addition to the 3.5m
Palestinians who have already been displaced, and move
their border further east. However, the continuing
"settlement activity" deep within the West Bank area
reveals the real purpose as being the confiscation of
the whole West Bank.

The Bush Administration has protested the settlement
activity, but the Israelis respond that this is "very
complicated." So complicated, in fact, that even a
man smart enough to become a general officer in the
Marine Corps has no chance of understanding it. The
truth is, a simple land grab is not complicated at
all, and a marine general would be in a unique
position to understand exactly what is going on.

If we keep in mind that Sharon is an army officer, and
look at a map, his purpose becomes quite obvious. If
he could get rid of the million or so Palestinians in
Gaza and get rid of the millions in the West Bank area
he would have the sea as a border in the west and the
Jordan River as a border in the east. From the point
of view of an army officer, this would be the most
militarily defensible position. Soldiers don't like
water and don't like to get their feet wet. They
consider rivers and oceans to be impassible barriers. 
I would be astonished if General Zinni is mysteriously
unable to figure that out.

Chairman Arafat asked for 72 hours to hunt down the
people responsible for recent suicide bombings, but
Sharon moved to seize this opportunity immediately and
started a series of attacks which he could justify as
retaliation for Palestinian attacks, which were
justified in the minds of the Palestinians as
retaliation for Sharon's attacks, etc. This behavior
would be consistent with a desire not to be cheated
out of an opportunity to attack Palestinians, if such
is his underlying motivation. It seems inconsistent
with other possible motivations, such as a desire to
seek peace. The first attacks were in Gaza, which is
the smaller of the two areas and the one that would be
therefore easier to ethnically cleanse.

So here seems to be the situation:

o It is extremely doubtful in my mind at least than
anyone in the Jewish elite wants "peace" until they
have expelled all Arabs from Gaza, the West Bank, and
Israel itself.

o If that perception is correct, Chairman Arafat, who
has no army, cannot realistically sign on for "peace"
since the peace he would be agreeing to would be the
peace of the grave, namely the graves of himself and
his people. One of the recent attacks in Gaza
apparently was intended to speed him along toward his
personal grave a little ahead of schedule.

o If there is an end to resistance activity on the
part of the Palestinians, that would seem to work
against the interests of the Jewish elite, since they
could not in that case use resistance activities as an
excuse for ongoing attacks in Gaza and the West Bank. 
History students will recognize this as amazingly
similar to The Night of the Long Knives. History
students will recognize the settlement movement as
amazingly similar to the matter of the Sudetenland and
the Danzig Corridor. Nothing mich changes from decade
to decade.

Or from century to century for that matter. History
students will also see an amazing similarity between
this and the brief tenure of the Latin Kingdom, which
was part of the motivation for the Crusades. Brief as
it was, the Latin Kingdom, which included Jerusalem,
lasted 148 years, or approx. three times as long as
the new Hebrew Kingdom.

English translation: the likelihood of the Arabs
accepting the Hebrew Kingdom as a permanent entity is
precisely the same as that of their ancestors having
accepted the existence of the Latin Kingdom as a
permanent entity, namely zero. They see themselves as
the heirs to the people who brought down the last
vestige of the Roman Empire in the fifteenth century.

That much is easy to see. When we redirect our
attention from Sharon's policy to Bush's policy,
somehow seeing what is going on becomes much more
difficult. So here is my question: I assume people
like erstwhile Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger
are far more knowledgeable than I, and given that the
prognosis for this situation is so obvious, why does
he seemingly pretend to be on some sort of permanent
dumb attack? Why, furthermore, does Colin Powell
assure us that we shall remain to be Israel's obedient
colony? I thought we ceased to be a colony in the
eighteenth century. And why are these policies not up
for reexamination in the light of Arab terrorism
coming to our shores as a result of them? What is the
logic of proclaiming a War on Terror and then
proclaiming oneself to be a Crusader preaching a new
Crusade in the Holy Land?

Can anyone explain this?

--- nos <nos@granite.net.au> wrote:
> From associated press: 
> 
> Israel strikes Arafat's complex
> 
> RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) - Israel used bombs and
> missiles to pressure
> Yasser Arafat to move against Palestinian militants,
> striking yards from
> the leader's West Bank and Gaza Strip.
> Two Palestinians were killed and about 150 were
> injured in the attacks.
> 
> The campaign stirred opposition from moderate Labor
> Party members of
> Israel's ruling coalition, who boycotted a Cabinet
> vote on tougher
> action against the Palestinians.
> 
> Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government said it was
> sending a stern
> warning to the Palestinian leader that there would
> be even harsher
> reprisals if he did not crack down on militants who
> have been attacking
> Israelis.
> 
> "The purpose was to send a clear military message
> .... 'Friends, we've
> had enough, take the responsibility that you have
> and stop the
> terrorism," said the Israeli army spokesman, Brig.
> Gen. Ron Kitrey.
> 
> The air attacks came in response to weekend bombings
> and shooting
> attacks on Israelis by Islamic militants that killed
> 26 people and
> wounded nearly 200. Kitrey said Tuesday's raids
> targeted Palestinian
> Authority installations because the Islamic
> militants' headquarters "are
> secret and cannot be hit in this type of attack."
> 
> Arafat, speaking to CNN after the airstrike on his
> Ramallah compound,
> accused Sharon of trying to undermine his efforts to
> combat terrorism.
> The Palestinian Authority has rounded up some 130
> members of the
> militant Islamic Jihad and Hamas groups since the
> weekend, and
> Palestinian officials said the sweep would continue
> despite the Israeli
> raids.
> 
> Arafat told ABC News that Sharon wants to destroy
> the Palestinian
> Authority and "kill the leaders of the
> Palestinians."
> 
> He also said that U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni won't
> respond to his calls,
> and he appealed to President Bush to order the
> mediator to speak with
> Arafat. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com