View Full Version : Netanyahu On The West Bank Situation
Is he accurate? Or just being himself?
Any West Bank land that Israel fails to settle is land made available for another "Hamastan," said Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday during a tour of Judea and Samaria.
"Any areas we evacuate now will be taken over by Hamas, which is simply a tool of Iran. The only reason this is not also Hamastan, like the Gaza Strip has become, is because the IDF is here," said Netanyahu.
Netanyahu, who will likely be reelected Likud chairman next month, displayed his commitment to settler expansion by then planting a sapling in the unauthorized outpost of Kida, near Shiloh.
SOURCE (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1185893693791&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)
Is he accurate? Or just being himself?
Any West Bank land that Israel fails to settle is land made available for another "Hamastan," said Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday during a tour of Judea and Samaria.
"Any areas we evacuate now will be taken over by Hamas, which is simply a tool of Iran. The only reason this is not also Hamastan, like the Gaza Strip has become, is because the IDF is here," said Netanyahu.
Netanyahu, who will likely be reelected Likud chairman next month, displayed his commitment to settler expansion by then planting a sapling in the unauthorized outpost of Kida, near Shiloh.
SOURCE (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1185893693791&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)
From his prospective and most visible hate towards Palestinians yes he is accurate.
But to simply label it as Hamas with the underlying taint that Hamas would fill that space is nothing more then trying to justify more settlements. Hamas is Palestinian people and not some outside group so therefore lets take this land before they get it.
Has everyone lost the understanding that bulldozing Palestinian homes and bringing in more settlers is against UN resolutions or do they mean anything anymore?
It's theft of land and nothing more.
I do not think that people realize that Israel has not recognized the UN resolutions as legal, so they do what they do best. Attack, destroy, occupy.
aifo yakov
08-10-2007, 03:16 PM
Is he accurate? Or just being himself?
Any West Bank land that Israel fails to settle is land made available for another "Hamastan," said Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu Wednesday during a tour of Judea and Samaria.
"Any areas we evacuate now will be taken over by Hamas, which is simply a tool of Iran. The only reason this is not also Hamastan, like the Gaza Strip has become, is because the IDF is here," said Netanyahu.
Netanyahu, who will likely be reelected Likud chairman next month, displayed his commitment to settler expansion by then planting a sapling in the unauthorized outpost of Kida, near Shiloh.
SOURCE (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1185893693791&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)
Look at recent history.
Israel went into Lebanon the first time because Arafat was firing artillery into Israel. Arafat was forced to flee to Tunisia. Hezbollah commenced attacking Israel and the IDF inside Lebanon. Israel withdrew from Lebanon and the attacks continued.
At Oslo, Arafat pledged to work for peace and make a peace agreement. Israel let him in WITH small arms. What happened? There was an immediate increase in Terrorism.
Israel withdrew from Gaza without any agreement. Hamas, Fatah, Jihad Islami and other groups refrained form attacking Israel until after the withdrawal. Since then, there has been incessant rocket attacks on Sderot and neighboring areas. Hamas taking control has made zero difference.
When the Gazans were not attacking Israel, like during the withdrawal, Israel did not attack the Gazans. When the Gazans launched their attacks, Israel launched attacks to take out gunmen and rocketeers.
What do you think of the Gazans launching rocket attacks against Israel right after the Gaza withdrawal?
I am guessing with all that said, you really want to know what I think of the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas. No prob. ANY military action or terrorist action that is aimed by civilians is NOT ACCEPTABLE! I have no use for any group that takes action against a civilian population. No matter what excuse is used for the killing of civilians.
aifo yakov
08-11-2007, 10:51 AM
I am guessing with all that said, you really want to know what I think of the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas. No prob. ANY military action or terrorist action that is aimed by civilians is NOT ACCEPTABLE! I have no use for any group that takes action against a civilian population. No matter what excuse is used for the killing of civilians.
Hamas (amongst others) get around that by saying that ALL Israelis are military because when they come of age, they serve in the IDF.
None of this makes it right. Hamas says this, IDF says that. I can understand the right to defend oneself. How many Israelis have been killed by the rockets that have been fired at it? How many Pals have been killed in the retaliation? I do not think the guilt by associations gives anyone the right to destroy a life. Excessive retaliation does nothing to help a peace process. Just as firing rockets at Israel does nothing.
It is time for the Palestinians to consider an alternative to Hamas and even Fatah. Unfortunately the Pals are at thye mercy of money hungry politicians, just as Israelis are.
aifo yakov
08-13-2007, 02:08 PM
None of this makes it right. Hamas says this, IDF says that. I can understand the right to defend oneself. How many Israelis have been killed by the rockets that have been fired at it? How many Pals have been killed in the retaliation? I do not think the guilt by associations gives anyone the right to destroy a life. Excessive retaliation does nothing to help a peace process. Just as firing rockets at Israel does nothing.
It is time for the Palestinians to consider an alternative to Hamas and even Fatah. Unfortunately the Pals are at thye mercy of money hungry politicians, just as Israelis are.
Well, Chuq, a number of Israelis have been killed. A lot more Palestinians have been killed in retaliation. This is war, not tennis, not football, not NASCAR. If the Palestinians had not sent rockets into Israel after the withdrawal form Gaza, how many would have been killed in retaliation? None. Zip. Just like Syrians haven't been killed since they haven't attacked.
I love your statement "excessive retaliation". It should be "effective retaliation". That means retaliation that is strong enough for the Palestinians to stop their terrorist (yes, TERRORIST) attacks.
As corrupt as Israeli politicians may be (not to mention the politicians of every other country) they don;t hold a candle to the Palestinians. Arafat became one of the 10 richest leaders in the world (Forbes magazine).
Yakov, my man, you do not want people to say that all Israelis are 'killers' because they must serve in the IDF, yet by your comments you seem to think that all Palestinians are 'terrorist' because they are Palestinians. This sentiment is very similar to the sentiment of the US army back in the Indian War days, if they are of a certain persausion then they are targets. That techniqus is no better than the attacks on Israeli civilians that you condemn.
aifo yakov
08-14-2007, 03:39 AM
Yakov, my man, you do not want people to say that all Israelis are 'killers' because they must serve in the IDF, yet by your comments you seem to think that all Palestinians are 'terrorist' because they are Palestinians. This sentiment is very similar to the sentiment of the US army back in the Indian War days, if they are of a certain persausion then they are targets. That techniqus is no better than the attacks on Israeli civilians that you condemn.
I suggest that you Google "Palestine poll suicide bomber" and find out for yourself how much support there is in Palestinian society for suicide bombing, even if a peace agreement is reached.
I want you to do the research because I don't want to be accused of "cherry picking" and I want you to see how many references there are.
Yakov--I like to see a scholarly debate. If I google what you suggest it would be like cherry licking in my opinion. I wrote a piece to try and explain how I try to look at the situation.
For many years I have been commenting and analyzing the situation in th Middle East, especially the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. There is a wealth of opinions, both pro and con. Who is right? Or who is wrong? That subject will be debated for many more generations to come.
One may not appreciate my perspective and that is fine, for it is mine and I will retain it no matter what is said or posted. I have lived on both sides of this situation, the war and the hopelessness of a situation.
My opinion is two fold; I see the plight of the Palestinians and I can sympathize with the Israelis and their desire for security. But there is an old saying, to know a person you need to talk a mile in his sneekers. For those confused, you need to try putting oneself in the position of understanding the situation. Trying to get a grip on it by only siding with the one side is not a way to understand. And in that lies the problem. No one is willing to do what it takes. Only easy answers. Yes, death and destruction are easy answers; you do not have to think about it, just pull the damn trigger.
I think I have a pretty good grasp on the situation. I grew up on an Indian reservation, vewry similar to the pockets of Palestinians. I was surrounded by hopelessness, disease, unemployment, alcoholism, etc. So i can understand what would lead a Palestinian to do some pretty horrible things out of desparation. Does that include Suicide bombers? Not completely, that is a phenom that is pretty hard to grasp, but I can understand why one would consider it. Before someone starts jumping on this as not a good analogy, I will ask, Ever been to a reservation? Ever been to a Pal refugee camp? If you have then please share.
Now I also can understand the point of the Israelis. Why? I served two tours in Vietnam and not exactlly the same as the ME, it has its similarities. Troops were surrounded by a hostile force that wanted them dead or gone, in no particular order. The US retaliated, some timesw excessive and sometimes civilians got hurt. OK there were very few suicide bombers, but rockets being fired daily were the norm. Reaction was predictable, destruction inevitable.
When I analyze a situation like this, I prefer to find pro and con. My mind is never with one or the other. I try to be fair and balanced. With that said, I will always look at both sides objectively. I did in Vietnam and I will elsewhere. If one has no idea of the suffering of the other then how will peace be found, or at least common ground?
The conflict in the ME has become an institution and if a way to break the custom of war cannot be found, then this debate will continue without end. Deaths will continue without end. So I say to all, if you cannot put yourself in the situation of the players in the game for the ME, then how can you feel you have an answer?
CHUQ
15 August 2007
Great post Chuq, I can understand how you can give credence to both sides.
Thanx I appreciate it. For too long I have been saddled as a anti-semite, it is lie to begin with, but because I post articles that I think would make a good exchange, everybody's hackles get up and the mud slinging begins. Itry to be fair and balanced. Do I support Pals? Yes, when I worked in the ME I had an interrupter that was Pal and I was always with his family and him. I found them warm, friendly, honesty and a helluva sense of humor. Is it the norm? Don't know, but like everyone else I made my decisions by what I was presented.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.