or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Terrorism at the Security Council
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Terrorism at the Security Council - Page 3

post #81 of 82
Thread Starter 
Just to give you a quick reality check .. read this to understand the issues at stake on the ground re settlements and the conflict
[quote]
<a href="http://news.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=%20175379&contrassID=2&subContr assID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y&itemNo=175379" target="_blank">Shorten the lines</a>
By Ze'ev Schiff

Many Israel Defense Forces officers agree that it would be better to shorten the lines in the territories - that is, to give up on isolated settlements and withdraw from certain areas. But I have not found a single senior officer with any influence on the decision-making process who thinks that we should do this in the current situation, because the Palestinians, and the Arabs in general, would interpret it as a military victory.

In this context, the withdrawal from Lebanon is always mentioned. We viewed this as a move that would have a calming influence on the military conflict - but the Arabs saw it as a victory, and that influenced them to support the Palestinians in a military confrontation with Israel. It is no surprise that the evacuation of isolated settlements is not currently being discussed by the general staff.

Even former prime minister Ehud Barak, who led the withdrawal from Lebanon and supports separation as a strategic necessity, now says that for the time being, all we should do is decide which isolated settlements should someday be evacuated - primarily so that their residents can be informed, and will be ready to be evacuated when the time comes.

There are also Palestinian personalities who say it would be a mistake for Israel to implement a unilateral evacuation today, because such a step would strengthen the extremists and give great encouragement to Hamas and all the others who want to continue the military confrontation. Evacuation without an agreement is thus liable to result in stepped-up military pressure by the Palestinians.

But despite all this, it is clear that Israel is approaching the stage at which it can no longer postpone a crucial decision on this issue. The decision to build a fence along the border was also deferred for many months for fear that it would be viewed as a retreat under pressure to the 1967 borders. But just as it did with the fence, the moment will come when we will have to choose a certain path even though it is not an ideal response to every operational problem.

In the case of the isolated settlements, it will be necessary to decide which consideration outweighs the others, while taking into account the psychological effect on the Arabs and the negative impact evacuation is liable to have on negotiations. The defense establishment must first of all weigh the operational considerations. For the IDF, which is crying out for more operational manpower, this is the critical issue. In Gaza, for instance - where there is a shortage of forces in reserve - every isolated settlement requires a battalion. There are more soldiers than settlers.

One phenomenon that is bringing the day of decision closer is the tricks the settlers are using in order deceive, not the Arabs, but the defense establishment - to wit, the illegal outposts. These outposts (which admittedly are not always isolated, but are often set up near a large settlement) are constantly being reestablished, until in the end, the army is forced to defend them even though they are illegal.

The settlers, who view refusing to build a fence around their towns as a show of ideological muscle, are thereby intensifying the tragic conflict. The cat-and-mouse games with the settlers, who circumvent the law and the army's orders, are contemptible - and they also make the military struggle more difficult.

Yasser Arafat had a chance to create a situation in which Israel would have been compelled to freeze the settlements in the framework of the Mitchell plan. But the continuation of the violence was more important to Arafat than a settlement freeze, even though he would have enjoyed broad American and international support on this issue. Today, the chances of a comprehensive agreement with the Palestinians, within whose framework we could deal with the settlements, including the isolated ones, are slim.

In this situation, there are two alternatives that have yet to be thoroughly discussed. One is to evacuate civilians from isolated settlements and put the army in their place until comprehensive negotiations are opened. The evacuees could be absorbed into settlements that are part of the settlement blocs outlined in former U.S. president Bill Clinton's bridging proposal, or they could accept compensation and relocate in Israel.

The second possibility depends on the start of negotiations. In this case, it would be possible to reach an understanding at the outset on coordinated unilateral moves: Israel would evacuate certain isolated settlements, and the Palestinians would turn illegal weapons over to international observers. But it is clear that such coordinated unilateral steps have no chance of

The second possibility depends on the start of negotiations. In this case, it would be possible to reach an understanding at the outset on coordinated unilateral moves: Israel would evacuate certain isolated settlements, and the Palestinians would turn illegal weapons over to international observers. But it is clear that such coordinated unilateral steps have no chance of becoming reality if the fighting continues in its current form.<hr></blockquote>

I would still like to see some meaningful reply from you for my question if you care to do that
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
post #82 of 82
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by rashumon:
<strong>

What the hell ???
Where have I made excuses for the settlement policy ?
What are you talking about ?
You insult me with this twisting of facts !
Indeed I have repeatedly said that I believe the settlement policy to be Israel's greatest mistake .. read my posts and don't misquote me please ! <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

What I did say was that there can be no moral equivalence between settlers and terrorists !
I have also said that ( and proved that point on many occasions) Arafat is a plain liar and a terrorist and that he has missed every chance to gain Palestinian statehood or advancement for his people - He has a clear and obvious aim which is the ultimate destruction of my country .. and you expect me to accept him as a peace partner ...LOL <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
You keep going back to the point of the settlements as if you believe that by some miracle the removal of these would make the Arab world suddenly accept Israel ( which for most Arabs is itself a one big settlement) and bring peace and stability to the region - a peace which this region has never seen, even long before any settlements were built.
Arafat and the PLO have been calling for the destruction of Israel long before 67 and so did and still does Syria (Which is chairing the security council these days BTW)...

New, if you care so much about injustice why is it the you don't care about all these facts , why is it that you don't really care about the rights of the Israeli civilians who die daily ?

It's clear that a withdrawal like the one you propose would lead to an increase in terror attacks on civilians ... Arafat would be vindicated, he would have finally found the way to remove the Israeli presence form their Palestine ... keep using terror and slowly the Israelis would retreat until there is no where to go for them .... Arafat himself has pretty much spelt this tactic out in the quotes I posted above..

What hope do you offer Israelis with the 'pack up and get out' approach you suggest for Israel ?

An answer would be nice !
</strong><hr></blockquote>


New ... I'm still wating for your explanation about these accusations !
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Terrorism at the Security Council