Latest Middle East News

[The Fool]

I agree. Abbas is in a terrible spot. I don't think he has people around him he can trust. That is, I agree that Hamas could assassinate him with relative ease.

So what's the solution?

I put up the al Queda infiltration into southern Gaza as a possible scenario to the only solution I can see. Gaza has to be disarmed and it ain't gonna be unless the world decides to go in and do it. I don't think Bush can do it without a little world support. But al Queda is the only reason that would give him cover if the Palestinians are destroyed from factions within Gaza.

Do you see any way out for Palestinians if left to their own device? I can't. If that mess is to be cleaned up, someone else has to do it... someone other than Israel. It'd be great if the Arabs themselves could muster some influence but there is too much distrust.

As a start, Gaza must be completely disarmed.

well, the solution is not an invasion of Gaza. I think (how many decades?) of Israeli occupation has shown that method is not much use.As for the proposal to disarm Gaza... "disarm iraq" is also a pretty good Idea....wave a magic wand is another good idea as is wish apon a falling star...

There is only going to one long term solution and that is going to be the emergence and success of a secular democratic regime that is strong enough to not be controlled by fundamentalist extremists.

Now you can listen to the biggotts carry on as if the Palestinians (silastic armorfiends) are somehow incapable of this.

Is there something overly complex about supporting the most moderate elements and not supporting the extremists? Its probably a damn sight simpler to just say they are all the same and we need to go back in and reimpose colonial military rule...., more of the same sound like a good idea at the moment?

 

[a_unique_person]

Not the right way to look at it.

The entire Gaza Strip needs to be totally de-militarized and ALL the arms collected/confiscated. The rocket-launchers, the mortars, the RPG's, the entire gamut of weapons of every description.

Israel has been trying for years to stop the smuggling of Katyusha's and GRAIL AA missiles. Israel stopped the KARINE-A from off-loading tons of armaments at Gaza. Israel will not, under any circumstances, allow the Gaza Strip to become a base of ops for Syrian/Iranian-backed proxies of Hezbollah or AlQueda or Islamic Jihad or Hamas. Fuggeddaboudit.

I agree with Atlas --- the object is not to bolster the PA with better and more powerful forces, the object is to get everyone in the Gaza Strip down to a level where just sidearms (revolvers and automatics) remain in the possession of the PA Police.

If it takes a United States Marines operation to do this, then so be it.

IIRC, the PA has asked for years for UN monitoring. Once again, IIRC, Israel has rejected this idea.

 

[zenith-nadir]

I wanted to disagree with those who earlier in the thread had accused ZN of being a troll or at least engaging in troll like behavior.

Thanks Dave. I always find it hilarious when posters drop into a thread and start labelling people trolls then exit stage left without ever joining the debate. The hypocrisy is extremely humourous.

ZN makes a lot of posts about the violence endemic with the Palestinians and he makes a lot of posts about the difficulties they are having with self government.

I am debunking the myths that "Israeli expansionism" made them do it. For instance:

That requires an end to Israeli expansion, obviously, otherwise the future is just increasingly constrained.

Israel abandoned the Sinai for peace with Egypt. Israel just abandoned Gaza. Yet the "end to Israeli expansion" drum is still beat loudly. Why? Cuz the people who beat the "Israeli expansion" drum don't believe Israel should even be there in the first place.

I mean look at this map...Israel has virtually wiped out the entire Arab world...what with it's criminal "expansion" and all...:

I believe he does that in support of his view that those of us who are critical of Israel's policies don't understand that if Israel abandoned its expansionist policies that peace, happiness and democracy would not all of a sudden spring up in the Palestinian areas.

Considering Israel is slightly smaller than New Jersey, gave up the Sinai and Gaza in a search for peace with it's neighbors and when you look at that map above doesn't terms like "expansionist policies" seem a bit over the top? Just for a second?

But let's take Gaza as a case in point. Israel left Gaza lock stock and barrel. Everyone with a TV or radio on Earth has heard about it including the Palestinians. Yet the Palestinian factions are not building a better future, they are not pulling together and proving to the world Palestine would be a wonderful place to visit, they are kidnapping foreigners left and right, killing members of the PA, storming the PA Parliament while killing each other over the rights to take power...why do they want power?.. so that they may continue to kill Israelis...because that is the goal of HAMAS and Islamic Jihad - to destroy Israel.

I think for the most part this is based on a misunderstanding of the views of those of us who have opposed the Israeli expansionist policies and the American subsidy thereof.

This claim always puzzles me. When Germany lost WW2 did it get to keep all of Europe? Nope. The Palestinians sided with the arabs in three wars - 48, 56, & 67 - AND LOST. They sided once again with the Arabs in 73 - AND LOST. They tried a 40 year terror war led by Arafat and the PLO that involved decades of terrorist attacks against innocent civilians - AND LOST. These actions included thousands of bombings, hijackings, assassinations and other attacks which killed thousands of innocent people from just about every country on earth. So since the Palestinians lost four wars - 48, 56, 67, 73 - and 40 years of terrorism why should they have "won" a state? or "gained territory" for a state? I don't think they "won" the rights to anything.

IIRC, the PA has asked for years for UN monitoring. Once again, IIRC, Israel has rejected this idea.

The UN is already in Gaza and the West Bank a_u_p. Jabalia, Rafah, Khan Younis, Bureij, Tulkarm, Jenin.... you know those hotbeds of terrorism for Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aksa you hear about in the news all the time? Well parts of those towns are all UN-run 'refugee' camps! And the UN has done diddly squat to stop the terrorists operating from INSIDE their UN-run 'refugee' camps.

If the Palestinians want a state to run all by themselves and if they want to be respected then they have to do it...not the UN.

 

[webfusion]

I did not say "UN" -- I specifically said US Marines.

The CIC has declared the USA is engaged in a war on terror.
Gaza is part of that war. Obviously.
I am sure the US Marines could mop up the entire place in less than two weeks.
Gaza is not Iraq. The Strip is less than the area of greater New Orleans.
A force of US troops sent there would probably welcome the opportunity to perform a quick strike-force mission with a clear outcome and a defined exit strategy. Disarm the Palestinians. Leave them with no military capabilities whatsoever. (see: Syrian deal being arranged, to end support of HAMAS).

 

[Atlas]

... There is only going to one long term solution and that is going to be the emergence and success of a secular democratic regime that is strong enough to not be controlled by fundamentalist extremists.

I agree.

Now you can listen to the biggotts carry on as if the Palestinians (silastic armorfiends) are somehow incapable of this.

Is there something overly complex about supporting the most moderate elements and not supporting the extremists?

I think the world has offered Abbas support. There is a limit to what he can say, do and accept from people who might want to help. He can't be seen groveling. It's ok for him to lie and appear feckless. I think you'll agree that so far that's been his way and it's kept him alive.

If his lack of leadership combined with the other forces in play turns Gaza into a free-kill zone or a Taliban controlled enclave where hate filled rhetoric escalates and al Queda factions merge with Palestinian - we might both agree that our support has been in vain. That, in fact, appears to be the way it is going. Do you have links suggesting otherwise? Links that might suggest that Abbas is turning the tide? Links that might suggest that Abbas has a plan?

Abbas cannot or will not exercise control. Gaza is such a mess that it's hard to see what kind of support would help it. It's a civil war zone and until it gets so bad that Abbas begs the world to save the Palestinians from themselves it's going to get meaner and bloodier.

Do you see it playing out differently? I'm asking that as an honest question. How long should the world support Abbas if his leadership allows more Palestinian deaths than during the Israeli occupation. What is the best way to supprt him?

Its probably a damn sight simpler to just say they are all the same and we need to go back in and reimpose colonial military rule...., more of the same sound like a good idea at the moment?

Actually, history suggests strong man rule keeps the peace in that area of the world. It generally comes at a steep price but it's the only model that's been shown to work. Afghanistan and Iraq have a chance at a new model but if they make it and the Palestinian problem continues to fester what is gained? Syria, Iran and some other Arab populations will continue to exploit the Palestinians as long as they see advantage and profit in it. That will continue to destablize the region threatening Afghanistan and Iraq's progress toward democritization.

Unless the Palestinians find their way toward a solution they will descend ever more rapidly into chaos. Lip service and money won't change that if that is the support you're talking about. That's an element, sure - but it's the maginot line. It won't really stop what's coming.

Do you really believe that the Palestinians are drifting closer to democratic reform or further away? If you accept that they appear to be drifting away how long do you support the leader that allows it or can't fight it? I realize Abbas hasn't had the job for very long but the tides are against him. You've always wanted the best for the Palestinians - is it your idea that their own descent into chaos will produce the strongman who will bring them peace if not democracy? It can't be if you urge support for moderates... What are you looking for that will show they are gaining the upper hand against the descent into chaos?

 

[The Fool]

I did not say "UN" -- I specifically said US Marines.

The CIC has declared the USA is engaged in a war on terror.
Gaza is part of that war. Obviously.
I am sure the US Marines could mop up the entire place in less than two weeks.

ridiculous... why didn't the IDF "mop up the entire place"....

Gaza is not Iraq. The Strip is less than the area of greater New Orleans.
A force of US troops sent there would probably welcome the opportunity to perform a quick strike-force mission with a clear outcome and a defined exit strategy. Disarm the Palestinians. Leave them with no military capabilities whatsoever. (see: Syrian deal being arranged, to end support of HAMAS).

ok web...what is the clear exit strategy you had in mind....just go home after your 2 weeks of welcome military activity? It would take a week for the weapons to be replaced that you dream could be removed in two...two weeks? Try two years.....if you are lucky.

clear exit strategy? I don't see even an attempt to propose one nevermind a clear example...

your suggestion is a simplistic recipe for chaos. The sort of chaos Ideally suited to justifying the Israeli reoccupation of gaza, is that what this is all about?

 

[Freakshow]

ridiculous... why didn't the IDF "mop up the entire place"....

Restraint. For various reasons; some selfish (it would hurt Israel, in the long-run), some altruistic (they aren't the blood-thirsty thugs that some make them out to be). But it came down to willingness, not ability. People accuse Israel of hurting/killing civilians. But I think that military powers in today's world show some incredible restraint. Israel could just carpet-bomb the entire Gaza strip. They could level the entire area and kill every person there. So why haven't they?

 

[The Fool]

It can't be if you urge support for moderates... What are you looking for that will show they are gaining the upper hand against the descent into chaos?

The "decent into chaos" is a meme that ZN et al want to plant and water and fertilise...The IDF leaving Gaza must be a disaster and a mistake to justify placing the abandoning of west bank colonies in the too hard basket.

Generations of military occupation have been removed overnight in Gaza and many expect its a failure if the sun does not shine the next day...Meanwhile they will happily tell you that Iraq may take years to sort out....

So lets see eh?

If you want a meme how about this one?
Support the principle of secular democratic rule. Reject the people who tell you colonialism is a good Idea.

 

[Freakshow]

The "decent into chaos" is a meme that ZN et al want to plant and water and fertilise...The IDF leaving Gaza must be a disaster and a mistake to justify placing the abandoning of west bank colonies in the too hard basket.

Generations of military occupation have been removed overnight in Gaza and many expect its a failure if the sun does not shine the next day...Meanwhile they will happily tell you that Iraq may take years to sort out....

So lets see eh?

I have some agreement with this. Interestingly enough, I think the same thing about Iraq. It is too early too tell whether or not the Iraq experiment is going to succeed or fail. But I don't think that the disorder we see now can by itself be used to define the entire situation a failure. Let's see what happens in the coming years.

As for getting rid of terrorists in Gaza...I would like to see it oursourced. I'm not sure to who, but I would suggest it not be the US. There are too many strong feelings surrounding that. The PA can't, and I'm not sure they really would, even if they could. They have not done anything to convince me that they really want to battle terrorism. (For what its worth, my own government hasn't done enough to convince me that they really want to get OBL.) And of course having Israel do it would upset too many people. So have someone else do it.

 

[webfusion]

outsourcing

"It would take a week for the weapons to be replaced"

No way.
How are they gonna get them?
As of right now, October 2005, the Gaza Strip is hermetically sealed off.
The Egyptians have complete control from Sinai. The Egyptians have no interest whatsoever in allowing arms to flow across their border. The Egyptians would like the Palestinians to be demilitarized totally, and have given Israel all kinds of assurances that the Philadelphi smuggling routes will not be allowed to function. That certainly looks to be the case.

From the sea, Israel maintains a full blockade. Not so much as a Zodiac inflatable boat moves off the Gaza coast without the Israeli Navy knowing about it. No re-armament is possible from that direction.

Air? C'mon, get serious. The re-opened Gaza International Airport isn't going to be turned into an arms-smuggling enterprise. Fuggeddaboudit.

From the West Bank? There is no overland route to Gaza for the terrorist organizations in the West Bank. The Strip is isolated and should a United States Marines Strike Force spend two weeks there with orders to clear the place of weapons, you can depend on it happening.

Will President Bush go in that direction? I have no idea.
He is about to meet with Abbas, let's hear what statements come out of that.

I do know one thing --- Gaza is not Iraq.

 

[CapelDodger]

For instance:Israel abandoned the Sinai for peace with Egypt.

When I were a lad, the term was "Sinai Desert", not simply Sinai. The "Desert" has been progressively dropped since it was abandoned to the Egyptians - who are, as I'm sure we're all aware, not Palestinians. "We gave up a desert" doesn't have the same ring as " gave up the Sinai".

Weizmann didn't demand the Sinai at the Paris Conference, but he did demand both banks of the Jordan, the Litani Valley to the north and the Gaza Strip to the south. (The Negev was marginal enough, the Sinai Desert more so.) Ben Gurion reiterated the demand. The greatest extent of Israel included the Gaza Strip, Lebanon up to the Litani Valley, and the West Bank of the Jordan. It never encompassed the East Bank, and it's been retreating from that high-tide mark.

Time will tell whether Weizmann and Ben Gurion were correct - that Israel isn't viable in any lesser extent.

 

[The Fool]

"It would take a week for the weapons to be replaced"

No way.
How are they gonna get them?
As of right now, October 2005, the Gaza Strip is hermetically sealed off.
The Egyptians have complete control from Sinai. The Egyptians have no interest whatsoever in allowing arms to flow across their border. The Egyptians would like the Palestinians to be demilitarized totally, and have given Israel all kinds of assurances that the Philadelphi smuggling routes will not be allowed to function. That certainly looks to be the case.

So The cunning foolproof plan requires the full cooperation of the Egyptians? Yep, that should work...always has in the past eh?

From the sea, Israel maintains a full blockade. Not so much as a Zodiac inflatable boat moves off the Gaza coast without the Israeli Navy knowing about it. No re-armament is possible from that direction.

Air? C'mon, get serious. The re-opened Gaza International Airport isn't going to be turned into an arms-smuggling enterprise. Fuggeddaboudit.

any other reasons beside you saying it is so? generations have gone by and the total imprisonment of Gazans has failed as a strategy...but lets dress it up as a new idea and give it another go eh?

From the West Bank? There is no overland route to Gaza for the terrorist organizations in the West Bank. The Strip is isolated and should a United States Marines Strike Force spend two weeks there with orders to clear the place of weapons, you can depend on it happening.

I can depend on it can I ?

Will President Bush go in that direction? I have no idea.

maybe he will occupy Israel instead? About as much chance....

 

[webfusion]

Just sayin' --

The Egyptians are recipients of billions of $$$ of American aid, IIRC.
Mr Mubarak is more influential in Gaza than Abbas, if the truth be told.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1494191/posts

AFAIK, any plan by Marines to go into Gaza and clean the place of weapons is well within the realm of probability.
US President Eisenhower set the precedent.
1958.
http://i.timeinc.net/Life/covers/1958/cv072858.jpg


"any other reasons beside you saying it is so?"
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Pro...ts/Revised+Disengagement+Plan+6-June-2004.htm
The Israeli Government says so.
Addendum A - Gaza Withdrawal Cabinet Resolution

• The Gaza Strip shall be demilitarized and shall be devoid of weaponry, the presence of which does not accord with the Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

President Bush has declared a war on terror, so I take him at his word, and Gaza falls within the purview of this. Doesn't it?

 

[CapelDodger]

The Egyptians are recipients of billions of $$$ of American aid, IIRC.
Mr Mubarak is more influential in Gaza than Abbas, if the truth be told.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1494191/posts

Don't get your world-view from that sort of source, it'll cripple your mind. Hamas is an avatar of the Muslim Brotherhood, so just how "down" do you think the Egyptian regime is with the Muslim Brotherhood? The native Gazan population has a historic link with Egypt - they even speak Arabic with an Egyptian accent, I'm told - but Egypt gave them up for peace with Israel, because frankly the Egyptians don't care. They have far bigger issues to worry about. The majority of the Gazan population isn't native, it was driven there from what is now southern Israel. They have no connection with the Egyptians. How much sense can there be in the idea that the Egyptian regime has significant influence in Gaza?

The PA has so little influence in the Gaza Strip that the Egyptians could well have more and still have damn' little. An alliance between the PA and the Egyptians is almost inevitable.

AFAIK, any plan by Marines to go into Gaza and clean the place of weapons is well within the realm of probability.

There are "refugee camps" in Gaza that even the Israelis didn't dare go into. Do you think the Marines would do any better without an Okinawa effect? Hard to justify without a Pearl Harbour. And a Gazan link with 9/11 remains to be established.

 

[Freakshow]

And a Gazan link with 9/11 remains to be established.

Since when have facts mattered when it comes to starting wars?

 

[The Fool]

The Egyptians are recipients of billions of $$$ of American aid, IIRC.
Mr Mubarak is more influential in Gaza than Abbas, if the truth be told.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1494191/posts

The fantasy of prison Gaza will never happen. It is a preposterous idea. Decades of Israeli afforts could not prevent the inmates from arming. What would change?

AFAIK, any plan by Marines to go into Gaza and clean the place of weapons is well within the realm of probability.
US President Eisenhower set the precedent.
1958.
http://i.timeinc.net/Life/covers/1958/cv072858.jpg

luckily I think the US are way to smart to follow such a silly idea..."US invades gaza" Lol....whatever....

"any other reasons beside you saying it is so?"
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Pro...ts/Revised+Disengagement+Plan+6-June-2004.htm
The Israeli Government says so.
Addendum A - Gaza Withdrawal Cabinet Resolution

• The Gaza Strip shall be demilitarized and shall be devoid of weaponry, the presence of which does not accord with the Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

ok then...any other reason besides you and the Israeli cabinet saying it is so...why don't they state "cancer will be cured" as well, it would clear up two big problems at the same time.

President Bush has declared a war on terror, so I take him at his word, and Gaza falls within the purview of this. Doesn't it?

no

 

[CapelDodger]

I have some agreement with this. Interestingly enough, I think the same thing about Iraq. It is too early too tell whether or not the Iraq experiment is going to succeed or fail. But I don't think that the disorder we see now can by itself be used to define the entire situation a failure. Let's see what happens in the coming years.

Iraq experiment? That's cold.

Succeed or fail to achieve what? Originally, neutralise Iraqi WMD and put the scare on aspirant WMD'ists. (And 9/11, never absolutlely explicitly but hovering out there.) No Iraqi WMD, and no scarifying of Iran (for instance). Then regime change, oust Saddam. Then nation-building, but without the nation-building because the US doesn't do that. Now ... what? Getting out with fewer casualties than in Indo-China?

The US hasn't demonstrated its strength by the Iraq imbroglio, it's demonstrated its limitations. Better by far that the big stick had remained sheathed and thus bigger by reputation than it actually is.

 

[CapelDodger]

Since when have facts mattered when it comes to starting wars?

All it takes is a reason. Which is not usually persuasive to the poor sods whose arses are put on the line; they have to be presented with entirely different reasons. A good one being "If we don't do it to them, they'll do it to our womenfolk". Or goats, or PC's, or SUV's, whatever the proles hold dear. Another one is "If you live, you loot", which can be like a lottery win in many societies.

 

[a_unique_person]

I mean look at this map...Israel has virtually wiped out the entire Arab world...what with it's criminal "expansion" and all...:

Yes, that's right, the Arabs are like the Borgs, as are the Jews, I recall. They are all the same. It doesn't matter if you hurt a few of them, there are plenty more where they came from.

 

[Freakshow]

Iraq experiment? That's cold.

Yeah, I'm not someone who is known for using couched language to be especially gentle when communicating.

Succeed or fail to achieve what?

I was referring simply to whether or not a functional democray can come up in place of the dictatorship that was there before. It's too late to argue over the WMD thing. As my sig says "The die is cast". Sure, it is useful to learn from our mistakes so we can avoid doing stupid things in the future. But when it comes to Iraq, no discussion about WMD is going to change what is going on now.

Some say that the current unrest in Iraq demonstrates that there is no way that a functional democray can be created in Iraq. I am simply stating that it is too early to tell.