-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Israeli + Palestinian= **** storm latest developments
- Thread starter Kycntryboy
- Start date
This is a lose-lose situation for Israel. But I guarantee you this--this isn't nearly so much about Gilad Shalit as it is about Ehud Olmert. In January of 2003, Olmert was the mayor of Jerusalem and #38 on Likud's party list His standing on the national political stage could be compared somewhat to a John Kerry here in the states--his name was known, but his reputation was as a double-talking, shady, uncharismatic apparatchik. But he barely squeaked into the Knesset and hitched his wagon to Sharon's star. And NOBODY who bolted either Likud or Labor for Kadima expected to be led by Ehud Olmert. It kind of makes me shudder to think about it... Anyway, it's probably in Israel's best interest to make some demonstrative military moves and then cut their losses (again, he's most likely already dead). They can settle in for the long haul of trying to determine where his body is. A long-term military operation will just end up with dead Arab kids and little international sympathy for Israel. It will also increase Hamas' standing on the all-important "street," as it will force people to either work with Hamas or against them. Seeing as how Israel has already quit the Strip, living there after having worked with Israel is not healthy. Hopefully Olmert will be able to double-talk his way out of furthering the operation and take the heat from right-wingers waiting for him to crumble. Anyway, I could write more on this, but we'll see what happens.
Birdman1 said:
The short answer is no. The PLO was kind of a quasi-government (state-within-a-state) in Lebanon in the late -70s and early -80s. In that case they did provide social services and the like. But the PA never worked as a government in the territories. Part of that was because Israel wanted them to fail and never "set them up for success." Another part was that Hamas was already firmly entrenched in Gaza by the early -90s when the Oslo agreements that created the PA were signed. Another part was the whole "inside-outside" schism that existed (and still exists) in Palestinian politics. But the biggest reason was that the PA existed primarily to further the power and prestige of Yasser Arafat, and that didn't usually include anything productive.
They are definately coming, and fast. It doesn't even have to be an Israeli soldier, citizens are just as bad. Don't forget Entebbe. Official AW sponsored citation provided by wikipedia. Talk about a bad ass operation.
joboy666 said:
I'm not suggesting that the "bad" types are in the minority (although they most likely are), only that there are undoubtedly lots of average Joe Palestinians who have been repeatedly screwed over the years by bad leadership whose only interest is in preserving the conflict to ensure their own power base, and not to look out for the interests of the Palestinian people.
Brett
joboy666 said:
You can find tons of videos, news reports, etc. @ www.memri.org. But that's kind of beside the point. Brett's more or less right on this one: 90% of Arabs in Gaza, the West Bank, and everywhere else are pretty much only interested in making a living, raising their kids, and being more or less normal. Sure, they might have an oppressive patriarchal society that's about two centuries behind "the West" in terms of enlightenment, but I really don't care if they want to make women wear the hijab or not. For the people who want to be the world morality crusaders, they can knock themselves out... But I digress...
The bottom line is that Israel really needs to act in its own interest. And brawling in Gaza for one person, soldier or civilian, is not in Israel's interest. It's simply a matter of domestic politics--Olmert is trying to get some street cred with the right-wing nut jobs who would drive the state to its ruin. And a show of force, to a certain extent, is probably a good thing. But I doubt they'll find Shalit alive, and if they don't then they'll probably do the smart thing and walk away and start negotiations. Yes, negotiations--don't forget that in 2004 Israel traded hundreds of prisoners for the bodies of three soldiers and one live (criminal) civilian.
And please, don't do the whole "us Jews" thing...There are as many opinions as there are Jews, and in the end, the opinions of Jews don't matter at all--this is an Israeli affair.
I trust MEMRI about as far as I can throw them... their translations are something on the order of the "democrats" that come on Fox News shows: rather tilted to the extreme side.
They *have* been doing better at this recently - their Reform Project, dedicated to translating and rebroadcasting progressive Arabic and Farsi voices, does a lot of good. But on the whole, I still sense an agenda.
NavyLonghorn
Registered User
joboy666 said:
They are allowed to leave dude. None of the neighboring countries want this conflict to go away either. They are litterally traped in refugee camps.
You lost me with the Democrats on Fox News thing. I don't watch Fox News so maybe that's why. Please clarify for me: to which extreme do you feel that they are tilted? Do you mean that they seem to only translate and post things that are particularly extreme or virulent? If that's the case, then I can't disagree. I don't swear by them--I just wanted to illustrate to Joboy that such videos/other media which describe the "undying Arab hatred" towards Israel are a dime a dozen. Besides, everyone involved with the Middle East has an agenda. I must admit, though...I'm impressed that your Arabic/Farsi skills are advanced enough that you can detect the nuances in the translation well enough to realize their quality.
joboy666 said:I realized. Actually my online sarcasm radar is becoming more and more acute every day on this site. Regardless, I figure those are good things to use when speaking to a superior...
Ooh...Wrong again. Look, I'm going to leverage my admittedly very limited Navy experience to try to save you pain when the time comes: "Yes, sir/ma'am," "No, sir/ma'am," and "Aye, sir/ma'am." At your future spot in the Navy food chain, none of your superiors will care about subtleties, nuance, or detail. Just give it to them quick and straight and then try to rearrange reality to fit what you just said.