35 Comments

1. richard mcenroe:

To the extent that the Palestinians and their enablers/exploiters in the West and the Muslim world have basically the mindset of divorce lawyers, to whom any concession is a sign of weakness and greater prizes to be won, he’s absolutely right.

Aug 7, 2005 - 1:42 pm 2. flenser:

I’m a very long way from being an expert on the topic, but his analogy of Gaza to Iraq struck me as wrong at best, dishonest at worst.

The terrorists in Iraq are widely understood to have minority support, and the construction of a stable and peaceful Iraq seems like a real possibility. The opposite is the case in Gaza.

Aug 7, 2005 - 1:50 pm 3. David Thomson:

ìAs an agnostic, I am not greatly moved by religious arguments for the drawing of borders by Israelis or by anybody else.î

My own defense of Israel has absolutely nothing to do with religion. The Zionists bought land from the Turks. That is the beginning and end of the matter. I could care less if the land was bought by Swedes, Eskimos, Filipinos, or the man on the moon. To accept the claim that these purchases are somehow fraudulent would jeopardize just about all property transactions throughout the world.

Aug 7, 2005 - 1:54 pm 4. Terrye:

The Palestinian social/political strctures are so screwed up that almost anything is seen as winnning by them. They just declare victory and go blow something up. I mean if they do not know by now that they can not drive Israel into the sea I don’t udnerstand how this will matter.

Netanyahu and Sharon on different sides leaves me wondering. Sharon seems committed to this and the US is getting the blame. I read an article by Krauthammer some time ago and he said that Sharon is doing this so that he can get people behind the wall. He is thinking like a general and wants people behind a defencible line.

I don’t know what is best. Sometimes I wonder how a society with terrorists like the Hamas thugs can ever be anything but violent and corrupt.

I know I am getting really tired of the words: Islamic extremists. These people live for hatred. It is all they know or want to know. Why work for a living when you can be a martyr and lynch people?

Aug 7, 2005 - 2:00 pm 5. chuck:

In someways withdrawal is definitely a short term loss. I agree that the Palestinians will promote it as a victory, this was always going to be the case as long as the conflict was ongoing. On the other hand, the profound deterioration of Israel’s moral position that has taken place since the 1967 war is in many ways a consequence of the continued occupation and the settlements. Begin set this up, I think he intended that Israel become so entangled in the territories that it could never withdraw. Toss in the US recognition of Arafat, yes, Reagan and Schulz made that call, and the stage was set.

So, at this point I think the real question is the long term one: will the Israeli borders be more defensible, both morally and physically, in the future. I am no prophet, neither is Sharon nor Netanyahu. And the latter always struck me as a defender of the settlements with a vested interest in extending the occupation. What Sharon’s viewpoint is, I don’t recall hearing articulated in any detail. We will just have to wait it out and see what happens.

Aug 7, 2005 - 2:08 pm 6. sparrow:

David Thompson said

My own defense of Israel has absolutely nothing to do with religion. The Zionists bought land from the Turks. That is the beginning and end of the matter.

This is very true and quite important in terms of chain of title to land in what became modern Israel. I have not understood why Israel’s defenders do not bring this up more often. Perhaps because it would then entail a long discussion about the history of the area.

With regard to disengagement from Gaza, there is no moral or ethical reason for Israel to withdraw, considering how they came into possesion of the area. There are practical demographic and miltary consideration why this may turn out to be a prudent move.

Interestingly, in all the discussion of the Israeli withdrawal, there is little about what will happen to the Palestinian Arab populace that will remain. It could be come more of a lawless area, and degenerate into civil war.

Aug 7, 2005 - 2:38 pm 7. chuck:

sparrow,

With regard to disengagement from Gaza, there is no moral or ethical reason for Israel to withdraw, considering how they came into possesion of the area.

Even all Israelis can’t agree with this. The dispute fractures the country, and I believe the division itself is an argument to have borders that everyone can agree to defend. It is not only in front of the world that Israel needs to justify itself, but also in front of itself.

Aug 7, 2005 - 3:19 pm 8. David Thomson:

ìEven all Israelis can’t agree with this.î

Thatís only because many liberal Israelis tend to embrace Marxist doctrines. Private ownership is inherently perceived as theft from the general citizenry. Once again, if the Israelis cannot justifiably assert ownership over these properties—then no property rights are secure anywhere in the world.

Aug 7, 2005 - 4:00 pm 9. chuck:

David,

Thatís only because many liberal Israelis tend to embrace Marxist doctrines.

Since many of these sorts were among the original settlers in Palestine, getting rid of them would tend to pose a problem:

Eventually, a young intellectual named Ber Borochov proposed a theory of Marxist Zionism that envisioned a Jewish state built on the principles of Engels and Marx. This was the beginning of Labor Zionism, and most of the thirty thousand Russian Jews who immigrated to Palestine between 1905 and 1914 came with this ideology in mind. Many of Israel’s founders, builders and political leaders-people like David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Dayan and Yitzchak Rabin-were Labor Zionists, and it was Labor Zionism that would place a far-reaching socialist stamp on economic and social policy during Israel’s formative period.

Unfortunate, no? Maybe we should just clean out the whole nest of socialist vipers and restock the place with Jewish Randians, but I do worry that the number of qualified Jews would be insufficient to the task.

Aug 7, 2005 - 4:24 pm 10. Martin Lindeskog:

I have posted a commentary by Scott Holleran of the Concord Crier, including the latest cartoon by Cox & Forkum, in my post, GAZA PULLOUT.

All the Best,

Martin Lindeskog – American in spirit.

Gothenburg, Sweden.

Aug 7, 2005 - 4:27 pm 11. David Thomson:

ìMaybe we should just clean out the whole nest of socialist vipers and restock the place with Jewish Randians, but I do worry that the number of qualified Jews would be insufficient to the task.î

Hey, did I say it was going to be easy? I can see it now. No one can immigrate to Israel without owning copies of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Ayn Randís picture must hang in every living room. Those inclined towards Marxism would have to move to Cuba.

The Jewish progeny of Proudhon cause enormous damage. There is no stronger argument for the justification of the state of Israel then the one premised solely on property rights. Which country of immigrants, like the United States or Australia, hasn’t been accused of stealing land away from the ìindigenous people?î Do you see a large number of Americans feeling overly concerned about the property rights claims of Indian activists like Russell Means? Who do so many Israeli Jews allow themselves to be guilt tripped by the Yasser Arafats of the Middle East. It simply does not make any sense.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:25 pm 12. Rick Ballard:

I think I’ll go with Dayffd’s speculation, to a point. With the Israelis out of Gaza, Israel can treat terrorist attacks as though Palestine were a state. I doubt that the response will consist of airstrikes, though. I would be very surprised if Israel did not establish counter battery artillery forces along the border in sufficient strength to provide a very harsh response to any rocket attacks. Firefinder radars linked to MLRS with drones above providing film of the entire exchange would provide good evidence for display at the UN when the inevitable cries about collateral damage are raised.

Hamas scum will undoubtedly fire from densely populated areas but that’s going to be a Palestinian problem – not an Israeli problem.

In a bit the Palestinian civil war is going to heat up to the point that Israels responses will seem comparatively minor.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:28 pm 13. Rick Ballard:

I dunno, David. Palestinian ancestral claims to Judean land are pretty impressive.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:32 pm 14. sparrow:

Chuck,

As you know Israel came into possession of Gaza, and other land, after the 1967 war wherein the publicy state goals of Israel’s enemies was eliminate Israel totally. Israel’s goal in that war was not to eliminate Egypt or Jordan or Syria. The amount of land that Israel acquired from those counties, as a percent of the total land those nations had at the time, was tiny.

There are, as far as I can tell, several Israeli views re disengagement:

1. don’t give up any land–continue to settle it.

2. give back Gaza, even though there is no obligation to do so (which I agree with, without enthusiasm).

3. give back Gaza, because it is an “occupation” and is illegal, etc. This last group, in my opinion, considering the history of Israel, is not connected to reality.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:38 pm 15. flenser:

Roger, Rick

You are misspelling Dafydd’s name. One “f”. Of course it’s all the fault of the Welsh, whose written language looks like something Tolkien dreamed up. Sample place names; “Eglwys Fair y Mynydd”, “Ffwl-y-mwn”, and “Llanfihangel-y-Bont-faen”.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:45 pm 16. flenser:

sparrow

I can add a fourth reason.

Give back Gaza, because it has 1.4 milion Arabs living on it. Forcible expulsion of masses of civilians is not something modern Western democracies are comfortable with. But trying to absorb them into Israel is also out of the question. Redrawing the border so they are on the outside is the only practical solution.

Aug 7, 2005 - 5:55 pm 17. David Thomson:

ìPalestinian ancestral claims to Judean land are pretty impressive.î

And what is your point? It matters little who originally owned a particular piece of property—if the sons and daughters eventually sold it to a third party. The land in Palestine was mostly useless and the Turks apparently purchased it for a small price.

There are present day family members who doubtlessly remain irritated that their ancestors sold land that was later valued in the millions. But whose problem is that? Myth has it that Indians sold Manhattan to the newly arrived white men for $24 in beads. Should todayís New Yorkers begin packing up and leave the island?

Aug 7, 2005 - 6:27 pm 18. Kevin P:

Roger:

Pulling out of Gaza is a bad solution but the alternatives are worse. The Israeli’s are getting killed in the court of world opinion, it is not fair or just but it is reality, and they could stay in Gaza for another 100 years and it would never get better. They can never include Gaza, with all the Palestinians in it, as part of Israel and they can’t police it.

Pull out, wall it off, and let the PLO and Hamas go at it. Respond to any attack, and let them know that suicide bombers that come out of Gaza will result in lack of entry into Israel. Take away the “occupation” propaganda tool and the responses to suicide attacks look more like self defense. This is not fair. It is just the way the world is. Ugly solutions to ugly problems.

Aug 7, 2005 - 7:38 pm 19. sparrow:

Prediction:

In 10 years, Gaza will be a demilitarized part of Egypt. And those part of the West Bank that Israel turns over to the PLO will be a demilitarized part of Jordan. The faster that happens, the better off the Arabs residing in those areaas will be.

Aug 7, 2005 - 7:39 pm 20. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Dafydd’s speculation is interesting, but I fear it is wrong.

The left and its academic fads has so badly damaged the civilized world’s ability to apply critical thinking that nothing Israel does will be accepted. Israel will remain a pariah nation simply out of leftist and anti-semitic prejudice. Thus Israel will not have the world’s approval if it responds militarily to terrorist attacks, just and the US and coalition leaders do not have approval for removing a great threat and terrible tyrant from Iraq.

Only when the civilized world’s population has suffered enough terrorist attacks will enough people regain their sanity, temporarily. This presumes that the terrorists are dumb enough to run a high enough operational tempo in Europe and America to maintain that suffering, fear and shock. 7/7 was an operation of that sort, but unless there are more attacks in London, the loons will remain out of touch.

As long as Europeans and American leftists can remain in the normal leftist state – psychologically dissociated from a certain set of painful realities – they will continue with their utopian fantasies and Marxist inspired analyses, not to mention their anti-semitism. Until then, Israel will remain the bad guy.

Aug 7, 2005 - 8:25 pm 21. chuck:

David Thompson,

And what is your point? It matters little who originally owned a particular piece of property

Historically, this is the case. I find you and myself on the side on Hitler here (gasp!). But what if the Arabs get their act together and drive the Jews into the sea? Are you fine with that, or are you taking sides?

Aug 7, 2005 - 8:54 pm 22. ed:

Hmmmm.

I’ve got to start my own blog. Endlessly re-typing the same stuff is getting old. So I hope nobody will mind it if I copy & paste an email I sent to a friend.

————————————————-

Hmmm.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011265.php

“The U.S. has, at great cost, overthrown two governments that harbored and supported terrorists. But now, with U.S. encouragement and indeed pressure, Israel is about to transform Gaza into a substantial base of terrorist operations.”

Perhaps.

1. Gaza is along the Med Sea, yes that’s true.

2. Terrorists are heading towards Gaza in the hopes of establishing bases there.

3. It is very probable that terrorists, along with very kind of murderous nutcase, is going to set up shop in Gaza.

Now let’s look at the other possibilities:

1. Gaza is right next to Israel, the one nation on

Earth with the overall best anti-terrorist intelligence services.

2. Gaza is right next to Egypt, which has been an ally, of whatever value you choose to believe, for years now. Mubarak might appease Islamofacists in Egypt but he won’t be very happy about terrorists in Gaza. Primarily because terrorists in Gaza won’t be happy about him staying in power. Terror groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, have been the ones behind assassination attempts on Mubarak.

3. Israel has owned and operated the Gaza Strip for years now and have deep roots. Prime territory for placing deep cover agents. What has been the one single most difficult thing in anti-terror operations? Getting deep cover agents into terror groups.

4. Gaza is a very small piece of land. It’s not Saudi Arabia. It’s not Iraq. It’s not Syria. It’s bounded on two sides by friendly nations and on the other by the Med Sea. It would be extremely possible to literally surround the Gaza Strip with every kind of electronic intelligence gathering devices. I suspect that the CIA, Mossad or whomever would be able to track the high scores of Palestinian kids playing their XBoxes.

5. Many Palestinians in the Gaza are extremely unhappy about the idea of Israelis pulling out. They realise that their economic good fortune has now dried up. The corrupt vultures of the PA are now going to literally loot Gaza right to it’s bones. There will be no jobs, no money, no prosperity.

6. Terror groups are extreme Islamofacists and follow the patterns of behavior of their fellows, such as the Taliban. Look at the Taliban, Fallujah and the other Iraq cities that fell under their sway. Universally these groups became extremely corrupted. They stole, murdered on a whim, pillaged homes and raped whomever they wanted. Instead of adequately governing, which would actually be dangerous to the Coalition, these groups in Iraq made themselves a living pestilience that the resident Iraqis hated and despised.

The pattern is almost a signature. They come in, take over and replace both the civilian authority and the local police. They do not replace the tribal authorities, not until later when they feel more confident in their control. That’s when they start kidnapping and murdering tribal figures, which then generates a backlash.

In any event it is certain that cafes, movie theaters, shops of all kinds. Literally all the things that make life easy, nice and happy will be forbidden under the aegis of stern Islam.

And those things not immediately forbidden will disappear anyways due to the lawless nature of terror groups. What business could operate in an environment where his shop is looted, his goods stolen and himself beaten and robbed on a daily basis? In Fallujah all the shops closed up within a day.

7. A recurring pattern, which has not been commented on by anyone so far, is that the AGWOT(1) has a very common pattern. A summary might be: “You want Islamofacism? Here’s all the Islamofacism you could want, and then some. Now eat it all up until you’re sick of it.”.

This has happened in every single case in Iraq. In every single case where there is a strong terror or militant group, the Coalition retreats, physically or operationally, from the area and allows that group to take over. And in every single instance the local residents get to experience first hand what they normally only see in clips and bits on television.

Namely that Islamofacist groups, and the environments they create, are intolerable for any normal person. People are, in general, people all over the world. They want today to be a little better than yesterday, but will accept having today not be a whole lot worse than yesterday. Most people want stability most of all in their lives. It’s hard to plan for retirement or raise children in an environment that is completely unstable, and Islamofacists have a great difficulty in creating stable environments.

Which invariably puts them at odds with local residents who will do anything to get rid of them.

8. There is currently a struggle for supremacy going on in the Palestinian Authority between Fatah and Hamas. This same struggle is going to ignite into a civil war in Gaza because it’s new terrority, with a lot of loot for the taking, with enormous prestige involved as well. Whomever takes over Gaza will be on the world news every single night for months. Hamas is very strong compared to Fatah and wants to take over completely.

Now add in every single terror group in the world. Now add in all the wanna-be terrorists travelling in from all over the world.

Dodge City will have nothing on Gaza.

Terror groups tend to talk about how they can work together, but this tends to break down in practice. Terror groups are formed almost entirely on ego, not just ideology. This is a necessary component. The idea that “my belief matters most” and that “I can change the world”. So into this cauldron will drop in some of the biggest egos and the craziest bastards on the planet. People who have more than just killed other people, but who actually enjoy it. People with hair-trigger tempers, huge egos, loaded weapons and a complete unwillingness to take crap from anybody.

And you must know that both Fatah and Hamas will take the position that they own Gaza and everybody else has to obey them and pay homage to them. Yeah that’ll work out.

9. There is an interesting facet to modern Islamic terror groups. They’re a lot more broad based now, which causes problems since Gaza is *Arab*. Arabs tend to disparage and look down on other people, muslim or not. Look at attacks by Arab muslims on non-Arab muslims in Africa. Look at the rebellion by non-Arab terrorists in Iraq, who were so offended they gave up their Arab compadres to the Coalition forces.

So that’ll cause a lot of problems.

10. In addition to terror groups will be the infestation by criminal gangs. Criminals will love nothing more on earth than an Gaza under nobody’s control where everything and anything is up for grabs.

11. Now imagine the average Palestinian Arab living in Gaza today. He’s got a wife, 2 kids, his parents and some other relatives that depend on him for shelter and food. His job is gone because the Israelis that owned and operated the shop for years now, are leaving. He knows from personal experience, having lived in the West Bank at various times, just how tough life will be under the rule of the PA. He knows there won’t be any jobs and that any income will depend on personal contacts with people in the PA or Hamas. And it’s unlikely that he has many contacts at all.

He can hope for international aid, but once the terrorist groups infest Gaza this will largely dry up since the terror groups will simply steal all the aid for themselves. Even if he has any money, he won’t be able to spend it since all the shops will be closed or looted and pillaged. He can try to buy food on the black market, but the prices will be staggering and impossible. Even if he could buy food he’ll still have to pay a “tax” just to live in his home. Soon he’ll run out of money, and there’s no telling what will happen after that. And on top of the terrible struggle just to survive will be the endless incessant violence.

….

It’s going to be a choice slice of hell that’ll show not just the Palestinians in Gaza, but in the West Bank as well, just what terrorists are like when they have the whip hand.

Aug 7, 2005 - 9:05 pm 23. Rick Ballard:

David,

I will always champion the cause of Judean lands being returned to those for whom they were named. “Judah for the Judeans” is my motto. I gotta figure out an irony tag.

Aug 7, 2005 - 9:12 pm 24. Rick Ballard:

Ed,

Good post. One point though, there is no way in hell of distinguishing between “criminal gangs” and the various terrorist factions in functional terms. It’s all a criminal enterprise and the Gaza is going to make Five Family gang wars (or even M13 gang wars) look like a church picnic – as you note.

Watch for the UN to ask Uncle Sugar to step in. And watch for Bolton to suggest that we have a full plate at the moment but we will be able to applaud politely, if requested.

The harvest is coming in for the Palis. They should have been a bit more careful as to what they sowed.

Aug 7, 2005 - 9:23 pm 25. ed:

Hmmmm.

@ Rick Ballard

“Good post. One point though, there is no way in hell of distinguishing between “criminal gangs” and the various terrorist factions in functional terms.”

Yes that is correct. In functional terms it will be impossible to make a distinction between criminal gangs and terrorist groups. The criminal gangs will act upon the local populace in much the same way as terrorist groups, though perhaps with less violence. Nothing is off limits though since criminal gangs in Iraq have shown it’s possible to make a profit by doing sub-contracting work handed out by terrorists.

Frankly I think the primary driving forces is an attempt at drawing in terror groups into a “honey pot” and showing Palestinians just what a victory by hardline Islamists is going to be like. Gaza is perfect for this simply because of all the things I listed in the previous post and because it is possible to draw a direct contrast between what they have experienced as part of a liberal democracy and what they will experience as part of a hardline militant Islam.

The only factors that could possibly prevent a wholesale slide into another Fallujah would be Hamas or Fatah making the effort to rein in the real nutcases. But it will take a significant effort to do that and they’ll clash with those that want to impose very strict forms of Sharia’a. It might work to a degree and for a time, but violent clashes over ideology, religion and territorial control are going to happen.

Aug 8, 2005 - 4:21 am 26. ed:

Hmmm.

Frankly I used to think the proper would be what Dafydd is thinking Israel is up to now. Withdraw unilaterally, award nationhood to the Palestinians right now. Give them 6 months to a year grace period. And then treat them like a sovereign nation when they can’t control the ongoing terrorism.

The only problem is that it just returns everything to the status quo. Even if Israel treated the Palestinians as an enemy country, so what? What are the possible strategies that Israel could apply?

1. Bomb the hell out of them.

Well this doesn’t really accomplish much. Not unless you’re talking about carpet bombing, but there is no way that domestic Israelis or lefty Europeans would accept carpet bombing of such “helpless” people. If Israel is reduced to targeting specific individuals, well that’s not much different than now.

2. Ethnic cleansing.

This would work, but it would be political suicide and set Sharon up to be tried for war crimes regardless of how humanely it was done. Israel could pack everyone up at gunpoint, drive them to the Jordanian border and tell them “here’s $20, get yourself a cab”. And it wouldn’t be enough.

Or Israel could simply start shooting people en masse, but that wouldn’t be possible due to the heavy Nazi connection.

3. Re-occupy the territories.

Status quo anyone?

As long as there are Palestinians and as long as there are Palestinians who think the ongoing terrorism against Israel is worth the cost, then it will continue. The only answer is to teach the Palestinians that the cost for them is just too high. One way of doing is mass slaughter, neither ethical nor survivable politically. Another way is to apply the lessons of Fallujah and use that as a teaching method.

If Israel goes Dafydd’s way then the best they can hope for is a return to the status quo.

If Israel goes my way, then the worst they can hope for is the return to the status quo. The best they can hope for is for the population of Gaza to renounce terrorism entirely and petition for independent statehood apart from the PA.

*shrug* who knows what’s going to happen. Well except for violence. I think we’re all anticipating that.

Which really is too bad.

Aug 8, 2005 - 4:34 am 27. David Thomson:

ìDavid Thompson,

ëAnd what is your point? It matters little who originally owned a particular piece of propertyí

Historically, this is the case. I find you and myself on the side on Hitler here (gasp!). But what if the Arabs get their act together and drive the Jews into the sea? Are you fine with that, or are you taking sides?î

Why in hell are you dragging Adolph Hitler into this discussion? You seem unable to distinguish between free choice and coercion. I am all for the legal transfer of land from those who presently hold title to someone else. My position does not in any way justify the capture of land through violence.

Aug 8, 2005 - 7:07 am 28. chuck:

Why in hell are you dragging Adolph Hitler into this discussion?

Because if you read Mein Kampf you will find that Hitler had a similar amoral point of view of history where conquest was its own justification. I found it curious that in some respects I was in agreement with Hitler; his analysis of how to manipulate crowds and meetings, for instance. So I brought it up as a curiousity. You might also think of it as occasion to consider the consequences of such views and as a goad to reconcile an objective amoral consideration of history with the moral considerations that must inform personal behaviour.

Aug 8, 2005 - 7:44 am 29. Fresh Air:

Netanyahu may be right. But you can’t have a completed wall with settlers living on the other side of it. If, as Patton famously said, “Fixed fortifications are monument to the stupidity of man,” then Netanyahu must be correct. For, as John Moore has pointed out, leaving Gaza when considered without taking the wall’s continuity into account can have no positives, either on security or world opinion.

However, if one believes the wall is truly the answer to Israel’s security problem, as Charles Krauthammer, for instance, does, then the pullout makes perfect sense. Only time will tell which is the correct reading of the situation.

My own opinion is that, while Gaza may become an incubator for terrorists, that is not a distinction with 95/100ths of the rest of the Middle East. Terrorists are like mosquitos and Saudi money is like rain. Put the two together and their eggs hatch in a fortnight. Only a comprehensive application of DDT can get rid of them.

Aug 8, 2005 - 8:16 am 30. David Thomson:

“Because if you read Mein Kampf you will find that Hitler had a similar amoral point of view of history where conquest was its own justification.”

Huh? I must be some sort of moron for I still fail to understand your reference to Adolph Hitler. Property rights underpin the very concept of human rights. Courts in the West reject claims by those whose ancestors may have resided on a particular piece of land—but eventually abandoned it for one reason or another. Proof of consistent ownership is demanded. We know from historical records that Turks owned the land. This is the beginning and ending of the matter. Nothing else makes any difference.

Mark Twain and others have pointed out that only the Zionists were willing to invest time and money to develop the area now named Israel. The Arabs during that time period rarely, if ever, described themselves as Palestinians.

Aug 8, 2005 - 8:24 am 31. Bruce Wechsler:

Of course, it would be utter foolishness to expect no further violence. But what the pull out will influence is who is doing it who, and how much…and force the issue of the Palestinian’s future on the Palestiniains themselves.

After the pull out, Israel will have the ability and the will to counter-attack against violence emanating from Gaza in stronger, less pinpointed ways. It will not rise to full scale war or carpet bombing, but something in between that and what they have been doing in the past few years. As long as there is some demonstrable level of restraint in Israle’s actions, the world will surely grumble publicly about it, but nothing strong enough to change its course of action.

This will ultimately force the populace of Gaza and the PA to finally make some important choices. Will they stand up to the criminals that will be making their lives ever so demonstrably worse? With the “support” of Egypt, there is a decent chance for that. At some point, the Palestiniains must be treated like adults who have their own problems to solve. And one of the best ways to do that is to take Israel out of the equation as much as reasonably possibleb.

Sympathetic ears in the world are dissapearing; the Pals will have to decide whether they will too.

Aug 8, 2005 - 8:44 am 32. Cynic:

Bibi is starting to campaign for next year’s elections. According to a poll in Likud Sharon came out ahead of him so staying the way is of no use to him.

Most probably this will split Likud between Sharon’s crowd and the more extreme elements.

For the record, suddenly after a long absense from public view Bibi’s wife Sara appeared, Sunday, together with him in public.

Aug 8, 2005 - 8:50 am 33. Kevin P:

Roger:

Staying in Gaza and trying to police it or leavimg Gaza and putting up the wall will not solve the problem. Anyone can attack either solution and rip it to shreds. Unfortunetly Israel is in the position of choosing which option is less hellish.

The only good aspect of leaving Gaza is that it takes away a couple of the most powerfull talking points of the Israeli haters. They will continue to blame Israel but there arguments will not resonate as well as the current ones. Occupation is such a easy sell. The current argument that Israeli is not pulling out of Gaza in the proper fashion takes more effort. “You been demanding the end of the “occupation” for decades, they are leaving, and you don’t like it!” I am not saying this is logical. But as agit-prop “improper end of occupation” is harder to sell then simple “occupation.” The severe Israeli haters will not stop their screeds. But for the apolitical or the indifferent they might not jump on to the Palestinian bandwagon on such thin gruel.

By leaving Gaza it also gives the Israelis some more rhetorical weapons. When the critics say that the wall is the cause of Palestinian misery they can point to the Arab judicial wall against the Palestinians. I think, and if I am wrong someone please correct me, that most Arab nations in the area do not allow palestinian migration into their countries, except for Jordon, and they do not allow normal economic relations with the Palestinian people. And Israel has the added bonus of stating the fact that the restrictions on movement are because of suicide bombs. What excuse do the arabs have? (actually they have the same fear but after portraying the Palestinians as noble victims it is hard to state the obvious that they do not let them in to their countries because they do not want the violence to happen in their countries).

When Hamas, Hizbollah, and the various permutations of the PLO give up the goal of destroying Israel there could be normal relations between the two states. The people of the world who view Zionism as the equal of nazism are hopeless. The PLO is corrupt so I have no doubt that Hamas will be running the show in Gaza and that is a nightmare. But when Israel is gone it may, over a period of decades, dawn on the Palestinian people that the war on Israel has brought them nothing but misery. I don’t think Israel could hold on to Gaza anymore then they could hold onto southern Lebanon.If they lived in a vacumn they have the military ability to do it but the International world can not be completly ignored. As I stated before all solutions are ugly and do not solve the problem. It has come down to which solution is less ugly. Pray for Israel and if Roger could provide a list of Israeli products that the blogosphere could buy from it could counter the Academic slander campaign that the left is waging.

Kevin Peters

Aug 8, 2005 - 1:51 pm 34. LarryD:

Over at the American Thinker, they’ve an

article that looks at this issue from a different point of view.

Important points:

The realistic Left has given up its wild hopes for a Canada-style unarmed border between Israel and the Palestinians, because of the utter failure of the Oslo Accords.

The realistic Right has given up its wild hopes for an Israel that would include the West Bank and Gaza, simply because of demographic realities. The Arab population in those areas is sky-rocketing, supported by European welfare money.

Israel needs to shield itself from the Palestinian terror state. Gaza is a drain on its resources, with less than 8,000 settlers living close to 1.3 million Palestinians. But the biggest suicide bomber threat comes from the West Bank, not Gaza. By itself, Gaza can be contained.

Prime Minister Sharon’s “defensive deterrence” against suicide bombers is working so far. Attacks against Israeli civilians are down by 75% in the last three years, due to the protective fence and targeted assassinations of terror chiefs.

Does Gaza signal a general retreat? Not likely. The voters will not allow any Israeli government to go back to the indefensible pre-1967 borders, not unless there is a trustworthy guarantee of peace. There is no confidence in Palestinian peaceful intentions today, nor can there be.

It’s worth remembering that the occupied terratories are occupied because of the 1967 war, Israel always hoped to return the lion’s share (beyond what Israel needed for defensible borders) back to the original contries. However, those countries gave up their claims, rather than negotiate for peace. Now, almost fourty years later, Israel is finally withdrawing, securing its borders, and treating the terratories as external (and hostile) terratory.

The Palistinians have always placed the extermination of Israel before getting their own state, Israel is cutting them lose and leaving them to their own failed state. Good riddence.

Aug 11, 2005 - 10:17 pm 35. LarryD:

Ed, I don’t think a return to the status quo is in the cards, if only because the ordinary Palistinians will have had it rubbed

in their face what a hell on earth their

support for terrorism creates. As you have pointed out. It’s different

when it comes back to bite you. If

the Palistinians aren’t hopeless, their

priorities will change. If they are hopeless, well, the gene pool won’t miss them. Sigh.

Aug 11, 2005 - 10:48 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: