Hello Leftwingers:

So, you got your Hamas in Gaza. They want to wipe Israel off the map, AND they've got starving children... Should Israel be sending them money? They are, you know.

excon

Did we send money to Hitler during WWII ?

Wonder what Jimmy Carter thinks.. hmmmm

Jimmy’s fantasy land - Opinion & Editorial - BostonHerald.com (http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=1007498&srvc=home)


Should Israel be sending them money?


I'd send it to them in 10,000 lb ordinance .
But you know the UN is itching to intervene on behalf of the terrorists
Send money ? To what end ?

Here is some nice before and after pictures of the greenhouses that Israel left behind when they pulled out of Gaza.

http://home.comcast.net/~fenrisulven/GazaGreenhouse01.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~fenrisulven/20061020TunnelGreenhouse01.jpg

I got an idea... Israel should set up a food for weapons exchange. The Palestinians have their heads so far up their butts it's ridiculous . Can't they see the big picture ? If they weren't consumed with their irrational hatred they could turn Gaza ;with it's huge coast line into the Riviera of the Middle East .

You would think that Egypt can't be thrilled with the idea of a rogue state affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood being located on their border. I don't think it would take much for Egypt and Israel to cooperate and completely isolate Gaza from the rest of the world .

Egypt reinforces Gaza border, sees Iranian 'threat' - Region - Middle East Times (http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20070621-044758-5233r)

Egypt sees an Iranian part in all of this... ya think?! Doubt if truck loads of food and medical aid will be delivered from Tehran .

Nation & World | Conspiracy or collapse in Gaza? | Seattle Times Newspaper (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003756469_fatah21.html)

The tin-foil hat crowd thinks that Abbas intentionally ceded Gaza to Hamas... nah ;only Isreal would cede territory like that.

The definitive answer to your question can be found in a letter General Sherman sent to the leaders of Atlanta .Here is an abbreviated version:


Headquarters Military Division of the Mississippi,
In the field, Atlanta, Georgia, September 12, 1864.

James M. Calhoun, Mayor
E. E. Rawson and S. C. Wells, representing City Council of Atlanta

Gentlemen:

I have your letter of the 11th, in the nature of a petition to revoke my orders removing all the inhabitants from Atlanta. I have read it carefully, and give full credit to your statements of the distress that will be occasioned, and yet shall not revoke my orders, because they were not designed to meet the humanities of the case, but to prepare for the future struggles in which millions of good people outside of Atlanta have a deep interest. We must have peace, not only at Atlanta, but in all America. To secure this, we must stop the war that now desolates our once happy and favored country. To stop war, we must defeat the rebel armies which are arrayed against the laws and Constitution that all must respect and obey. To defeat those armies, we must prepare the way to reach them in their recesses, provided with the arms and instruments which enable us to accomplish our purpose. Now, I know the vindictive nature of our enemy, that we may have many years of military operations from this quarter; and, therefore, deem it wise and prudent to prepare in time. The use of Atlanta for warlike purposes is inconsistent with its character as a home for families. There will be no manufactures, commerce, or agriculture here, for the maintenance of families, and sooner or later want will compel the inhabitants to go. Why not go now, when all the arrangements are completed for the transfer, instead of waiting till the plunging shot of contending armies will renew the scenes of the past month? Of course, I do not apprehend any such thing at this moment, but you do not suppose this army will be here until the war is over. I cannot discuss this subject with you fairly, because I cannot impart to you what we propose to do, but I assert that our military plans make it necessary for the inhabitants to go away, and I can only renew my offer of services to make their exodus in any direction as easy and comfortable as possible.

You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out.. .
You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war...

But, my dear sirs, when peace does come, you may call on me for any thing. Then will I share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your homes and families against danger from every quarter...

W. T. Sherman, Major-General commanding.

Hello again, tom:

Lt. Gen. Keith W. Dayton, the American security coordinator for the Palestinians, was pressing ahead with up to $80 million in aid to train and equip Mr. Abbas's Presidential Guard, along with millions the Israeli's have given.

I didn't know we coordinated (giving money and bombs! ) to terrorists. This money will wind up in the hands of Hamas. The guns we're giving them will wind up in the hands of Hamas.

We (George W. Bush) hasn't got a clue what's going on. Never has and never will. People. We're in trouble. If it wasn't for Iraq we had a chance...

excon

Well I guess you could pin it all on GW Bush if you want to ;but US policy regarding the Palestinians has been a failed policy since at least 1976 and probably longer . This 2 State solution has been a dead end no matter how many times it's ugly head has been resurrected . Yassar Arafat passed a lot of US cash to his heirs.

Hello again, tom:

I agree, our history is littered with mistake after mistake. There's plenty of blame to go around.

In its simplest terms, the reason I dump on Bush is because HE is the first guy to recognize our war against Jihadistan, and then proceeded to lose it by invading Iraq.

The Iraq disaster has emboldened the Jihadists and we're giving them money and guns. Huh?

excon

Well I just wrote a lenghty response and my computer crashed . Here is the condensed version .

Bush's instinct at the beginning of his administration was correct . After the 2nd Intifada that came as a result of the failed folly at Camp David 2000 ,Bush decided to disengage and let the Isrealis and Palestinians duke it out. But there was tremendous pressure on him to get back into the process . Seemingly everyone is committed to the 2 sate solution .That is where the so called road map came from .

When Arafat went to meet his virgins the process needed a replacement partner in peace . A known terrorist ,Abbas ,was designated that partner.

Now ; some of the biggest critique of Bush has been unilateralism . In this case he is following a blue print that the international community recognizes as the final solution... that 2 state solution . So again.. damned if he does /damned if he doesn't .

I don't see how Iraq relates to this at all . I don't buy into the Baker Commission linkage .

Hello again, tom:

IF there IS a global war on terror (Jihadistan), then Iraq certainly relates. Isn't it YOU who always said they were the same? I think so. It was ME who said they weren't.

And, in the beginning, they weren't. But they are now.

Now, the problem with Bush TODAY, is that he again is living in a fantasy. He's blindly pretending there ARE two states and moving in that direction... But, by my count there are three states - Palestine, Hamasastan (Gaza), and Israel. I think the rest of the world sees that too.

Maybe if Bush continues to fiddle while Rome burns, Fatah, the loser we backed because (well I can't find a reason), will fail in the West Bank too, and we'll be back to two states. That is happening, right in front of our eyes.

But, Bush is lost... A boy in the woods...

excon

At least for me ;the main justification for removing Saddam was that he was a terrorist enabler . Your point is well taken in regard to our backing Abbas . The similarities cannot be ignored . We should not be giving support to Abbas or as this disturbing report this morning suggest ;opening up dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood.

I agreed and still do agree with the Bush doctrine .That he is drifting from it to that more traditional but detestable realism (Baker /Kissingerism )is a tribute I guess to all his critics tag-teaming to beat it out of him.

We shall see if the world is safer when we feed and arm our Palestinian terrorists for the sake of stability . I kind of doubt it. Taking the realists argument to it's logical conclusion all would be well if only Israel didn't exist .

That he is drifting from it to that more traditional but detestable realism (Baker /Kissingerism )is a tribute I guess to all his critics tag-teaming to beat it out of him.Hello again,

And, therein lies the difference between us.

Invading Iraq, or in fact more importantly, not securing Iraq AFTER we invaded is the 800 lb gorilla in the room. That war is lost, and was so back then. You just don't admit it yet.

Bush had no plan "B". Consequently, he drifts. I called it fiddling.

His critics didn't cause him to lose the Iraq war. Not securing the country did. So he drifts... His critics aren't going to cause him to lose the very war we're talking about now, are they? Drifting will.

excon

Well, the world finally has their Two State solution... The West Bank is one and Gaza is the other.

Olmert is a fool for giving money and weapons to either side of this conflict. It will come back to haunt Israel. Either they'll be used by Fatah against Israel or by Hamas against Israel.

I've quoted Meir Kahane before: "A moderate Palestinian is a Palestinian who wants to kill Jews moderately." There's no significant difference between Hamas and Fatah, and supporting either one would be foolish. But nobody ever said Olmert was smart.

But If Israel has to support them, then I say that Israel should support both sides equally... It should give both sides just enough arms to keep the fighting between Fatah and Hamas going, but not enough for either side to win decisively. Let them kill each other off for years. Evey bullet or bomb they fire at each other is one they can't fire at Israel. Every fighter that dies in the fighting is one who can't attack Israel.

Elliot

You missed the point . This posting isn't about Israel and Palestinians .It's about Iraq and President Bush . Try to stay focused.

you missed the point . This posting isn't about Israel and Palestinians .It's about Iraq and President Bush . try to stay focused.Hello again, tom:

IF there IS a GLOBAL war on terror, and I don't disagree with you that there is, then this post is about how Iraq affected the Bush policy in Israel/Palestine.

Bush policy, we both agree is wrong. You say it's because he's drifting. I say it's because he lost in Iraq and is making accommodations.

excon