Submit your comments on this article | |
Israel-Palestine | |
Gaza settlers surrender weapons ahead of pullout | |
2005-08-09 | |
GANEI TAL, Gaza Strip - A group of Jewish settlers surrendered their guns to the Israeli army in occupied Gaza on Monday, part of a weapons handover aimed at minimising the risk of armed clashes during a planned Israeli pullout. In Ganei Tal, a religious farming community in the Jewish settlement bloc of Gush Katif, settlers handed a local security official more than 20 assault rifles used for guard duty. An orange ribbon was wrapped around each weapon, marking the symbolic colour of the settlersâ protest against Israelâs planned evacuation beginning Aug. 17 from land they see as a biblical birthright. Effi Slotsky, 55, was bitter as he turned in his gun. âWe do not want to give the authorities any room for confrontation,â he said. âI have no confidence in the establishment, and the pullout will bring a disaster for the country. But it is up to them (the Israeli army) to protect us now.â Personal handguns owned by Ganei Tal settlers have yet to be collected. Military sources said the army was discussing a larger-scale collection of settler weapons before Israel evacuates all 21 Gaza settlements and four of 120 in the West Bank in a plan billed as âdisengagementâ from conflict with the Palestinians. Ami Shaked, head of security in the Gush Katif bloc, said efforts were being made to collect many of the hundreds of handguns still held by the 8,500 Gaza settlers who live among 1.4 million Palestinians. âThe idea is to collect all the weapons. I hope all firearms will be handed over to the authorities,â Shaked said.
| |
Posted by:Steve White |
#17 because it was strategically and financially indefensible.... |
Posted by: Frank G 2005-08-09 20:21 |
#16 Ship, I didn't mean political debacle. But, the debacle created by the pullout. Hence, the constant shelling and exponential growth in Hizb rocket placement. I believe due to the pullout, there are about 10,000 to 30,000 rockets pointed at Israel which was never there before the pullout. This article was written in 2002, imagine how many rockets they have now. Not a total debacle yet, but the environment is rich for it to happen. Before the pullout, the situation was controlled. But, now sooner or later, Israel will forced to risk a great deal to get a handle on the threat when they could have been prevented in the first place by NOT pulling out. My whole point in this, is not to play word games, but that Israel already tried the pullout experiment. Capitulation under the threat of terror is not answer. The Muslims have millions and millions acres of land all over. Why is that Israel is always the one that have to give up land? |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 20:18 |
#15 yeah, that Golan debacle is set in the future, isn't it? Israel hasn't IIUC ceded any Golan strategic hts back, and in any vent, reserves the right to reduce Damascus to rubble. It's tougher when you face fish that swim in not-so-innocent-schools of |
Posted by: Frank G 2005-08-09 20:08 |
#14 Good stuff PR.... but I'm still missing the debacle part... political debacle? I'll reread closer in the morning. |
Posted by: Shipman 2005-08-09 19:22 |
#13 Ship, That was below the belt man. Here you go...skeptical grasshoppa Peace More Peace A bit more Peace A little bit more Peace Absolute Peace Nirvana |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 18:22 |
#12 You may have to Google to get more details :> Thanks! You don't know 'em do ya? LOL! Same old PR. I sense a little confusion. |
Posted by: Shipman 2005-08-09 17:54 |
#11 Here is something from Cal Thomas: The end of Israel? by Cal Thomas, August 4, 2005 In the H.G Wells novel and subsequent film, "The Invisible Man," the main character takes a dangerous drug and slowly disappears. That is a metaphor for what is happening to Israel as it plans its latest unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, which it once "occupied" for security purposes. Israel is slowly disappearing, and the twin drugs of appeasement and self-delusion are responsible. The "disengagement" later this month (which is actually a retreat and is seen that way by Israel's enemies) will not be the end, anymore than previous retreats, concessions, "good will" gestures and written documents have produced security or peace in the region.
Some Israelis are placing faith in a formal "letter of assurance" that President Bush addressed to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on April 14, 2004, in which the president assured Sharon that the United States would back Israel's claim for defensible borders, which Israelis take to mean the West Bank. The Palestinian and Arab sides have not agreed to any borders. Israel trusts the word of the president, even as the State Department continues its pro-Arab ways and pressures Israel into real concessions while accepting as gospel empty promises from the Palestinian side, a side that has lived up to only one pledge: to eradicate the Jewish state.
Who will stop them? It won't be the Europeans, or the Palestinians, or any Arab state that helps subsidize them. When the next formal war is launched against Israel, will the United States send troops and planes? With so little land left to defend, it is likely such a war will be over soon after it starts with Israeli cities reduced to rubble and casualties running to perhaps tens of thousands, or more. No responsible business owner would give something to his customers without receiving something in return, or he would not remain in business for long. Why should Israel be required to do all the giving and none of the receiving?
Has anything changed in the Palestinian and Arab world? Has the rhetoric in mosques, schools and media cooled toward Israel or the objective of eliminating it? It has not. If anything, the rhetoric has become even more volatile. The Israelis are held in such contempt that they must dig up their dead from cemeteries in Gush Katif, including six graves of area residents murdered by terrorists, to avoid the desecration they've experienced in the past. Not a single Jew, living or dead, will be allowed to remain. Based on past performance, once Israel's retreat is finished, the Palestinian-Arab side may digest its latest prey like a giant boa constrictor swallowing a large mouse. But after swallowing, it will want more. Look for another intifada and then look for the State Department and the rest of the administration to again pressure Israel to "do more." The formula is wrong. Just as the character in "The Invisible Man" was unable to find an antidote and restore what he had lost, Israel's slow disappearance from the region cannot now be reversed. Assurances, agreements, promises and documents will not be able to bring her back.
| ||||
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 16:58 |
#10 Ship, I am referring to the 3rd statement on thread #5. Please read before responding. Ehud's recent give Ehud pullout of the Golan Heights, similar to the now "Gaza pullout for peace outcry," has already been tried. The end result as you can witness realtime..... ....the Sheba Farms gets shelled constantly by Hizb and the pullout got plenty of Lebenase Christians killed. The Lebanese Christians once provided with Israel with valuable intel on the Hizb. movements. Ehud stabbed them in the back by pulling out. The more land Israel gives away, the more they get shelled in return. |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 16:07 |
#9 Golan debacle? The '73 surprise attack on the heights? Or perhaps you're talking about the withdrawl from Lebannon? |
Posted by: Shipman 2005-08-09 15:32 |
#8 Frank, Just one question. How do you explain the Golan debacle? |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 11:17 |
#7 btw - the Paleo civil war is on, and will break out openly once the settlers leave. Pass the popcorn |
Posted by: Frank G 2005-08-09 10:55 |
#6 Disagree - defensible borders/walls/along with massive retaliation to any mortar, rockets. Let the Paleos have their hellhole, and bring hell to the violators |
Posted by: Frank G 2005-08-09 10:53 |
#5 2b, While we are it, let's give up Mexifornia, MexiTexas, and Mexizona when the illegals wear bomb vests in our malls, looking for land. We will give up the land, build a wall and live in absolute nirvana. The "let them stew in their own juices" theory is not going to ever work. 1. Bush is not going to be President forever. 2. Sharon is not going to be PM forever. 3. The land give away for security has already been tried and failed. The sellout Ehud Barak, gave away the Golan Heights and now there is proxy attack after proxy attack by the Iranians. Israel can't retaliate like they want to because of 1. UN Peace keepers 2. world condemnation. After the Gaza pullout, the UN Peacekeepers will line up on the Gaza border as human shield preventing the Israeli's from retaliating to the attacks from inside the "pullout zone." Bottomline, the pullout will be an utter disaster. |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-09 09:51 |
#4 circle the wagons. I know it's unpopular, but I think it's a good strategy. And at the very least, it's a strategy. You can fight for thousands of years over a patch of land or you can do something bold and move forward. Do I think that the Paleos will stop at Gaza? No. Do I think they will stop short of anything short of trying to push the Jews into the sea? No. But with this move, Sharon is circling the wagons and can concentrate on keeping the savages out. In some ways, it's like our own Western experience. I have no problem with settlers who want to stay - except it's become clear that the calvary can't protect them. So they have a choice, get inside the fort or take your chances. If they want to take their chances, more power to them, but only if they don't expect the members of the calvary to risk their lives in a battle they can't win. The thought comes to mind of surfers in Hawaii who go out to surf big waves during a hurricane or storm. Fine. But then don't go calling 911 and asking someone else to rescue you. You made your choice - now deal with it. |
Posted by: 2b 2005-08-09 05:45 |
#3 Like the guy says, it's up to the army now. I think it's a bad idea, but maybe it IS easier to just fence out the savages, and let them stew in their own juices. |
Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2005-08-09 05:14 |
#2 I still don't like this disengagement. |
Posted by: Captain America 2005-08-09 01:19 |
#1 This is proving to be a horrendous few weeks. |
Posted by: Jan 2005-08-09 01:12 |