with Israel supposedly engaging in some diabolic conspiracy to get more and more land, and "Greater Israel" being the supposed bone of contention.
Not at all the way I read it. There are some who strive for a greater Israel, and some who don't.
As I said, my take on Sharon (based on what he taught my brother-in-law) is that he wants to hang on to the West Bank for strategic reasons, not religious reasons.
The large part of the motivation of the Greater Israel camp is pragmatic. Israel is nine miles wide at Netanya. When you're surrounded by hostile armies, that's not very comforting. The way to lessen the support for this camp is for the neighbors to act peaceable. The way to increase it to act like bloodthirsty nuts. Not surprisingly, the camp is growing again.
Righto. Stuff like that.
If Arafat didn't like Sharon, maybe he shouldn't have elected him.
Interesting way of putting it. Arafat, of course, is beneath contempt. Sharon, on the other hand, I thought you liked?
There is only one man responsible for the death of Iraqi civilians, and that is Saddam Hussein
Well, that is rather the point, isn't it? At this very (thousands of miles ) far remove, do we (US) really have anything to fear from old Saddam?
I really love the assumption that the Mideast would have been sweetness and light without Israel.
Well, no, but that nobody outside the Mideast would have given a flip about what was going on inside the Middle East except for the fact that Israel was in the cross-hairs, liable to be blown away. |
