Poll shows Sharon party ahead

[IndianaGreen]

By staking out the political center, and attracting members of the Labour Party, Sharon has hit pay dirt. The elections are set for March and Bibi Netanyahu is as skillful as Newt Gingrich when it comes to dirty politics. Let's see what happens. ABB, anybody but Bibi!

Poll shows Sharon party ahead

Friday 25 November 2005, 2:12 Makka Time, 23:12 GMT

The new centrist party of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has a commanding lead over the right-wing Likud party he dramatically left this week, an opinion poll has suggested.

Sharon's Kadima (Forward) movement would win 34 seats in the 120-member parliament against 28 seats for Labour and just 15 for the Likud, according to the poll commissioned by Israel's privately-run Channel 10 television on Thursday.

It was the fourth poll since Sharon's resignation from the Likud earlier this week to vindicate his political gamble ahead of 28 March parliamentary elections.

The others suggested Kadima would win between 30 and 33 seats, the Likud between 12 and 15 seats, a dramatic drop from its current 40, and Labour some 26 seats.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8A0D625C-0EDF-4FF3-A224-594769438ADE.htm

[MisterP]

1. both conservative parties might start up some "Sabra-rattling,"

so to speak, what with the invasion of neighboring Syria in the works in D.C. and the Jordanian king putching around

[whalerider55]

2. "and why did you sting me after I agreed to carry you?"

asked the fox of the scorpion, as the two of them drowned mid-river.
"Because," said the scorpion. "It is what I am..."

Sharon is the ultimate survivor. He is still a profoundly corrupt and corrupting, genocidal and polarizing figure. He still has a lot of blood on his hands, of Israelis and Palestinians. He may continue to
hold on to power, but we should never confuse the failure of the left to cohere after the death of Rabin and Sharon's ultimate slithering into the role of statesman with an affirmation of him as a person or leader.

he has always practiced the politics of division; he has habitually trimmed his sails to suit his pursuit of power, and he also historically used and disposed of allies to suit his own ambitions.

in effect, sharon has left likud because they believed him when he promoted a policy of settling disputed lands; a policy he was instrumental in creating and enforcing; a policy that has cost thousands of lives. It is a policy he now wants to partially dismantle, and finds his folowers unwilling to swerve.

i've always been a strong supporter of Israel; i've probably got fifty trees planted there in my name from my bar mitzvah. but a thug is a thug, and just because we might share the same friday night rituals, i still reserve my obligation as a person of the hebrew persuasion to oppose those who are inimical to justice.

whalerider

[Colorado Blue]

9. I see. So the person who is responsible for the Gaza

withdrawal, which is now bearing even more fruit in the form of the Palestinian-controlled crossing at Gaza, is nothing but a thug?

Sharon is the one politician who is likely to be willing and able to engineer an even trickier withdrawal from the West Bank. He has come out in support of a Palestinian state, which from a formerly hard right politician represents a major change in outlook.

Israel, in case you missed this somewhere during your Bar Mitzvah studies, is a democracy, with a parliamentary form of government. A leader who can create and lead a coalition powerful enough to effect reform is not to be scorned.

Also, no political figure in the Middle East can be seen in American terms. For all his sins Sharon had mirror images on the other side. Since one of Israel's primary foes has died, Sharon has modified his position enormously. This should be acknowledged and respected.

[whalerider55]

15. so your argument is...

because sharon committed genocide (shatilla), and others committed genocide "on the other side", sharon should be given a pass?

sorry. i draw the line at genocide, whether the genocidal maniac wears a yarmulke or a traditonal headdress. and i think thug is a fairly moderate term for anyone who orders genocide. you're right. i shouldn't have let him off so easy.

for the record, i'd also like to consider arafat an advocate of genocide. one of the few differences between him and sharon is that he never had full control of the apparatus of state to implement his policies, and had to rely on a loose coalition of freelancers to get the job done.

the post was about sharon. not his mirrors.

since policies pursued and implemented by sharon since the 70's have had a considerable impact on the situation israel finds itself in now- i just find it a little hard to thank him for undoing the mess he actively, creatively and overtly midwifed.

i find israel in a position that is similar to someone in an abusive relationship. your head gets so cracked by the abuse, that when you'rfe only verbally abused, it feels like your making progress, since you aren't get physically abused. for now.

i believe there is a special table reserved in hell for sharon. and sitting there, eating appetizers waiting for him to arrive, will be arafat. who had the chance to transform the situation when rabin was alive, but wouldn't.

sharon is the karmic convulsion to rabin's assasination.

flame on.

whalerider.

oh, and since you never heard my bar mitzvah speech, you missed my comments in that speech about the responsibilities of living in a democracy. not that bar mitzvah studies include the consideration of the practice of democracy in Israel, i just needed to mention it while i had a captive audience. what the hell, it was 1968, and all hell was breaking loose.

as well, i want to assure you that i don't see sharon in american terms. rather, i'ved tried to take an internationalist perspective, based on the philosophical perspective that genocide should never be a tool of politics, democracy or statehood anywhere at any time.

sharon, by that standard, is on the other side of the fence. with arafat, idi amin, hitler, saddam, pol pot.

nice company.

[barb162]

11. I thought you were writing about Arafat

perfect description

"He is still a profoundly corrupt and corrupting, genocidal and polarizing figure"

[thebigidea]

13. some people must really miss blaming Arafat for everything, eh?

[Behind the Aegis]

14. No more than those who blame Israel for everything.

[barb162]

16. I don't miss that corrupt man at all.

Now, the Palestinians may miss some of the millions he took from them....

[Hyernel]

3. So Joe Lieberman is, like, the only Likud Party member left?

:smoke:

Joementum!

[Charles19]

4. Probably a lot more Likudnic's in the states

They don't have to live with the fallout of the fascist, colonialist policies Likud leaves the Israeli's and Palestinians with.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Just as chickenhawks don't have to go to wars they support

American Likudniks and Apocalyptic Christians (aren't they one and the same?) don't have to suffer the consequences of the policies they support.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. .

:eyes:

[Lexingtonian]

5. I think Sharon is a minor genius, actually

He figured out that the problem in I/P was the radical Right of both sides and the unwilling centrists. And the way to deal with them was to champion the Israeli radical Right. He first destroyed the Palestinian radical Right by assassinations and Arafat finally died, then he took the Israeli radical Right for a massive dive via the Gaza business.

Now it's the stupider and do-nothing centrists on both sides who are going to get politically engaged and expended/discredited.

At least I like to think it's a deliberate plan. Even if it isn't, the exploitation and using up of the resentments and credibility of the right end of the political spectrum in both societies is horrible stuff- but it clears away the serious obstacles to peaceable coexistence very thoroughly. When Sharon is done, coexistence will be the viable political idea that remains.

[IndianaGreen]

6. The problem is not Sharon, the problem are the Likud extremists

When Sharon announced the Gaza pullout, the extremists went bonkers, going as far as issuing a religious edict saying that it would be a good thing if Sharon were assassinated. There is no way Sharon could have retained control of Likud, which really is a coalition much as the GOP is, particularly when challenged by that charismatic demagogue of Israeli politics, Bibi Netanyahu.

The March elections will be determined by which path the Israeli electorate chooses for peace and prosperity. An Israeli will have a better grasp of the issues than those of us living comfortable in America, however, here is my attempt at describing the big picture from the comfort of my living room:

1. Bibi's idea of peace is to keep all of the land occupied since 1967. Bibi will retake Gaza! Bibi's idea of prosperity is rather Reaganesque: privatize, privatize, privatize. Poor and struggling Israelis will suffer under Bibi's draconian economic program!

2. Amir Peretz of Labour Party. I don't know much about him other than he is a socialist and that his defeat of Shimon Peres came as a surprise to everyone, particularly the hapless Peres. From news accounts, I surmise that Peretz wants to return Israel to her socialist Zionist past and he wants to give up all of the land taken after the 1967 war. I would hesitate to compare Peretz to a combination Dennis Kucinich and Hugo Chavez simply because if I were living in Israel I would be concerned about that component of peace that is security. One cannot have peace if one is afraid of leaving the house because of terrorism. One cannot have prosperity if there is no peace, for a permanent state of war will drain resources that are badly needed elsewhere. Time will tell how Peretz will deal with these issues were he to become Prime Minister. I suspect that for Israelis in the political center, a vote for Peretz's Labour would be a gamble.

3. Sharon of Forward Party. Americans are not voting for Sharon and his new party, Israelis are, so I will dispense with the usual litany of grievances that always pop up whenever Sharon's name is mentioned. Sharon offers something to Israelis that Bibi can not: trust! Before you spill your coffee at reading this let me say this about Sharon, he is a familiar face with a reliable record. Let's not kid ourselves, Sharon will never share Jerusalem, and he will keep great chunks of the West Bank by formally absorbing them into Israel. Sharon offers the half a loaf of bread solution, but it is a solution that Sharon can deliver. As to prosperity, I don't know how Sharon can offer anything other than more of the same malaise that his government has produced in the past. Let's see how Sharon, the most versatile politician in Israeli history, can frame his appeal to the electorate. The man is a chameleon!

That's my take from my comfortable living room in America. I hope to hear what Israelis have to say about the upcoming elections, and I am envious that they get real choices at the ballot box.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Heh heh...

I would hesitate to compare Peretz to a combination Dennis Kucinich and Hugo Chavez

I would be extremely concerned about what such a leader would look like.

((shudder))

[Jim Sagle]

12. Ariel's da man, doin' the best he can...to make the world a better place.

O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8) O8)

[barb162]

17. Good point, Jim