Sharon Doesn't Plan to Follow 'Road Map'

[chiburb]

(Mods, this is front page Yahoo news right now. Can it stay in LBN instead of that "other place"?)

Snip:

By KARIN LAUB, Associated Press Writer

JERUSALEM - Israel will not follow the U.S.-backed "road map" peace plan and could remain in much of the West Bank for an extended period after it withdraws from the Gaza Strip , Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in a newspaper interview published Wednesday.

Sharon's comments were his most detailed yet on his long-term vision for the region. Palestinian officials said the remarks confirmed their fears that Israel plans to draw its own borders and keep a large chunk of the West Bank, rather than negotiate a peace deal with the Palestinians, as envisioned by the road map.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040915/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_9

[rpannier]

1. He hasn't been following it for some time.

Why is this such a surprise

[wurzel]

2. Sharon never did. He wants it ALL! And he will get it.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chiburb]

4. The important point of this is NOT Sharon reneging...

It's that here is ONE MORE example of a failed Bush policy. Remember when he was criticized for sitting back and not having a Middle East policy? Out comes the "road map for peace" with great fanfare. We all said at the time that it was bullshit, just providing cover for Sharon, etc.

Kerry: "Bush had a road map alright, unfortunately it was upside down".

[Gyre]

5. Why should he?

Bush hasn't ever done anything but say that he "should cooperate" and then wink at Sharon, from day 1.

Kerry should nail him on that, but he won't, because it's too "complicated" for the average murikan. Maybe if they do an episode on "The Simpsons", murika will finally understand. But that's about the only way it'll happen.

Gyre

[Violet_Crumble]

6. And in breaking news...

Bushy announces that for the first time ever the US might target an oil-rich sovereign state in retaliation for a terrorist attack it had no involvement in ;)

Strange, but I don't recall Israel ever agreeing to the road map, let alone following it...

Violet...

[IndianaGreen]

7. And Israel's Ambassador to the US said today that...

if the US pulls out of Iraq, no problem! He said that if was just speculation that the country would sink into civil war, and if it did, so what?

Israel wants the Arabs to be weak and divided, so a fragmented Iraq is just what the doctor ordered.

In other news, neither Kerry nor Bush have said anything about Sharon's announcement that Israel had pulled out of the Roadmap.

For once I agree with Sharon. Why pretend that you want peace when you really don't?

[bemildred]

8. It's interesting that it's been said in public by a paid

political whore. He's being wildly optimistic if he thinks the
US defeat in Iraq is going to be good for Israel. But I think
he's mostly likely whistling past the cemetary here.

[IndianaGreen]

9. From an strategic point of view, a fragmented Iraq is good for Israel

which is why Israel's agents in AIPAC lobbied so hard for the war. This is also why our whore Congress voted for the Syria Accountability Act, to lay the legal groundwork to do to Syria what we did to Iraq. Israel is the only winner here, and without having the IDF shed a drop of blood in Iraq.

Shame on us for being so stupid!

[bemildred]

10. From a strategic POV, Uncle Sugar getting his ass kicked is not.

You are right about fragmented, weak Iraq, but that is not the most
important issue, IMHO. The power vacuum left by Uncle Sugar will
be filled by powers that are less knee-jerk in their support of whatever
half-wit party is running Israel. Iran, Turkey, Russia, and the EU are
all much more important than Iraq, and much closer to the action.

Of course, this is all premised on the idea that having a settlement of
the conflict rammed down Israel's throat is bad for Israel, whereas I
would argue that that may be the one thing that will leave and enduring
"Jewish State", or something of the sort, there.

[IndianaGreen]

11. We should have thought of that before we invaded Iraq

No one can put Humpty Dumpty back again!

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses,
And all the king's men,
Couldn't put Humpty together again

I am among those that think the US should get out of the Middle East altogether, I just didn't think we were going to get kicked out.

Listen to those idiots that are calling for the overthrow of the Saudi royal family. Who in the Hell do they think is going to replace the corrupt monarchy. A Saudi Chalabi? No, it will be an Osama look alike!

[bemildred]

12. Yup, it's too late now.

Uncle Sugar getting his ass kicked is not going to be good
for the Saudis either, and they already got plenty of trouble.
They are likely to get themselves overthrowed without much
outside help at all. The one nation in the region that stands
to come out smelling like a rose is Iran.

[legin]

13. My guess on this

As it stands at the moment Iran is sort of the last major threat that israel has left.

israel would like to just go over to Iran and defeat them, but that would look a bit over-aggresive, and not very democratic-like, while Iran is quietly sitting behind it's borders.

So israel and Iran are like 2 heavyweight champions giving press conferences, in the lead up to a big fight, about how they are going to dystroy each other. What israel wants to do is organise a venue for the 'big fight' with Iran.

If Iraq splits into three, as is being suggested lately, Iran moves out of its borders into southern Iraq and israel moves into the northern Kurdish part. Now they can get at each other and if the engagement should result in israel, at some later date, following Iranian forces across the border into Iran then it won't look so bad.

Also Iran has a Kurdish population too which could made less 'Iranian' if the beginnings of a Kurdish state took shape, and who thus could be used to weaken the Iranian state.

israel would like to take out Iran, but needs to manufacture a suitable 'excuse' to quell any 'moral' uneasiness people in western countries might feel, and a messy split up of Iraq could provide israel with the means to do this.

[bemildred]

14. I was referring to the US pullout, not the balkanization of Iraq..

I find the notion that Israel could "handle" Iran wildly optimistic.
Not that they might not like to, I just don't think they have the
wherewithal. Israel could make itself very annoying by working
with the Kurds, true, but that is going to piss off their buddy
Turkey.

However, I doubt that the Ayatollahs care that much about Israel
except as a political stalking horse to keep themselves in power.
Israel would do better to encourage that indifference rather than
pursue it's present antagonistic course, on a number of grounds that
I don't want to go over here, as there is presently no evidence at
all the Israel or it's government have much interest in being
sensible.

[hansolsen]

15. These Settlements and the battle over the so called "Holy Lands" in the

West Bank are going to get a million Americans killed. Israeli Settlers need to get the hell back into the original U.N. mandated borders.

It needs to be the policy of the United States to make that happen.