U.S. military may be needed for Israel- Palestinian stability, (Lugar R-In

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Military involvement by the United States and its NATO allies may be necessary to create stability between Israel and the Palestinians, a key lawmaker said Sunday.

"If we're serious about having a situation of stability, a very direct action, I think, is going to be required," said Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, on CNN's "Late Edition." ---

The Bush administration "has to figure out who is going to go after the terrorists," Lugar said, adding that U.S. military involvement "has to be a potential possibility."

A Democratic colleague agreed. ---

Are we going to invade them, or do they think its swell?

I don't know about GOI, but did you read that article in editorials.

man it is time to get real. It does appear US mid east strategy revolves around that Mofaz plan. which means they are going in for the kill. perhaps a search is necessary to see what GOI thinks. the last time Lugar (you know his is with the CFR right) mentioned US troops go in (before the Hudna) just before it. There was an article suggesting GOI did not want it. This is very bad news. These guys are crazy.

snip

The Jewish state is firmly opposed to such intervention. Hamas has said it would reject any peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=857

No way they want US troops stumbling around
in the middle of their little mess.

So that raises the question: "What is up with Lugar
running his mouth like this?"

You are correct BTW, they are not rational.

He gained my undying enmity for comments shortly after the U.S. Navy destroyed the Iranian airliner, to the effect that they had it coming.

The idea of an international force to police the Arab Palestinian areas is not unsound in theory, but wholly impractical in the actual situation. No one would consider it neutral, and it would not have the willing cooperation of either party to the conflict. Such a force, in order to actually attain the desired goal, would have to act both to prevent operations by Arab Palestinian irregulars, and the further confiscation of land for Israeli settlements. This would bring it into open conflict with both parties, and render its situation untenable.

The constant harping on the "Mofaz Plan" as some sort of conspiratorial blue-print is more humorous than anything. It was drawn up clearly as a contingency plan, and shelved thereafter for some while. It is not really anything besides a codification of standard counter-insurgency doctrine. Nor is their anything particularly untoward about a nation setting about to neutralize the capacity of its armed foes to strike its citizens: that is what nations maintain a military arm in ordr to do, after all. The people of Arab Palestine certainly have a right to armed resistance, as does any people: they do not, however, have a right to succeed at it, any more than any other people do, nor a right to exercise their right to resistance without action being taken against the effort by their foe. Defeat is always a possibilty; there is no right to victory.

You are correct WRT military planning. The issue that I see
is that it presumes continued warfare. However problematical
the PA may be, it seems shortsighted to destroy it's capability
to exercise power, one is only left with Hamas and such.

Given your comments on the problems with an outside force, which
I agree with, it seems clear that a Palestinian agency capable of
policing the Palestinian people will be needed, as the Israeli
people will need to police themselves, and already do somewhat.
The Israeli people at least have effective internal governance.

So the question must be asked: What Palestinian agency is to do
that, and how is it to be constructed? It seems unlikely that
the GOI will succeed in dictating such a solution, hence development
of cooperative rather than adversarial relations with some sort
of Palestinian agencies seems a necessary precondition of any effective
movement towards peace.

I don't believe we disagree here.
Regards.

It seems to me that the only body which conceivably could carry out the necessary actions is the Palestine Authority, that being the nearest thing to a state organization in existance there. The policy of attacking this body in response to activities carried out by Hamas was misguided. It probably originated in the view that punishment would goad it into action, but this does not work as well as people often think it will: the result is often mulish obstinancy instead of cooperation, and the punishment may do such damage as to reduce the capability to do what is desired. Another factor was the greater ease of striking the open facilities of that body; rather like the old joke about the man who loses his keys in the alley but looks for them by the lamppost, since it is easier to see there.

It is still, though, more a change of heart than a reconstitution of apparatus that is required. So long as the attitude that "we will not be Israel's jailer" remains predominant, no progress will be made. Cooperation with Israeli intelligence would be a first step, one that could, as a practical matter, be taken today. The Palestine Authority must recognize that so long as Hamas, etc., remain in operation, there will never be peace, and they will never achieve full statehood. These irregular organizations are every bit as much the enemy of the Palestine Authority as they are of Israel.

conspiracy blue-print, but that it was a strategy as you say. From what I understand you are correct it was a contingincy plan (going back to the sixties I believe) with stress on various military strategies that Israeli military has utilized before. I just found it interesting because since first reading it, all that has gone on in the occupied territories has followed pretty much this basic strategic even to the point that now Lugar wants to send in US forces.

It does seem to have been kicked off after a large terrorist attack in which many people were killed which does seem to have been 9/11 as unofficially the IDF did go in just after 9/11. You are correct the strategy itself is not new, but it did call for demolotion the PA, and has provided for an international force be sent. Because I had read it well over a year ago, I found the strategy itself has seemed to supercede the roadmap. I always wondered what was all this allusion to a roadmap which seemed to go contrary to this strategy itself.

I also find it interesting that no analysis has ever outwardly made mention of it till now, which isn't necessarily indicative of anything. Throughout the last year because the plan stayed with me, I just have found I haven't been much surprized with the stalling and haggling with the roadmap, as again this plan does not seem to be in line with the roadmap, but instead with the demoliton of the PA. This has been accomplished.

One would have thought it would have been mentioned long before now. Although I guess that is just naivete on my part the news is always a bit slow on the draw. There is nothing new there either. I just found it striking and having read it made it much easier to read through the empty political gesturing, as well as the rhetoric in regards to the roadmap.

.

US troops are known throughout the world for their skill at eradicating Muslims.

Perhaps Senator Lugar is displeased with the number of Palestinians who continue to cling to life, and feels that the IDF could benefit from the zeal of the bush regimes crack Crusade force.

I am bitter about this. If the US troops try to interfere, I wish them only bad luck.

I mean, the way the Israelis exterminate Palestinians is so interesting.

Kill a busload of Jews and lose your house. Your house. Your house.

Unless you are idiot enough to stand in front of a slow-moving bulldozer, the house goes down and you stay alive.

Damn straight that's a slow extermination policy.

Why, if no Palestinian ever died blowing up another bus, or restaurant, or marketplace, the Palestinians could live forever that way.

And maybe somebody would then be willing to invest a dime in their future.

all the way. but they couldn't have sold that plan outright it was smokescreened by the Iraq war, and by all the empty gesturing the roadmap was shot dead right at the beginning this is a war within a war. they let that christain zionist faction in. once they are done with the palestinians. It is the fight for the holyland next.

This is world war. Please reel me in.

Im sick of US tax money fighting for Sharons Neocons who run the Bush empire....there arent any more fucking US soldiers to fight your fucking Neocon War you assholes...




what total horsehite.

He dictates policy from a tiny, oil-free, postage stamp of ground desperately dependant on American goodwill for survival.

GW Bush, the grandson of Hitler's banker, Prescott Bush, is naturally anxious that everything turn out just the way that old Jewish guy wants it.

GW Bush, a man who only grants favors to the rich and powerful is eager to do the bidding of a guy with no money, and no power. For what? Jewish votes? Jews are barely 2 percent of the US population. So naturally he's eager to curry favor with them.

But wait! What about the Christian fundamentalists? But then, if Bush is doing their bidding, how can he be Sharon's puppet? Is Sharon a Christian fundamentalist?

Who knew?

Sharon dictating to Bush is the flea dictating to the dog. Doesn't work real well.

To tell the truth, I'm not sure that the tired old tactic of wailing and trying to spin any criticism of European invaders in the Middle East into some kind of statement about people with a particular faith tradition has a lot of resonance even in the west any more.

To suggest that the gunrunning, oil-looting and general thuggery that passes for government in the puppet regimes the US installs in the glorified military base cum gangsta paradise that the US refers to as "Israel" has jackshit to do with any religion is an insult to all religions and all people of any faith, especially Jews, many of whom put their lives on the line every day to try to save one child, one family if they're lucky, from some drooling sharonista gunman or other.

The name of the game is not about red heifers, but revenue, and whether the pocket-stuffers are Jewish or Jain is irrelevant, to them, and to their victims.

but for the the time being both are on the same page. Ultimately the saxon neo nazi christian zionist thing is going to set in.

Also it serves the saxon anti-semitic spin to play up the religious angle. you have it down correctly I believe the hierarchy, and isn't it ironic. Israel came in behind the BA guns - a glorified paramilitary junta. But their intelligence and covert tactic is much better than the US's (or so it seems) and once this plays down the road farther do you really believe Sharon is just going to turn the spicket off.

Perhaps I am way too ahead of myself and should stick with oil revenues because once the palestinains are out of the way if that is as easy as all think, and they break OPEC, than I guess Israel will be the oil broker. or am I still too far head of myself. You see the article regarding that pipeline to Haifi. I just think at one point there will be that play for the holy land. And after all Israel is a country of semitics. NOT saxons or germanics. The whole world has to protest. Of course they did didn't they before we invaded Iraq.

DuctapeFatwa this is moving fast now. since the UN bombing.

are more pro-Israel than the Zionists. And, they do support/vote for Bush.

and they are backed by the extremists on both sides...
In the meantime, dont send my son or daughter to fight some religious horsehite nationalistic war...
http://www.againstbombing.org/

http://www.iraqwar.org/Armageddonupdates.htm

Sharon is on record saying he controls the United States.

It's time to stop the denial.

Time to pay some real attention to the ways of the world.

Your problem is that some people are paying attention to what is going on in Israel. If you think Sharon would lie about his influence, then show us why, and provide some links.

It is so blatantly obvious the continued denial is now almost a nuisance. Not to say he controls the US (as in taking over America), but it's military ME policy and strategy. From what I can see, it seems the charade will continue. Certain things are best left to final status. In an effort to not have to deal with that which might open up too many cans of worms in a way that would reveal the deceptions we are being duped by.

That way the blind or the consciously resistant can continue with the farce that good faith actually exists and that Israel has ever had any intention of negotiating anything with the PA or will be reigned in anytime soon. An unconsciousness which just serves to support the current line of propaganda.

The US for the moment, does seem to have given sharon a very long leash, and Israeli military strategy has been very influential in this process. You know how it is I tend to find I stay ahead of the spin? I hardy consider US strategy. I follow Israeli strategic blue prints from the past, (in essence not much of the strategy has changed over the years, not from what I can see.) from one milestone to the next with full understanding of the covert operations utilitied (mis and disinformation campaigns (very well disguised pre-emptives have been the name of the game, for the most part).

Following the game board from this prospective, so far seems to have worked in helping to assess every new situation or incident as it has arisen and in some cases has enabled some predictability for what lays ahead.

Sorry.

the quote might be bogus. That is not necessarily what captured my attention. Not in the sense a quote like that might generally conotate, but only in the sense that Sharon has not been reigned in or made to comply and that IDF has had carte blanche alla mofaz' plan. To be clear that is what frames my response. Not that Sharon has taken over America or fully US overall policy here. Israel for the most part has been a strategic mechanism in the region from the saxon imperalist perspective I mean. This more so is what justified the monetary investment.

On edit: What is obvious is that Sharon has been given leeway as well as clearance. That he leads the pack in the grand scheme of things. I don't think so. However, pulling reign on him may prove interesting. Than again from purely a business standpoint that time may not pass. That would depend on the strength of the resistance in the overall region, and the problems that arise in quelling it.

But it is a personal point of mine to make sure people don't use that quote. There is more than enough evidence against Sharon without resorting to fabrication. :)

It isn't true either. Sharon doesn't "control" the U.S. In fact, real quotes show he is desperate to avoid confrontations with America. He accepted the Roadmap in order to "not quarrel with the Americans", even though he made clear in cabinet discussion that the dates set down were "not serious".

I am not a fan of fabrication, nor am I fond of talkpoints and propaganda, mis or disinformation either. I did not contest the quote but just used it as a jumping board to make further points along the lines I am thinking. There are interesting bedfellows and from the covert side Israeli involvement has for the most part come under the umbrage of GOA (but for minor exceptions which is difficult to discuss but for lack of substantative evidence).

I view this from the perspective of the saxon germanic supremacy or hierarchy and the strategic worth of a foothold in the region. While the colonials left in body they never did relinquish their interests. Nor have they brokered this in a way to necessarily enhance the comfort or interests of the all the people in the region. In my mind many dynamics are at play here and history seems to be repeating in various ways with the mightily armed Israel on the chess board in a different way than during the WWII era.

Old wounds and grudges can diehard, but for business interests and monetary profits. All those are meant to serve the eastern european/european not the arab semitic per se. The dominance of OPEC is another factor besides this played up Judeo-Christian crusade. Saudi Arabia figures into this scenario as well. The carlyle seems to like them.

Put your money where your mouth is. Give us a link.

but it was attributed to an Israeli radio station which has no idea what they were talking about. There is Palestinian propoganda to and I don't believe anything about anyone over there unless it's in print.

And can't be bothered to search. I suggest you research the matter yourself. You'll find the claim came from a pro-Hamas website, picked up by a U.S. newspaper columnist and falsely attributed to Israeli Radio.

I'm recalling from memory, but that is essentially accurate.

will not be bothered to pay them attention.

http://brian.carnell.com/articles/2001/12/000020.html

if you want to believe, believe, but if you know the players and the mindset of the Israeli right it is inconsistent with their paranoia to believe such a thing.

It's also just way, way, too handy of a quote.

for propaganda purposes. The use of this quote is to be taken with great discernment it is meant to stir another boiling caldron of anti-jewish sentiment which as I said might well be convenient subtrefuge for the elitist I speak of. What a game it all is really spin for spin.

Do whatever you like and pay attention to whatever posts you want. :)

The idea that I don't substantiate my posts shows you've read very little of them. For the record, I spend valuable time on worthwhile topics, and this isn't one. My post was accurate. If you're so bothered about this "quote", research the matter yourself. That will be more rewarding to boot.

It's supposedly from an Israeli radio broadcast that didn't happen.

One other thing to consider, when it's AIPAC vs. the military/industrial complex AIPAC loses ever time (see the Lavi).

on edit: Thinking about it, I guess you can't say AIPAC *lost* since they managed some incredible concessions involving shoveling money at Israel to pay for a cancelled plane that we paid for anyway but the Lavi did go into the shitter to make sure US manufacturers wouldn't be competing with them.

when one considers that one percent of elitists the main core of that group which the CFR could be considered a leg of as can too the trilateral commission... its epicenter is NOT jewish. but one could argue that the misnomer that the Jews are taking over the world might serve this group as a subtrefuge to hide behind. GOA and GOI have certainly done business with one another overt and covert AGAIN, they were for hire in a sense with perhaps some of the paramilitary expertise utilized for the purpose of GOA aims.

please understand I had never heard of the remark before you mentioned it, and I can not say what source wrote it. I also do not vouche for this site or this source. I merely put the sentence into googles: "sharon controls the US" this is what came up: Other's will have to comment on validity or worth of source. I myself do not know.

I will say this: judging from some of the names in parenthesis it could be disinformation. I say this because David Dukes may have affiliations with those patriot groups who hate everyone and Israel has taken over America has been their mantra for quite some time. I always questioned their motives. Personally I can go as far as Sharon Policy and strategy is being utilized because it serves Saxon government interests. And the media is controlled by corporations that support these interests. That does not necessarily mean Sharon has taken over America. And I do not want to defend my position. The subject matter is highly conbustible for obvious reasons. This site does seem to be propaganda. To verify the remark. One would need to track the original source. That it was printed, does not necessarily make it fact.

snip

With the United States determined to use US troops to attack Iraq it is well to remember that Israel controls the United States, as Israel's Prime Minister has admitted.Ariel Sharon made an interesting remark to his foreign minister, Shimon Peres, when he said:"I want to tell you something very clear, don 't worry about America... we. the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it." (The Truth At Last, Box 1211, Marietta, Georgia, USA, 30061 and Israeli Radio, Col Yiserael).
US Senator William Fulbright (of Fulbright Scholarship fame) said, "Israel controls the US Senate." (David Duke, President of European-American Unity & Rights Organisation http://www.davidduke. com/writings/howisraeliterror.shtml).That means that Israel controls the United States Military Forces. Ron Paul, US Congressman, "Our policy is driven by Israeli, not US security interests." (New Times Survey, GPO Box 1052J, Melbourne, Vie. 3001; July 2002).

http://www.nesa.org.uk/latest_issue/html/israel_controls_the_united_sta.htm

here is another take on the statement which was said by someone else. This link is a testament to just how distasteful remarks of this nature are. Even with the use of Sharon. Connotation will always be suspect.

http://www.factsofisrael.com/load.php?p=http://www.factsofisrael.com/blog/archives/000629.html

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/sharonproof/sharonproves.htm

IN conclusion that Bush has adopted a more pro-israel stance is one thing. that our media supports the Bush propaganda another. But the connotations that Sharon has taken over America? IF he said that he is not a well man.

anyway there is much press on the issue. here is the googles:

http://www.google.com/search?q=sharon+controls+the+United+States&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0

for me the first link I placed which is the one that came up first is the most off putting. It does seem to be anti-jewish propaganda rather than indicative of astute analysis or accuracy in terms of balanced and fair reporting. The site is a vanity site. Highly suspect.

I find it very disingenuous, that you purposely belittle and demean the influence and power of Likudnick controlled Israel on our foreign policy, our media, and our national politics. Through their adherents in the U.S., they have tremendous influence, and to insinuate otherwise, is to insult the intelligence of any informed person.

Though the Jewish population in this country may be only 2+%, as you say, and perhaps only 50% of the 2+%, support Likud policies, they are a very, very, powerful 1%. They may seem like a "mouse", and in fact prefer to be seen that way (witness, your efforts), but with their allies in media, among the neocons, in the Congress, and hyper-influential groups like AIPAC, .....they are a "lion" with a VERY loud roar! Who are you trying to fool?

For those who are seeking peace in the world, I can no more see one supporting Likud policies, than one supporting the policies of Hamas. Both are doomed to tragic failure. Can someone tell me why it would be in the interests of the United States to tie themselves to this failure? Better to focus our efforts on removing both Likud, *AND* Hamas, from power, and then proceed. In any case, I resent my country being used by ANY other country or group, as a tool to further imperialistic ambitions, or hate, or violence.

from an international perspective. I speak of the ELITES it is international and it is not wholly Jewish. The power of the 1% is a force. It is concerned with an overall dominance of finance and resource. This 1% utlizes whom best will serve their end. And though somewhat enigmatic and beyond media scrutiny do pull many of the strings.

Lugar thinks that sending in the (largely) Christian soldiers in there is going to be taken as anything other than a crusade? He, is an idiot for even speaking of it.

Is Israel in NATO?

He seems to believe the US still has credibility in the Middle East.

And what, pray tell, are our soldiers to do, Mr. Lugar? Walk the children to school? Frisk people getting on buses? Can't wait till one of our boys frisks a pregnant Palestinian woman. Should work real well.

I understand his frustration, GOD I do, but permanently moving into Israel is a truly bad idea.

Because it would have to be permanent. Which would result in our being fragged by both sides.

Back to the drawing board. Have fun, you hear?

while our soldiers get murdered. He doesn't care
what happens to them as long as it serves the
agenda's of the wealthy. (OIL)

bush plays golf but stops long enough to say...

"BRING EM ON!" then he continues his golf game.

Israelis. On the other hand, if he lets anyone else in then his lie (much like the * cabal's) will be found out by OUTSIDERS. He can't have outsiders seeing the genoicide!

Let's see: Palestinians blow up busses, children, markets, women, restaurants, boys, school cafeterias, girls......and they are sweet put upon freedom fighters.

Israelis bulldoze a house and they are committing genocide. Oh, maybe you mean they fired into a crowd today trying to kill some Hamas guys who were hiding behind their own people TRUSTING that the Israelis wouldn't want to kill innocent civilians. Why would they trust people interested in genocide?

But maybe it was just one bus too many, you know? Maybe after being indiscriminately murdered day in, day out, you kinda wanna just get even, you know? Maybe today was that day, because they went into that crowd. Genocide.

Right? That was genocide? Really? The crowd didn't really run because THEY didn't think the Jews would fire on them? (I haven't read the reports. Did they scatter in terror?)

Honestly, I ride the M15 bus every day. If someone blew it up, I'd have no trouble killing him or anyone who sent him. And I've only lived thru one terror attack. Can you imagine how I'd feel if every day, any day, the bus I was stepping into could fragment into a million pieces and some of those pieces would be my arms and legs? Mean, maybe? What do you think?

Or do you ever consider how the Israelis feel? Not human, are they?

Any accusations of genocide from either of the parties, Israeli or Palestinian, are an abuse of the word.

So you think that firing into a crowd is justified? Because they didn't get out of the way they are complicit in the terror attacks?

That's some Vietnam era rationalization if I've ever heard it.

Why waste your time trying to figure out who is justified when clearly niether party has any moral argument to support extremist actions, against civilians?

Or just a laughable rant?

we happen to have sitting around. Good idea.

n/t

They use the Merkava.

http://netwave.casablanca.cz/merkava/

it could have the unusual effect of destroying the u.s.'s self-image as an impartial mediator in the conflict-- which to me is a good thing

and which is why i think they'll never do it

why go to all that trouble arming the idf over all these years, and then have your own men get killed? it doesn't make any sense

...abide by International law. This will be an end to human rights abuses and the occupation of Palestinian land. No more walls or settlements, Palestinians can return home and all will be well over there.

Otherwise, the Palestinians have every right to see us as agressors if we use our troops to lock in the status quo.

-Sandy

US troops in the OT's -- well so much for backing of Mofaz's plan. this is that plan the Guardian pointed out as the weakness in the US middle east policy.

A Dem agreed with him? Gee, I wonder who that was..............

If blood shed and mayhem are the order of the day, then just send our troops over to Israel. But send an extra shipment of body bags as they will be coming home in those instead of a blaze of glory. This is one mess we should stay out of!!! Instead of "Road Map" it's better name would be "Road Kill"! :nuke:

lest sharon pre-empts lugar. I can't see how. There are not enough troops for Iraq. I can not see how in the world there are troops for Israel.

is silly, it will never happen. Do you think the average American is that dumb that we would send our boys into that mess. The complaints against us being in Iraq are escalating every day so no way what is being hazarded here

whose opinions I have had the misfortune to have to be surrounded by FREEPERS. Their biases and their leaning. Hawks all the way. For them the propaganda suffices. None have even heard of the PNAC. So YES.

As for conjecture. Some do it naturally. Others Don't. I happen to fall into the forum category. I really don't know why. I have always fell into the forum category. I know it is conjecture. It is like a game with me. More than not my conjecture is not too far off. Not to suggest it is now. This is a very complex chess board. But it is a game the conjecture with me. I do it naturally. It is the cynical way I view my government.

As for this ever happening. My conjecture was directed toward lugar getting his way, but more for commenting on Mofaz's Plan and that it did speculate the arrival of some kind of peace keeping or international force. It didn't seem to bother the General at that time. The international force is almost moot in regards to the plan itself.

Give Halliburton the contract to build the Israel wall with the 1967 boundaries.

The Palestinian will be happy -

The Jews will be happy -

And the U.S. will be happy with the tax that they receive from Halliburton and the Carlyle boys.

Mark Twain's thought it a good idea for Ireland and Israel to trade places. The countries are about the same size. The Irish could live
in peace with the Middle East and the Palestinian would be happy living next to the UK. LOL!!

Lugar is nut!

"Oh dear the gas prices are going up....SEND IN THE MILITARY!"

"Oh my, global warming! SEND IN THE MILITARY!"

"Dear merciful lord the economy is tanking...SEND IN THE MILITARY!"

These dumbass repuklickcans need to develop a different strategy other that...SEND IN THE MILITARY!

"Jeepers this election looks bad for the chimp. Call out the military!"

Before you did this, you'd put in international observers to calm down the violence. The Bush administration vetoed that proposal at the UN, right at the time they voted to give East Jerusalem to Israel. Israel is taking that as a green light to destroy the Palestinian state-to-be by annexing Abu Dis and walling off Greater Jerusalem (the U.S. is pretending not to notice that happening).

Look to the actions, not the words - always.

because part of the US ME strategy has taken into consideration Mofaz's Plan so it holds itself at bay as the US strategy has given Mofaz's plan clearance. All this talk of the roadmap clearly political gesturing. The destruction of the Palestinian state-to-be is not in line with peace now is it?

It pretty much still stands up IMO. I wrote this for a UK media board posting but I think I put it on DU somewhere.

-------------------------- written June 2 2003 (two days after)

Notes:

* It says it is based on UN/RES/1397, but that resolution (and 242/338) say *nothing* about Palestinian rights beyond a "vision". This isn't going to be full withdrawal, in return for full peace. Therefore, it's going to be a Bantustan. Plus, 1397 says that the UN-SC "Demands immediate cessation" of destruction of homes etc. Like that has a prayer.

* It says it is partly based on the Saudi initiative (pick one, 1982, 1985, 2002. They probably mean the latter). But that initiative is at odds with 242/338 because it demands a full withdrawal (the original US interpretation of 242, now defunct), which Israel has always rejected. Also, it can't be part-based on Oslo "agreements previously reached by the parties), because also says ONLY 242/338 are relevant. So, there is internal contradiction within about two paragraphs.

* "The parties" are defined as Israel and the Palestinians. Missing out a crucial party to the conflict: the US. Although personally, I never expected to see that much honesty anyway.

* The Palestinians have to immediately halt "violence" (i.e. the Intifada) and in return they get help to "normalise Palestinian life". Hence, the end of the 2nd Intifada for a meaningless phrase (since Occupation isn't 'normal', and no demands for cessation of "violence" are put on Israel). I suspect the roadmap will fail just on this point alone.

* Israel doesn't have to withdraw back to the Sept 2000 IDF positions UNTIL there is "progress" on "security performance" and "co-operation". Hence, meaningless. This paragraph dissolves and violates a Security Council resolution (1435, *demanding* "the expeditious withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from Palestinian cities").

* Israel has to "freeze" settlement activity (including "natural growth"). A good thing, and presumably this is supposed to be immediate, but since this paragraph comes after the "security co-operation" nonsense, you can bet your life it will be made dependent on that. i.e. put off forever, until eventually the Palestinians restart the Intifada or have a civil war. Also, it should really be phrased: "the US must stop paying Israel to establish illegal settlements", because that is exactly what is happening. Get ready to see Sharon brazenly issue some house tenders in some strategic location, and watch the U.S. press ignore it and circlejerk about putting the plan "on track", or some other idiotic metaphor.

* At the "outset" of Phase I, all "official Israeli institutions" have to "end incitement" against the Palestinians. That would mean Sharon kicking out "transfer" advocates from his coalition government and/or stopping them from promoting "transfer". This point will probably be ignored, just like all the "transfer" signs plastered on Israeli traffic lights are right now.

* Palestinians have to declare an "unconditional" ceasefire, Israel doesn't. The GOI only has to "call" for an immediate end to "violence against Palestinians". Since it is the GOI doing most the violence, this point is probably supposed to be a joke.

* There aren't going to be an UN monitors on the ground. Before "Phase I" is done, "the Quartet" will only use "existing mechanisms and on-the-ground resources" to "begin informal monitoring" on progress. It's a "performance-driven" plan, but the performance won't be officially monitored. O-kay. Only afterwards (at some unspecified date) will "the Quartet" consult with "the parties on establishment of a formal monitoring mechanism and its implementation". So no monitoring will be *demanded*. Therefore, it won't happen, just like the Jenin investigation didn't happen.

* The "outside oversight board" for the "re-training" of the Palestinian security forces consists solely of the US, Egypt and Jordan. So essentially it'll be the training of a bunch of thugs to keep the Palestinians quiet.

* The Arab states have to cut-off "all public and private funding" and "all other forms of support" for groups "supporting and engaging in violence and terror". The US, on the other hand, has to continue to pay Israel to kick the Palestinians in the face. Pro-Zionist Palestinian-rejectionist groups in the US can continue to ship fistfuls of cash to Israeli settlers, cos that ain't a problem either. Same goes for US members of Congress who reject the Palestinians right to self-determination (House Majority Leader Dick Armey, to name one). He can vote on as many bills as he wants giving massive aid to the IDF, even as it engages in "violence" and "terror". I presume that "violence" and "terror" will be defined by the US and Israel, therefore they can demand funds be cut from any grouping they want (i.e. their opponents).

* The Palestinians have to "perform" on judicial, administrative, and economic "benchmarks", as defined by the International Task Force on Palestinian Reform. Which, when deciding how to allocate funds to the Palestinians, regularly "consults" with, you've guessed it, "the Israeli government".

* The Palestinians are supposed to hold "free, open, and fair elections", while under military occupation. How they'll achieve this marvel is not specified, apart from the GOI "facilitating" it. I'm sure a similar offer on behalf of Hizbollah to conquer Israel, occupy its cities, settle in its towns and *then* "facilitate", "free, open and fair (Israeli) elections" wouldn't be similarly welcomed. Hey, Hizbollah was did win seats in an election!

* The GOI only has to dismantle ("immediately" - that is, at the "outset" of Phase I) settlement "outposts" erected since March 2001. I think the "outpost" part is intentional, since it means Israel is only going to dismantle the ones which it alone defines. Those will be isolated, difficult to patrol etc, neither Ma’ale Adummim nor the ones in the Jordan valley.

* Phase II is where it starts to get really amusing. An "independent Palestinian state" with "provisional borders" and "attributes of sovereignty" may be "created". Okay, a state can't have provisional borders, it either has borders or it doesn't, so that can't happen. But luckily, even if it did, this will only be a "way station" to a permanent status agreement. A way station (eh?) which will likely become the new status-quo: the Intifada is over, the US-run security forces are retrained, Arafat is probably gone and the occupation remains. I guess this will be the point at which Israel says "ta very much" and on some pretext (aided by the US media), rejects the rest of the roadmap.

* Phase III is basically double-speak which probably means the opposite of what it says, especially as it turns out that after all this, THEN the talking starts on Jerusalem (the East of which isn't occupied according to the roadmap, nor U.S. votes at the UN), settlements (which will be dependent on "provisional borders"), refugees (UN/RES/194 is by omission declared bunk) and borders (which won't be anywhere near the Green Line, again by virtue of omission).

To sum up, I count five demands made of Israel, only 3 of which are specific:

1. Withdrawal to Sept 28 2000 positions.
2. Freeze of settlement activity.
3. A statement supporting a Palestinian state.

Of which only 1 of those is unconditional: the last one. So, you can put the other two in the idiot box.

The roadmap = End of the 2nd Intifada in return for a statement from Sharon. Excellent!

--------------------------------

Compare the above to the (nearly anti-semitic) BBC saying Bush's "vision" was "breaktakingly ambitious!" :eyes:

:thumbsup:

Thanks for that outline. I have to print it and read it more carefully.

That end statement alone - "The roadmap = End of the 2nd Intifada in return for a statement from Sharon" - is damning.

The best answer I ever heard for how to stop terrorism: force the United States government to stop supporting it, especially in Israel.

Mofaz's plan considered some kind of a international force would be sent. The plan itself states that by that time Mofaz's plan would be a fait accompli. My only bitch is that the plan was apparent which made the roadmap posturing transparent. There was no room for appeasing Arafat in the plan. The Roadmap posturing was just meant to appease the internatonal community as well as the public and give their posturing for a peace process some credibility even though it never had any.

Sign up for the military and you do one year in Afghanistan, one year in Iraq and one year in Israel/Palestine....

That'll drive recruiting for sure!

They are too willing to send other people's children into danger without thinking about the consequences. They need a reality check.

Reagan lost 200+ Marines in Lebanon.

What drugs are Lugar on?

Just sign up all the fundie Xtian blow hards who favor this and send them over there, using their own church funds for transport, equipment and materiel and their own weapons.

We'll just promise not to interfer in their holy war.

Let'em blow each other up. We'd all be a lot better off.