Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jan 06 - 12:20 PM

Just making a factual correction, Guest, 08 Jan 06 - 01:57 AM. Netanyahu was quite open about his hatred of the Oslo process, and his intention to kill it. And even though Barak gave the appearance of accepting Oslo, more settlements were constructed while he was prime minister than anyone else. But I don't think it's particularly constructive to focus too much on Oslo. It was a flawed process that did not specify any particular resolution. Prior to Oslo, the Palestinians had already lost more than 70 percent of their homeland, and all the Oslo agreement did was to make that official. Beyond that, it did not guarantee that they would be able to keep any of the land they still had, and it did not provide an end to Israeli military rule in the occupied Palestinian lands.

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: Pied Piper
Date: 09 Jan 06 - 11:25 AM

Thankyou Big Mick for thoughtfull and profound coments.

Have a nice day

PP

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: GUEST,Clogger
Date: 09 Jan 06 - 11:52 AM

This thread epitomises exactly what is wrong in the middle east!
Everyone takes a side and is unwilling to look at "their own side's" faults / misdoings, whilst at the same time rabidly pointing out the faults of "the opposition". This means that EVERYONE is categorised into one camp or the other! Nobody is in the "middle" so if a point criticising "your" side occurs you are fully justified in slagging the other off without having to look at any points made, much less answering them. The middle east is a big pile of poo ..... if you go playing round in it you WILL SMELL BAD!
If you distrust your enemy to the extent that you cannot believe in them (or their emissaries) you have lost YOUR humanity!
The opposition HAS done bad stuff! ..... so have YOU!
For what it is worth Sharron seemed to be changing direction!

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Jan 06 - 12:14 PM

Michaelr,

perhaps you are only playing the Shamblesk clown here and imitate his style of completely out of proportion comparisons.

But just in case you are serious, yes there are degrees of evil in my eyes. A much closer (both in number of people killed and in geography) comparison would be King Hussein of Jordan. He also was responsible (though also not at a direct personal level) for many killed Palestinians in the Black September killings. Most estimates of the Black September killings of Palestinians put the number at 'only' about the tenfold of those killed in Sabra and Shatila, but at least that's roughly the same order of magnitude.

And no, I did not rejoice about his death in a way I would have (had I been alive) or did about the deaths of the brutes you have mentioned. On the balance Hussein was a good ruler and did a lot for peace and reconciliation later in his life.

Sharon has done more for peace than he ever intended. He's just a soldier leaving an untenable position. But he may have started a movement in Israel for more compromises than he ever had in his mind. The way he has dealt with the opposition of the settlers may have opened the door for more of the same. For that reason, it would have been good if he had been in power longer than he will (assuming that he will not recover enough to retain the job).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: michaelr
Date: 09 Jan 06 - 07:24 PM

Oh, so evil is a function of how many people killed?

What's the magic number, then? How many victims are necessary to make applauding the killer's demise OK?

Michael

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jan 06 - 11:42 AM

Subject: RE: Comments on illness of Ariel Sharon - Jan 2006
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jan 06 - 04:57 PM

He's pulling a Franco on us. The thing that refused to die.

Or maybe they are going to try keeping him alive until closer to the election, when his death would be more useful to the current prime minister.