Amazing there is any debate about this. WTG terrorist lovers.
Which means we should consider a vote for Kerry as a vote against terrorism lovers:
"What peace process, when the situation is on fire? Nobody would have imagined that matters would go this far. ... Its repercussions are unknown."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
"We are deeply troubled by this morning's incident in Gaza."
Official Bush administration statement.
Hopefully no one supports Hamas. However, Hamas has been a tool that has is useful to both Arafat and Sharon, neither of which seems to be very interested in really working towards a true peace involving real compromise. Here’s what Sharon’s government (Likud and partners) and Sharon himself feel about issues like the West Bank:
Likud
* In a Nutshell - secular, Zionist, right-wing party led by Ariel Sharon
* Although the party platform rules out establishing a Palestinian state, Sharon has said that he is willing to make territorial concessions for peace and willing to supports the creation of a Palestinian state.
Mafdal (Mafleget Dati Leumi - "The National Religious Party")
* In a Nutshell - modern Orthodox, Zionist
* Opposes a Palestinian state, withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, any Palestinian autonomy in the Land of Israel, the ceding of any territory to a foreign power, and the uprooting of any settlement, but supports a separation fence that would surround Palestinian population centers
The National Union ("Ichud Leumi")
* In a Nutshell - composed of three secular parties: Yisrael Beitenu ("Israel Our Home"), Moledet ("Homeland"), and Tekuma ("Rebirth").
*Adamantly opposes a Palestinian state, calls for "transfer by agreement" to resettle Palestinian refugees in Arab countries, proposes that the Israeli government require every citizen to swear loyalty to the state and its flag, national anthem, and laws.
http://judaism.about.com/library/1_politics/elections/bl_elections2003_parties.htm
"(JP, April 11, 1994), contemplating the mere possibility that the government might uproot the Jews of Hebron. "Zionism came about first and foremost to bring us back to Jerusalem, Hebron, Shilo and Beit El. It is from these places that we came, it is about these places that we dreamt, it is these places that we yearned and prayed for during the last 2,000 years. Only if we are there can we be a free Jewish people."
http://www.afsi.org/OUTPOST/2001JUN-JUL/junjul3.htm
It's kind of interesting that Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (he is a POS, FWIW, and he got what he deserved) would be targeted at this specific time, while Sharon is contemplating a very unpopular pull out (at least among his Government’s supporters) from Gaza:
In an apparent effort to both pressure Qureia and entice him, Sharon is likely to propose unilateral steps to improve Israeli security if no peace deal is reached. Among them: removing all 7,000 settlers from Gaza — home to more than 1 million Palestinians — and consolidating settlements in the West Bank behind a more defensible perimeter. Sharon may also repeat offers to recognize a provisional Palestinian state and dismantle the security fence if the Palestinians crack down on militant groups…
In the past few months, Sharon's popularity has plummeted — an Israeli poll last week found that 9% of Israelis view Sharon as a credible prime minister compared with 59% in August. Sharon and his family are also being questioned about multimillion-dollar loans from a South African businessman for Sharon's campaign and suspect real estate deals.
"On the Israeli side, the political map is shaking," says Ami Ayalon, former director of Israel's domestic security service and co-author of "The People's Voice," a freelance peace initiative. A petition drive in support of the proposal, which calls for Israeli evacuation of most settlements, has attracted more than 200,000 signatures. More than 60% of Israelis say they would give up most settlements in a peace deal…
Some experts are skeptical that Sharon will really withdraw. "Is this something serious or just a tactical move?" asks Edward Abington, a former U.S. diplomat in Israel who advises the Palestinians.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-12-16-sharon-usat_x.htm
Is this assassination all that different form the others? Was it a wise move for peace?
KHALIL JAHSHAN: I don't agree with the logic that was presented by mostly Israel officials today in trying to justify the decision they have taken. I believe what they have done today is illegal, it's politically not just unwise but utterly stupid. And in the long term, it's going to prove to be harmful not only to the cause of peace and stability in the region but even to Israel's interests and definitely to U.S. interests in the region and we are already beginning to see the rules of that decision.
Now Sheikh Yassin is a political leader like it or not, yes, his group was involved in terrorism in the sense that they have killed civilians for political purposes. But he's a political leader, and for the state of Israel to engage in extra-judicial assassination, I mean the hand of Israel that could reach Sheikh Yassin and kill him is the same hand that could have imprison him.
They have imprisoned him before several times, they could have arrested him and put him before a court of law and given him some due process, if indeed they have charges against him. And the logic they have used today is deficient in the sense, basically, what's good for the goose is good for the gander -- in the eyes of many Palestinians many Arabs and many Muslims the same logic applies to Sharon. What makes Sharon and other leaders in Israel think that they are immune to such action from the other side?
KHALIL JAHSHAN: Moderates have certainly been weakened and today they are definitely an endangered species. I think if there is a beneficiary to this, I think Hamas. You and I will be talking about this a year or two from now and you will see that Hamas will emerge as a result of this assassination as the number one, the premiere political movement in Palestine, should things move in a political direction. So Israel is going to, or has contributed through this action to the exactly the opposite of what its been trying to justify today.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june04/mideast_3-22.html
Could a dramatic escalation of the conflict help or hinder a peace process that might involve giving up long held Zionist beliefs? Deflect the growing bribery scandal? Bring other radical elements into the conflict and further unquestioned support for the Likud perspective among Israelis and abroad?
…The haste of the Yassin execution by Sharon the general is in stark contrast to the deliberate and ever-so-damaging slowness of Sharon the politician. Nothing, including the political threats by the extreme right, need have prevented him from starting the evacuation of the Strip in another month, after returning from Washington. There is nothing to prevent him - other than the threat to his political head - from proving the seriousness of his intentions by removing a few settlements in the West Bank at the same time.
Last week he barely escaped a no-confidence motion. This week, he went through four no-confidence motions like a hot knife through butter. Killing Yassin did that. As he says, nothing personal? Sharon the politician is capable of a lot to survive. Or, in more positive language, there should be personal, full press guards on his flanks on the way to the promise that may - or may not - be kept.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/407981.html
and,
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon gave his endorsement on Wednesday to a bill that would require the support of at least 61 Knesset members to authorize the evacuation of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip…
The left-wing parties responded in surprise to Sharon's support for the bill, which is specifically designed to thwart his disengagement plan, and reacted positively to the bill's defeat.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/408370.html
The left is growing stronger? A Ma'ariv poll this week showed in numbers what was already apparent without any poll. The Likud is down from 40 to 36 Knesset seats. Labor is stuck, Shinui weakened, Meretz has grown by a half. While the numbers aren't yet great tidings for those hoping for a change of government, the numbers show that even conservative Israelis are fed up with the three destructive years of Sharon's administration. He has driven most of the national indicators down - in the economy, the job market, poverty, Israel's international image, public confidence. Support for him personally also has been falling for some time in all the polls. As happens in many democratic societies, the public's discomfort is reason enough for the government not to be in a hurry to ask the voters what they actually think of it.
The people are tired and confused. But not stupid. Not since Barak's victory after a previous period of failed Likud leadership, have there been circumstances like these that make it possible to start considering - let's put it cautiously - the possibility of a political turnaround.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/400456.html
Charon
