The Prime Minister of Chaos

[Resistance]

http://www.counterpunch.org/svirsky09202003.html

Sharon rode into power on a double promise: security and peace. And yet Sharon has not made even one significant act of progress to achieve either. On the contrary, security and peace appear to be the victims of Sharon's overriding agenda: maintaining the occupation. Although one can deliberate Sharon's motivations for wanting to maintain the occupation--a commitment to a Greater-Land-of-Israel ideology? a belief that Israel is in even greater jeopardy without control over Palestinian lives? a hunger for power that feeds off fear of the other? Regardless of the reason, one thing is crystal clear: All the abovementioned, so-called 'errors' are blatant instances of making occupation the priority, placing it above security and peace.

If maintaining control over the territories is viewed as Sharon's priority, then all his actions fall into place. Here are a few of Sharon's impressive accomplishments after only two and a half years in office:

* He killed the Oslo Peace Process (a course begun by Netanyahu).

* He exponentially increased the fear and loathing of Palestinians among Israelis (which had declined during Oslo days).

* He brought the Palestinian economy to ruin.

* He resurrected Arafat's power and influence among Palestinians by appearing to ostracize him.

* He continues to delay construction of a 'Security Wall', because it would de facto create a Palestinian state on the other side of it. And,

* He increased support for settlements by forming the most right-wing government in the history of Israel.

These 'accomplishments' all lead to the same conclusion: a dead end to all avenues leading to reconciliation. Sharon's efforts have destabilized Palestinian society economically and politically, dehumanized Palestinians to an extent not seen even in pre-Oslo days, and destroyed or disrupted all infrastructure that would enable a properly functioning Palestinian society--roads, power and water supplies, health and education systems, even the records and databases. Sharon has sown chaos and misery, and, above all, has kept the Palestinian population in a constant state of turmoil. His scorched earth policy is not a mistake, but a deliberate strategy to grind the population into submission, to prevent the rise of a sovereign state, to allow Israel to continue its domination. And if these cruel measures give rise to belligerent, anti-Israeli activity, all the better. Palestinian terrorism is what gives legitimacy to Israel--both domestically and internationally--to maintain its brutal boot on the neck of 'out-of-control Palestinians'.

[LastDemInIdaho]

1. counterpunch is a racist and disgusting org

The have even gone as far as to blame Israel for the suicide bombings that the hamas and other Palestinian groups are using against Jewish kids. http://www.counterpunch.org/niva01092003.html
"Sharon's Fingerprints on Latest Suicide Bombing".
"Nevertheless, based on the evidence from the past decade of suicide bomb attacks, and Sharon's clear record of inciting these attacks, Israel's actions are of incomparably greater significance for stopping suicide attacks than those of Yasser Arafat"

Counterpunch is as anti-Israel as they come. They incite hatred of Israel.

[bemildred]

2. That's an interesting piece.

I hadn't seen it.

The startling fact is that four times as many suicide
bombings--around 80--have occurred since Ariel Sharon became
Prime Minister than in the seven previous years
combined--around 20.

So the number of suicide bombings has increased around eightfold
under Sharon, who promised "peace and security". Hmmm ...

I don't suppose that has diddly squat to do with Mr. Sharon and
his policies, he is just a helpless chip tossed about in the
storm of Palestinian hate, the poor fellow.

[LastDemInIdaho]

8. This isn't about Sharon

It's about excusing the acts of terrorism by using the acts of others as an excuse.

Are you saying there is an excuse or valid reason for terrorists to blow up kids on a bus?

[Darranar]

10. No one's been excusing them...`

They've only been criticizing Sharon and Israel for provoking them - which they do.

[bemildred]

11. Well, I was talking about Sharon, and so did that piece you posted.

I meant what I said. Read it again if it confused you.

[Resistance]

3. actually

the article I posted seems to me to be entirely on the money.

Criticism of Ariel Sharon is not anti-Israel. To help clue you in a little bit, criticizing right-wing warmongers is actually part of what progressives and liberals spend their time doing. Why is this such a problem for you?

Did you have an actual comment on what I posted? Let's see how many posts it takes for you to actually talk about the article here...

[LastDemInIdaho]

7. My comments on your article

"* Targeted assassinations and attempted assassinations, even during the recent ceasefire, which provoke increased terrorist activity;"

Saying Israel "provokes increased terrorist activity" attempts to legitimize terrorism. It implicates the author in accepting terrorism as a valid reaction. It is NOT a valid or acceptable action or reaction.

[Darranar]

9. SO?

the fact remains that however despicable and vile terrorism is, it is a reaction, just or not.

[bemildred]

14. Saying something is predictable is not "legitimizing" it.

If you jump off a cliff, you go splat. Saying that doesn't
"legitimize" gravity, which doesn't care whether we think its
moral or not anyway.

[Darranar]

4. That article isn't innacurate...

if you want to read racist junk from CounterPunch, read this.

Some of the articles there are in fact correct and accurate. Other ones are gross exxagerations that pass the line of racist, whether that was the intention of the author or not.

[Resistance]

5. Darranar

your link isn't working (I've noticed several of your links begin with a double http://http://)

and that article isn't racist: it was written by an Israeli criticizing other Israelis. Y'know how Americans criticize other Americans? That isn't racist (or 'anti-American') either.

[Darranar]

6. Fixed the link...

I think we've had this debate before. After quite a bit of thought I have moderated my position somewhat; I read over the thread again and realized that I was being oversensitive.

The author himself I would no longer classify as racist; rather, he seems a dissulutioned person to me, forever scarred by the lack of respect the Palestinians get from some people. My point about the article is that I can understand exxagerations, but when one exxagerates a situation too much and extends it to be bigoted, it makes the article in which it is stated racist, whether that was the intention of the author or not.

I don't want to hijack this thread, so if you want to reply please do it by PM.

[LastDemInIdaho]

12. If you believe that article is accurate

Then you must believe the acts of Israel are an excuse for the bombing of Israeli kids on busses.

[Darranar]

13. No, actually I don't...

but I do believe that Sharon's despicable actions ARE PROVOCATIVE and do lead to further violence against innocent people on both sides. Does that excuse any of the violence towards innocent people? NO. In case you didn't get it the first time, NO. NEVER.