BREAKING: Israeli Cabinet votes to expell Arafat

[ShaneGR]

Just on MSNBC. Hundreds of people forming ring (pro Arafat) around Arafat compound in Ramallah. No sign of Israelli troops yet.

NOTE: While I'm not for forceful removal, I don't think Arafat is a good leader for the palestinians.

[Hawkeye-X]

1. Well.. IMHO

If Arafat can't control the terrorist attacks in Israel or can't stop the terrorists itself, then what's the point of Arafat staying on as the leader of Palestine?

Just scratching my head on this...

:shrug:

(I'm neutral on the I/P issue btw)

Hawkeye-X

[MUAD_DIB]

3. If the IDF expels him then

he is still a rallying point for the Palestinians.

If the IDF kills him then he becomes a martyr.


Lose-Lose situation.


Quagmire to peace?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. The other side of the coin

has Sharon's face on it.


Killing or arresting Arafat would be a HUGE mistake. (Neutral, too.)

[cap]

12. the point is...

Arafat is the democratically elected president of the Palestinian Authority. You don't just remove elected officials because you don't like them. Arafat was elected to fulfill the wishes of the Palestinian people -- not the Israelis or Americans.

The Palestinians don't want peace on the current terms that Israel is offering them. That's why no one can stop the terrrorists and why Abbas had to resign -- there is no support for them.

Arafat represents the wishes of the Palestinians and is intelligent enough not to get out in front of them. The Palestinians haven't given up the idea of a homeland -- quite possibly, that homeland does not include a Jewish state.

They are banking on demographics: Jews are becoming a minority even in Israel proper. There is an article recently posted here about the Jews having a terrible choice to make: either survival as a Jewish state or survival as a democracy in which they will be a minority (a very hard choice for survivors of the Holocaust to make).

Arafat can be expelled but he will become a martyr and will lead the Palestinians from exile. This is a very dumb move.

[Rainbowreflect]

21. We (USA) do.

Think maybe they might think bush would agree after our attempt to remove Sadam?

[damnraddem]

26. If Sharon can't stop the terrorist attacks or the terrorists ...

what is the point of his staying on as leader of Israel?

[liberalhistorian]

30. No government controls Hamas and Hezbollah,

least of all Arafat. Granted, he certainly hasn't done nearly as much as he could to try to stop them, but they are independent and do not answer to or listen to ANY government except themselves, no matter what. Arafat no more has complete control over them than the US has over the Klan or neo-Nazis. Hamas, Hezbollah, and similar inhuman, psycho groups, in fact, consider Arafat and the Palestinian leadership to be weak and totally ineffectual and don't want to deal with them.

BTW, by that logic, Sharon should have been able to control the murderous thug who deliberately killed Rachel Corrie and who has totally gotten away with it, without anyone seeming to give a damn.

[theboss]

39. Big difference

The US government arrests and convicts members of the KKK and Neo-Nazi groups. Arafat does nothing regarding Hamas.

Granted, Hamas would kill if he tried anything, but my point is the same.

Anyway, Arafat is (and in my view always has been) an impediment to peace. He gains more individually as a guerilla rather than a politician. But the US does not want him expelled so Sharon likely will not touch him.

[clar]

2. Shit

The Israelis are trying to force out and out full blown war so they can crush the Palestinian Resistance once and for all. The loss of life and infrastructure will be huge. Repercussions in the form of increased terrorist attacks in countries across the globe, are a very real possibility. How can they even contemplate doing this?

[StandWatie]

5. the "big war"

I think if they start up with that shit they might be in for a shock as regarding American reaction. I think team Bush might just pull the plug on them and let them go down like the Prussians.

[liberalhistorian]

33. I would certainly hope so, but good luck.

Israel can do no wrong in the US government's eyes, no matter what they do, and they are backed up by gazillions of our own tax dollars that they use to kill American citizens like Rachel Corrie. I don't think there's anything Israel can do that would take the USA's rose-colored glasses off.

[Kamika]

6. well why not

Seriously Its not like arafat are keeping the terrorists like jhihad in check.. he dont have any power at all.. they do need a real leader

[mmm]

17. Untrue - Arafat has, in fact, done a fairly good job

of keeping all hell from breaking lose.
Read Uri Avnery and find out.

[CWebster]

24. What the hell can Arafat do

confined to a few rooms in that compound for over a year? Israel wouldn't even let him out on Christmas to go to the mass he traditionally attends. The way so many unthinkingly adopt the zionist neocon spin that places the blame on Arafat and then claim neutrality is a disgrace among folks that consider themselves more enlightened than fox network viewers.

Arafat may be a corrupt old fox but he was elected by the Palestinians, and with the assasinated Rabin, was awarded the peace prize. Sharon is widely recognised as a war criminal and was removed from his post by israel due to the findings. Sharon is prime minister now and who is going to remove him for his inability and unwillingness to remove fundamentalist Zionist settlers who violate international law?

[CWebster]

7. Because who is gonna stop them

The US?

With progressives like Pelosi and Hillary Clinton racing to see who can kiss the boot first?

[ShaneGR]

14. Hey there

What's that all about. How does Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pellossi have anything to do with this? Last time I checked the US Congress hadn't been holding any voting sessions on whether or not to support expelling Israel.

In fact, I seem to remember Bill Clinton getting the Israelis to make some pretty serious concessions but Arafat wouldn't sign the deal.

[StandWatie]

19. didn't happen that way

There were no "concessions". The deal basically gave them autonomy in the same sense that a group of POW's have where they are responsible for their own cooking and cleaning.

[CWebster]

28. 1...2...3...

"Baraks generous offer" was a farce.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/generous/generous.html

Clinton and Pelosi are whores to AIPAC and are big cheerleaders for supporting Israel unequivocally in the face of tremendous injustices visited upon the Palestinians.

[ShaneGR]

34. uh huh

Whatever you say

[StandWatie]

36. you can look at a map and tell it's a joke

[CWebster]

38. they can't bear that they've been had by likud neocons

pulling the strings in both parties and suppressing the truth.


http://www.sabeel.org/news/cstone21/halper.htm

[Larkspur]

4. And what makes Israel think that Arafat's successor will be their slave?

That's what Ariel Sharon really wants. He doesn't want a Palestinian who demands justice for his/her people. Sharon wants a Palestinian stooge who will do Israel's bidding.

Expelling Arafat will make peace MORE difficult because it will put pressure on Arafat's successor to continue opposing Israel.

[StandWatie]

8. he might be right..

I really never thought the Palestinians would hold out this long. They may just give up for some amount of time while Sharon turns the place into Transkei and the US (and no one else) might call it a "Palestinian State" run by some paid off quisling but it wouldn't last forever.

[Nevernose]

10. Arafat's never really demanded justice either

Remember, he was the founder of the first Palestinian terrorist groups in the fifties, and was publicly calling for the death of all Jews everywhere until just 10 or 15 years ago.

He's an Arabic Sharon (or perhaps Sharon is a Jewish Arafat -- still not real sure on that).

[StandWatie]

15. that's all propaganda

He never called for "killing Jews everywhere", the PLO may not have always represented their goals honestly but compared with Israel they are the accomodationist party.

[ShaneGR]

18. I think you hit it on the head

Both sides are all screwed up.

[Dogmudgeon]

9. Can O' Worms?

Nope, the Israeli mahofs are opening a can o' bees.

Arafat, expelled from his compound, will be able to organize the Palestinian militancy like Ayatollah Khomeini organized the Republican Guard from exile in Paris. Unlike Khomeini, who was content to sit on his pious ass and issue fatwa after fatwa and pretend to be holy, Arafat is an activist, and once roused, will not rest until the hand of every Israel-hater holds a rock, a gun, or a bomb.

This will come to no good.

I'm beginning to think that a lot of Powers That Be do not want peace, but war. And not just war, a climactic war for power over the Mid East and its considerable energy wealth.

--bkl

[Nevernose]

16. Once again

Arafat already IS the organizer and founder of Palestinian warfare/terrorism -- he practically invented it in the fifties.

[damnraddem]

37. He thereby created a Palestinian movement, separate from ...

neighboring Islamic states.

The PLO has consistently called for secular governments, unlike either Israel or most of the surrounding states. Arafat has long called for negotiations rather than terror.

Sharon, on the other hand, started as a terrorist in the 1950s and has remained a terrorist. He has no interest in peace negotiations, only in use of force to get what he wants.

[damnraddem]

35. Sharon has always and consistently been for war ...

until Israel controls all of what the extremists consider to be 'theirs.' Don't look for Jordan to be spared if Israel gobbles up all of Palestine. Sharon is the ally of a very few Palestinians: Hamas and Hezbollah -- he has consistently favored their efforts to bomb all prospects of peace. Just the statement that no peace talks can occur while bombings continue is sufficient for that; but he has also consistently added new provocations to the situation when the bombings were not occurring, thus assuring that they would once again occur. Caught in the middle are millions, Palestinians and Israelis, who will suffer or die before the extremists have finished pushing the situation to one or another catastrophic outcome.

[WilliamPitt]

13. Not good

Whether you like or dislike Arafat, this kind of punch-the-nose action is only going to breed more bloodshed.

[Karenina]

32. HALLO!!!

:shrug:

[Blue_Chill]

41. As do all the actions both sides in this conflict

continue to take. I honestly do not believe peace is the goal for many in this conflict.

[patdem]

20. Why is America fighting for Isreal's protection but not vis-versa?

Isreal does not care about the repercussions...when bush* said do not oust arrafet...sharone does it anyway...we are to protect isreal and isreal is to thumb its nose at us????

I too am neutral...but thinking that sharon and the lukid party is too harsh.

[TheYellowDog]

22. Good

Nobody should take any crap from Arafat. He is nothing but a terrorist and he needs to learn how to grow a beard.

[Warren Stuart]

29. And Samuel Adams was?

A peace loving Minute Man?

One person's terrorist is another person's patriot.

Arafat keeps his beard the way it is due to religious reasons, if this is a reason for contempt, then you and me part ways.

[kentuck]

23. If we had a real president, he would intervene in this crisis...

But he probably agrees with it....

[damnraddem]

25. What Isreal, or any of us, think of Arafat is irrelevant.

The question is what the Palestinians think of him. He is seen as the leader by most Palestinians. Abbas failed to achieve such a status; and Quria is unlikely to. If Arafat is removed from Palestine by Israel, this will be yet another example of how Israel tramples on Palestinian rights and humiliates an entire people. And if you want to talk about horrible leaders in the region, look no further than that long-time terrorist, Ariel Sharon.

[Julien Sorel]

27. They aren't likely to expel him.

It's just further demonizing him, so they can continue to squeeze propaganda points out of his existence. The only reason they would expel him is to prompt some kind of violent response. Arafat at large is dangerous; Arafat penned up in Ramallah is a symbol both of Palestinian weakness and Palestinian terror. Why would Israel screw up such a pretty situation for them?

[GreenArrow]

31. US troops in Israel soon?

Don't dismiss it out of hand--Dick Lugar has brought the subect up on at least two occasions.

WASHINGTON - As violence escalates in the Middle East, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee says military involvement by the United States and its NATO allies might be required to bring stability to Israel and the Palestinians.

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

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6610089.htm

[Samaka 3ajiba]

40. If they do expel him

...it really isn't a big deal and would not necessarily weaken the Palestinian cause, or will of Palestinians to fight. Remember it wasn't too long ago most of the PLO including Arafat were headquartered in Tunis. Both Intifidas were carried on from there to the point the exasperated Israelis bombed the PLO headquarter (flying half accross the Mediterranean to do so) and assassinated Abu Iyad using naval commandos dropped off in Sidi Bou Said by sub.

Not to mention of course expelling Arafat does nothing to reign in Hamas or Hezbollah, over whom Arafat exerts no control and who will remain in the occupied territories and Lebanon even if the full PLO is sent elsewhere.