Fatah splinter group calls for killing Arafat

[Gimel]

A leaflet distributed over the weekend by a hitherto unknown group called Fatah – The Reformist Path called for replacing the Palestinian leadership and threatened to liquidate Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and many of his top aides.

It's not clear who stands behind the leaflet, but some senior PA officials have pointed a blaming finger at former security minister Muhammad Dahlan. They said that when Arafat saw the leaflet, he cancelled a meeting planned with Dahlan last week.

Dahlan has strongly denied responsibility for the leaflet, arguing that it was yet another attempt by his rivals to drive a wedge between him and Arafat.

This is the first time that a leaflet signed by a Fatah affiliated group calls for eliminating Arafat. Most Fatah leaders and activists who have been demanding reforms and an end to corruption in the PA have refrained from attacking Arafat personally, directing their anger instead at top officials in the PA chairman's entourage.

Continued..

[liberalpragmatist]

1. Ugh

I actually do hope Arafat dies. I'm sorry. That's an incredibly morbid thought. But I do hope he does die (naturally, though). It has simply become impossible to see the light at the end of the tunnel with him in power. It's not that he's incapable of peace, and I see Sharon as every bit the roadblock Arafat is. Moreover, at least Arafat HAS negotiated. The Camp David talks broke down for many reasons besides Arafat's supposed *unwillingness* and the Taba talks could've been continued and resulted in an agreement had Sharon not been elected.

Still, he's incredibly corrupt and he's implacable. At least it's conceivable that Sharon can be voted out. Arafat is so entrenched that he is hurting the Palestinians' accountability. And additionally, at some point, perceptions become reality. It doesn't matter if Arafat could, hypothetically, under certain conditions, make peace if nobody trusts him and is not going to trust him. The reality is nobody is willing to give him a chance.

That being said, I certainly hope he isn't going to be killed. I'm just saying I sometimes can help but think that things would go better if he were to have a heart attack and die suddenly.

I know. I know. It's morbid and probably wrong to think this. But I can't help it.

[aquart]

2. Of course he negotiates.

But nothing ever comes of it. Can't be his fault. No, Arafat wants a settlement, yes he does.

Of course, the establishment of a Palestinian state would require, say, an audit of the PLO books? Control of the money passing to other hands?

No reason Arafat wouldn't welcome that.

[Sugarbleus]

3. lol...aquart... It's interesting that Arafat's nasty side is

brought up. I thought all of DU were Israel haters.

Talking about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in DU is hotter than talking religion and politics in mixed company... Hoo boy!

[Behind the Aegis]

4. i thought the same thing

I love being a liberal and a democrat and an American! But, when I trolled DU before joining, I was appalled at the utter hate directed at Israel. I do not equate hating Israel with hating Jews; just as I do not think that support for the Palestinians means one hates Israel. However, it does seem that most people are grossly undereducated about the issues facing Israel. Hopefully, one day, this situation (I/P) will end peacefully. Positive actions are needed from BOTH sides.

Brightest Blessings!

[Sugarbleus]

5. "Brightest Blessings!" to you as well........

I agree with your entire assessment. Thank you so much for that reply.
:)

[aquart]

6. What astonished me

Was the bizarre image of Israel as this giant military threat, when it's the smallest nation in the region, with a commensurate population.

Nor does anyone seem to question why, if they're so fond of the Palestinians, Arab nations are so reluctant to actually have anything to do with them.

[Classical_Liberal]

7. Because the Israeli military is gigantic and subsidized by money

and technology transfers from the US. Israel is responsible for seeing the Palestinians have a homeland, because Israel is the reason they are homeless. None of these facts represent hatred of Israel. I do dislike Likud intensely, and I disagree that Israel will make a real Palestinian state if we make it comfortable. If anything pushing Israel helps peace because the settlers will blame America instead of their politicians. So it takes the pressure off the politicians of Israel when we give Israel a push in the right direction. MOst of the people defending Israel probably like the settlements more than they are willing to admit.

[aquart]

12. Gigantic? Pardon my doubts

But do you have anything that resembles regional statistics? I'm pretty sure the proportion of men in arms is extremely large.....but the actual numbers?

Come on, you must have some factual basis for such a disproportionate word...other than that boogeyman under your bed.

[Darranar]

8. The Israeli military is certainly the most powerful in the region...

(unless one counts the US), probably among the most powerful in the world.

It may be a small nation, but it has a powerful military. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[bemildred]

9. Generally ranked around 4th or 5th, IIRC.

But the situation has a lot nuances, and, as we are seeing in Iraq,
the utility of military force is not what it used to be. The US
will spend something like $150-200 billion this year and cannot even
stabilize, let alone control, Iraq. Some of that, of course, may
be attributed to stupidity and "faith-based" planning.

In the case of Israel, it has the means to put on a good show of
forces for some weeks, and then must either receive massive outside
logistics support or suffer a large degradation of its capabilities.
In other words it capabilities for sustained conflict are widely
different from what it can do for short periods. This is one of the
major reasons for its aggressive tendencies, it cannot really afford
to get behind the curve.

Edit: spelling.

[aquart]

14. International Relations 101

A weak nation must respond with immediate strength.

A strong nation has multiple options. A weak nation has only immediate, unhesitating force.

Israel acts like what it is: a weak and outnumbered nation.

It is America's misfortune that George Bush has insisted we respond like a weak nation rather than a strong one.

[Darranar]

15. You are confusing "power" with "sustainability"...

Israel has a powerful military without much sustainability. It can defeat most nations in swift wars, but lacks the resources for long ones. When it comes to aggression, this is the worst combination; it lacks the ability to remain on guard for long periods of time, so it must act to remove threats quickly, and it can beat most nations, so caution is less essential.

"Weak and outnumbered" nations don't attack. That is basic logic. "Strong and outnumbered" nations do.

[bemildred]

16. An interesting theory.

I don't believe I've heard that one before.
So, Pakistan, say, has to immediately attack India, has no other real choice?
Or Syria, being weak, has no choice but to tee off on Israel?
I would think that would not work very well. Perhaps I misunderstood.
How does a "weak" nation respond with "strength"?
It sounds like an oxymoron.

[aquart]

13. Define powerful. Really.

I'm begging you to put up or shut up. Give me the fucking statistics. Not your pathetic fantasies. "Most powerful in the world"!!! Who was your nanny?

Seriously. Ready troops as compared to the region? Military stores? They have the atom bomb. Big whoop. How many? How strong? Missile reach? (You do understand the a-bomb is a purely defensive weapon? No? Missed that point, too?) Who can they attack and take out if they so choose? Fight a war on two fronts? One? Half? Can they occupy and hold how large a space? We are not making it in Iraq with 130,000.....I presume Israel has at least that many at the ready?

Oh, and what is the population of Israel? The population of Iran? Iraq? Syria? Egypt? Jordan? Saudi Arabia? Lebanon? Number of warrior age males in each population?

Support your assinine claims with fact, not anti-Zionist propaganda, please.

[Darranar]

17. I said "among the most powerful in the world"...

not "most powerful in the world".

As for nuclear weapons being defensive, this is only true between two nuclear powers, as the atomic bombings of Japan in 1945 indicate.

And anyway, I was speaking of military capability, not offensive capability. It is true that Israel lacks the capability for long, drawn-out wars. But it still can crush most nations with an interest in attacking it, due to technological advantages and air power.

When it comes to the numbers, Israel is first when it comes to armor and also first when it comes to combat aircraft. It also has a highly modernized military. Furthermore, any Arab nation that tried to attack Israel could recieve an immediate response through Israel's nukes, as it almost certainly would if Israel's survival seemed threatened.

There is more to it than population.

[bemildred]

10. Who would have thought we would see Fatah and Ya'alon agree

about anthing?

[Zhade]

11. Why is the Jerusalem Post a favored source here?

If anyone posted news from the JP, which has neocon Richard Perle as a Director, in LBN or GD, the thread would be shut down in minutes.

So why is this neocon-directed source allowed in I/P? I've never understood this. Is it okay to use rightwing sources when examining this issue, when it's not allowed (rightfully) on the rest of the boards?

What's next, the Washington Times or NewsMax? Can someone help a brother out here?

This is not a credible source, so why is it allowed here?

[Djinn]

18. wait till you see

frontpage mag quoted then you'll REALLY start to wonder if you stumbled into a rightwing forum!