rebuttal on Ariel Sharon article

Submitted by Leo Charendoff (United States), Apr 5, 2005 at 18:09

This will come as no surprise to you.

Sharon has no choice. Gaza is not part of Israel neither by history nor by military necessity.

The handful of Religious Zealot Jews (RZJ) who have made aliyah there are tying up a significant part of the Israeli Defence Forces who are being attacked daily to protect them and it is they and the rest of Israel, not the settlers, who are suffering.

The Palestinians vastly outnumber the Jews in Gaza and the presence of the RZJ inflames the area.

To argue that the Arabs will see the withdrawal as a victory is weird in view of the fact that the PA argued against it and Sharon has agreed to discuss it with them now that Arafat is gone.

If Israel is to retain its Jewish character and numerical superiority vis a vis the Palestinians it needs to have a Palestinian state (which obviously includes Gaza) where the Palestinians live separately from the Israelis. Real politik dictates Sharon's move.
The majority of Israelis support him in this move.

Your argument that he should stay in Gaza to make the point that he is strong to show the Arabs that they will not have a victory is ridiculous in the face of the fact that the Arabs have seen all their defeats at the hands of Israel as victories. Regardless of what he does in Gaza they will see it as a victory as well. The capacity for self delusion among the Arabs is boundless, as you well know,
There is no need for Sharon to be a psychiatrist to their psychotic delusions but to do what is necessary for the future of Israel and the Israelis. Otherwise we are committed to endless warfare with no end in sight.

Sharon demonstrates strength, not weakness.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".