Posted on 11/16/2005 10:45:43 AM PST by anotherview
Nov. 16, 2005 8:24 | Updated Nov. 16, 2005 19:39
New poll finds Sharon has 30% lead over Netanyahu
By GIL HOFFMAN AND JPOST STAFF
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at Sunday's cabinet meeting.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski
If Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is considering whether to split the Likud and form a new party, he may want to draw his attention to a recent poll that found that he would defeat his main challenger, MK Binyamin Netanyahu, by over 30 percent.
The poll, which was commissioned by Channel 10 and conducted among Likud voters, found that nearly 49% would vote for Sharon, while only 19.4% would support Netanyahu. Rebel leader Uzi Landau received 11.7% of the vote.
Meanwhile in Wednesday's Likud faction meeting in the Knesset, Sharon said that he was unimpressed with the fervent calls for party unity from his political opponents.
Likud MKs, who have been rebelling against Sharon for more than two years, took turns giving speeches about the need for unity in the party to defeat newly elected Labor Chairman Amir Peretz. But Sharon told his associates that he expects the show of unity to end immediately after the election.
"Let's not lie to ourselves," Sharon said. "No one in the faction has changed their mind about anything because of this meeting."
Sharon's associates shrugged off the calls for harmony within the party saying that they "hadn't seen such an atmosphere of hypocrisy in the faction in a while" and that the Likud was still "far away from reconciliation." Sharon loyalist MK Roni Bar-On left the meeting early, saying that the unity speeches by Likud rebels "made me need a barf bag."
In a typical statement from the meeting, Likud rebel MK Michael Ratzon said, "There is a time for everything - a time to argue and a time to unite. This is a time to emphasize what we have in common instead of our differences and move forward together."
Many Likud MKs left the meeting upset that Sharon did not use the occasion to announce whether he intended to remain in the Likud. Sharon's associates said that he would not make a decision until next week when his advisers receive the results of polls and market research focus groups.
Internal Security Minister Gideon Ezra and Knesset Law Committee chairman Michael Eitan told Sharon in the meeting that it was unacceptable that he had not yet announced his decision. Netanyahu said without mentioning Sharon that "whoever loses the race will have to accept the democratic decision."
Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that he was against a proposal in the Likud central committee to reserve the second slot on the Likud list for Netanyahu in return for him quitting the race. "We have to stop this crybaby approach of saving Bibi," he said. "Bibi is a big boy and he can run by himself."
Landau said in the meeting that the Likud should unite around its principles and ideology instead of around the prime minister. He said that there should be primaries and that he would be a candidate, but that "no matter who wins, I will stand behind the victor."
Ezra retorted bluntly, "You know you're going to lose, right, so why are you still running?"
At the end of the meeting, the faction unanimously passed a statement saying that "the faction sees the breakup of the national-unity government as an irresponsible move by Labor and its chairman. The Likud will unite against the extremist policies of Amir Peretz that endanger Israel and the economy. We will win the election and continue to lead the country.
As I've noted on a couple other threads, if the objective is a sovereign palestinian state, peaceful not mandatory, then clearly these agreements, I presume you're speaking of the border, advance that cause.
How many times have these 2 gone head to head in elections now? It seems every time its these two....
Yes, the border agreement was what I was referring to. Thanks for the reply. I may be mistaken, but hasn't the objective has been a sovereign state since '47? I think the original Palestinian Mandate set aside land, 80% of which became Jordan and the other 20% for the creation of 2 states -- Israel and a state for the Arabs. I don't think that Abbas has the fortitude or the political strength to disarm the groups that are opposed to the existence of a state of Israel.
In a sense. The Arab League has long rejected the concept. The West Bank and Gaza were under Jordanian and Egyptian control from 47 to 67, pending the destruction of Israel and unification as one nation. The Oslo concept established a less that sovereign state. Israel would have been responsible for defense, foreign affairs and controlled the airspace. The idea of a completely sovereign state is GWB’s. Most of the issues we’re reading about, like the borders or a West Bank-Gaza link were to have been settled in final negotiations under Oslo. Now they’re to be accomplished up front, prior to the Palestinians even embarking on their most basic pre-negotiation obligations, dismantling terror and ceasing incitement.
Thanks again for the refresher; I had forgotten that the Oslo accords had never been "finished". I do believe that a sovereign state is needed, but with Abbas' shaky grip on the security situation as well as some of his recent rhetoric, it seems further off. I don't want this to turn into another Islamic Republic(see Iran) that will feed more foreign fighters into the fledgling Iraq or continue to launch terror strikes into Israel. I understand that you cannot completely eliminate the suicide bombers.
Eventually Iran will destroy Israel, probably in the next 2-5 years. All it'll take is 2-5 low-tech gun style uranium bombs.
Israel will lash out and probably destroy most of the islamic world, but what will be lost is immeasurable.
The only thing that may save Israel is the fact that most islamics value Jerusalem (for false reasons of course).
Just a comment. Letting Pakistan be armed is bad enough.
I won't be surprised to see efforts to destabilize Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia emanating from Gaza for decades.
I fear you are correct, good sir.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.