Sharon was never the man they portrayed. Their portrayal of him was just more false news, propaganda.
We can never say...didn't see that coming.
It is a truly excellent essay. I missed it the first time, so thanks for the re-post.
The more I read about Ariel Sharon, the more my respect for the man grows. Israeli military men who entered politics really know what a war for national survival can be like. Our John Kerrys and wesley clarkes would never understand a perspective like that.
Excellent! I would be curious as to how it is received by Europeans. Or is it too late to make any difference?
"Once upon a time, the word "Palestinian" had no national meaning; it was simply the description on any passport of a person living in British-mandated Palestine. "
The term "Palestinian", by great irony, was derived by the Romans, who renamed the territory after the Jew's other great enemy, the Philistines, as one of many forms of punishment on a people who attempted to resist Roman imperialism.
Sharon had a splendid career up till the moment he resumed the leadership after the fall of Ehud Barak. Since then, I worry that he has changed from what he was. Maybe he reads too many newspaper accounts of himself.
There was also some talk that since he is getting pretty old, he wanted to leave a "legacy" of peace behind him as his last accomplishment. That's a very dangerous illusion, IMHO. Carter and clinton were also obsessed with legacies.
It's kind of like looking your shoulder all the time and letting the Monday morning quaterbacks direct all your actions. Not a good idea. I wish I didn't think this was happening to Sharon, but I get get away from it.
..........................................