Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SHARON'S CONTRIBUTION
Yahoo ^ | April 13 | Wm. F. Buckley

Posted on 04/16/2002 7:06:46 AM PDT by USAF_ret

SHARON'S CONTRIBUTION Sat Apr 13, 9:01 PM ET By William F. Buckley Jr.

My vote is that Ariel Sharon's offensive is the stupidest campaign in recent memory. Defined here as a campaign that has solved nothing, increased Israel's problems, intensified Palestinian hatred of Israel, estranged many Europeans and Americans, and fanned Islamic hostility. What is General Sharon up to?

What he said was that he was determined to destroy the "infrastructure" of the suicide terrorists. Well, how do you do that?

We Americans are trying to do that to al-Qaida. This involved a war on the government of Afghanistan, a nation formally identified with terrorists it sheltered, trained and dispatched to do their grisly work. The United States, in effect, declared war on the Taliban government and pursued that war as best it could. Having toppled Kabul, our anti-terrorist forces are now deployed here and there, doing such things as raiding a terrorist nest in Pakistan and hauling in a suspect leader.

Sharon's policy is scorched-earth. Under his command, the Israeli army has engaged not in isolating the infrastructure of the suicide terrorists. What he is engaged in is wanton damage. The New York Times' Serge Schmemann, reporting from Jerusalem, tells it in a dispatch on Thursday with a memorable lead:

"The images are indelible: piles of concrete and twisted metal in the ancient casbah of Nablus, husks of savaged computers littering ministries in Ramallah, rows of storefronts sheared by passing tanks in Tulkarm, broken pipes gushing precious water, flattened cars in fields of shattered glass and garbage, electricity poles snapped like twigs, tilting walls where homes used to stand, gaping holes where rockets pierced office buildings." And he uses Sharon's missionary mandate without apparent irony: "It is safe to say that the infrastructure of life itself and of any future Palestinian state -- roads, schools, electricity pylons, water pipes, telephone lines -- has been devastated."

How's that for retaliation for the Passover massacre?

What Sharon has been doing is to give way to Israeli rage. The rage is hot, deserved and purposive. But to proceed on the assumption that water and electricity lines and schools and hospitals are vital organs of terrorist excursions is untenable except on an understanding that General Sharon hasn't articulated. If you say: The poison that animates the suicide bombers is endemic in every stick and stone that make up the West Bank, then it would follow that a destruction of everything and of everybody standing would follow, as an inoculation would serve to chase down the infection in any part of the diseased body. Sharon hasn't ordered his soldiers to mow down every Palestinian standing, but his artillery and air force haven't been discriminating. There is no way to be entirely discriminating in a military offensive designed to find something that can't be found, namely the fuse box that causes an 18-year-old Palestinian girl to arm herself with a bomb and detonate it in an Israeli mall. There aren't, sitting about, neat paramilitary kiosks with explosives and rosters of willing terrorists. The search for these was bound to be fruitless, rather like looking for the infrastructure of lechery in Gomorrah.

General Sharon might have sent in a platoon, pulled out Arafat and his 100 lieutenants and executed them on the entirely reasonable grounds that they embodied the terrorist movement in the West Bank. A bullet into the heart of Arafat is not a wayward contribution to the search for the infrastructure of the evil and genocidal war against Israel. So Palestine would be left leaderless? Such a problem would be that of the Palestinians who have tolerated Arafat for so many years.

What has been done is to enhance and even legitimize Palestinian grievances. "After four days of heavy fighting," the Times dispatch goes on, "the Casbah, as the centuries-old warren of shops and homes at the center of this city (Nablus) is known, has been utterly destroyed."

How would we feel in analogous circumstances? What happened to Atlanta in 1864 at the hands of Gen. Sherman was perceived through the lens of a great civil war, a surrender of the losing side, and the heart and mind of a magnanimous national leader who sought to heal the wounds of a nation torn asunder. Such elements aren't there in the Mideast. Sharon has wounded the state of Israel incalculably, causing ache and pain not only to Palestinians, but to his people, and to friends of Israel everywhere.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: buckley; israel; sharon
My apologies if this has been posted. It didn't coome up on a search. It looks like Sharon has lost the support of one very important US conservative with impeccible credentials.
1 posted on 04/16/2002 7:06:46 AM PDT by USAF_ret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
Thanks for posting this. Finally a voice of reason! IMO Israel is paying for clinton and company getting involved in the election that allowed Barak to come to power and that gave us Sharon.

At the same time clinton and company gave total credibitiliy to the Palestian Movement headed by Arafat which they did not deserve. Ms. clinton can rant all she wants about what this Administration is not doing but she is the one with the picture kissing Arafat's wife on the cheek and they are the couple that had Arafat to dinner in the WH and made this terrorist an equal partner with the duly elected President of Israel.

Israel would have been much better off as Buckley suggests to round up Arafat and his Lieutenants and execute them as terrorists!

My two cents!

2 posted on 04/16/2002 7:22:57 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
if the US sent in ground troops into Kandahar in a similar operation, we would've captured Mullah Omar. Instead we let others do the job for us and he escaped. Failure to seal off Tora Bora meant that we let Osama and Zawahiri escape too. In contrast, Israel was able to capture or kill over 5000 wanted terrorists including Marwan Barghouti. Israel was also able to find lots of valuable intelligence including bomb factories. Remember when the press went into Kabul after it was taken over and found all sorts of info before the CIA was able to get their hands on it? If you don't seal off the battlefield, everyone will escape just like Al Qaeda did in Afghanistan by the thousands.
3 posted on 04/16/2002 7:23:32 AM PDT by arielb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
Well written, as we'd suspect from him.

Whenever I read Buckley I want to ask questions of him. This time I'd ask if Bush will start to lose popularity to the point of jeopardizing his re-election.

I already hear grumbles about the budget growth, fed government growth, and the ten billion to not find bin Laden. These are grumbles from folks that voted against Gore.

Tim

4 posted on 04/16/2002 7:28:08 AM PDT by AzJP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
well I certainly agree with that. However I strongly disagree with his comments about the destruction. Go take a look at the Afghan cities and villages that we bombed. We bombed the Red Cross-twice and also a UN mine clearing agency. The bombing made it hard for aid workers to enter the country. We used Northern Alliance warlords such as Dostum to do the ground fighting for us. The results were not pleasant.
5 posted on 04/16/2002 7:30:02 AM PDT by arielb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
It looks like Sharon has lost the support of one very important US conservative with impeccible credentials.

Nah. A couple of posts from now, you'll be reading how Mr. Bill is an anti-semite. In the meantime, while the U.S. is forced to deal with this nonsense, Saddam is smirking.

Dismantle the settlements. Isolate Yasser and his scum behind wire and land mines -- and then we can to turn our attention Baghdad.

But Sharon won't lift a finger against the settlements, so the war on terror is on hold and US policy is held hostage by settlements filled with zealots.

6 posted on 04/16/2002 7:35:23 AM PDT by Big Bunyip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
I think this is the 4th posting of this article. I suppose with the GOP lining up solidly behind Israel, and Sharon, this one article is comforting to some. ;-o
7 posted on 04/16/2002 7:38:15 AM PDT by veronica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arielb
if the US sent in ground troops into Kandahar in a similar operation, we would've captured Mullah Omar.

If if's and but's were candies and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas. It is impossible to say we'd have captured Omar, especially since to took months for us to get ground forces ready to go over there.

I do however think that you're ignoring Buckley's point that destroying the Palestinian infrastructure only helps to create more suicide bombers. In the long run, this further weakens both Israel's security and her support from her friends.

8 posted on 04/16/2002 7:41:38 AM PDT by USAF_ret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arielb
Not pleasent, but effective. We lost a minimum number of troops. That's a good thing.
9 posted on 04/16/2002 7:42:35 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Norman Shwarstkoff. (sorry for butchering his name) was asked by a reporter, something to the effect of; How do you defend yourself from people that are will to die?

Norman's answer: "You accomodate them."

I think it's way past time to accomodate Mr. Arafat.

10 posted on 04/16/2002 7:44:37 AM PDT by tjg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: veronica
I suppose with the GOP lining up solidly behind Israel, and Sharon, this one article is comforting to some...

It does show that conservative opinion can vary on the subject. It's kind of hard to shoot the messenger in this case.

11 posted on 04/16/2002 7:48:43 AM PDT by USAF_ret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AzJP
Patriot Act, CFR to name a couple more issues that bother the many. Bush will have to move farther left to compensate for the C3POs he's going to lose.
12 posted on 04/16/2002 8:05:03 AM PDT by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
Actually when Buckley bases his opinion on this::>>>>>The New York Times' Serge Schmemann, reporting from Jerusalem, tells it in a dispatch on Thursday with a memorable lead...it is actually easy to attack the messenger. Schmemann has a very poor record when it comes to Israel reporting.
13 posted on 04/16/2002 8:15:09 AM PDT by veronica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: USAF_ret
It's in moments of crisis that you find out who your true friends are. Buckley has never been more than a fair weather friend of Israel. He defended Buchanan and claimed that the Nazi apologist wasn't antisemitic. He's a Catholic who has defended the Pope's craven betrayal of the Jews and cooperation with Nazis. And now he uses Serge Schmemann, an enemy of Israel who the New York Times allows to masquerade as a reporter, as the basis for an attack he must have been longing to make for years.

Mr. Stab In the Back Buckley is just showing his true colors. Why be surprised - and why post this trash when the real goal should be to stand behind Israel?

14 posted on 04/16/2002 8:57:55 AM PDT by Masada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tjg
Couldn't agree with you more -- way past time to accommodate Arafat. I have a suggestion for you since I cannot spell his name either -- I use Stormin' Norman which I can remember without looking up!
15 posted on 04/16/2002 9:14:31 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Masada
Why be surprised - and why post this trash when the real goal should be to stand behind Israel?

LOL. The thought of Buckley as a Nazi just doesn't wash. As far as why post articles that run against the grain of the supporters of Israel, I guess I posted it because I misinterpreted the reason this forum exists. In stead of discussion of current topics, it's for standing behind Israel. Right?

16 posted on 04/16/2002 9:40:21 AM PDT by USAF_ret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson