Posted on 07/27/2002 4:42:35 PM PDT by Phil V.
| w w w . h a a r e t z d a i l y . c o m |
|
|
|
Peres says Shehada bombing was '100 percent mistake'HAMBURG - Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said Saturday that the IDF assassination of Hamas leader Salah Shehada's house in Gaza overnight Monday was a "100 percent mistake."
"Yes it was a miscalculation, one hundred percent a mistake. The outcome shows clearly we used the wrong weapon. The bomb caused more harm than good," Peres told the German news magazine Der Spiegel, in an interview released ahead of publication on Saturday.
"Mistakes have happened in other wars -- look at Kosovo or Afghanistan. The biggest mistake is war itself." The missile strike on a crowded neighborhood of Gaza City killed 16 other people and injured more than 150.
Peres went on to say that he has "doubts" about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's commitment to peace in the Mideast
The interview with Der Spiegel, due to hit newsstands Monday, quoted the architect of the Oslo accords as saying he is not certain Sharon can be considered a partner for peace any longer.
However, Peres pledged to stay in Sharon's coalition, telling the German magazine, "As long as I can serve as a balancing factor, I'll stay."
He confirmed in the interview that talks had indeed taken place in the days prior to the Gaza attack aimed at achieving a new ceasefire.
He termed his talks with Palestinian officials toward that end as "a very positive meeting" which "ought to be continued," Der Spiegel quoted him as saying.
"The talks must continue. They were very positive meetings," he was quoted as saying. "Their intentions are good. We'll have to see if they can put their plans into practice," Peres said.
To support those Palestinian efforts, Peres said Israel would lift curfews and withdraw its forces starting in Jericho, Bethlehem and Hebron "where possible." He didn't say when a withdrawal could begin.
But Peres said he has written off Palestinian Authority Chairman leader Yasser Arafat. "Yasser Arafat has lost all credibility," he told the magazine.
Peres is to leave Sunday for France, to meet with French President Jacques Chiraq. He will then travel to the United States for an international economic convention to be attended by Jordanian King Abdullah. Peres is also slated to meet with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice.
By News Agencies
|
The Israelis are trying to doom themselves with Peres.
=====================
Wake up, Israel:
Those who do not learn from the past will repeat it.
When "negotiating" with any Islamazi, remember...
If their lips are moving, they are LYING!
If their lips aren't moving, they're THINKING about LYING!
One does not negotiate with someone who has let it be known that they will say ANYTHING to keep you busy, and let down your guard until they can KILL YOU!
Paraphrase from "Planet of the Apes" (the GOOD version)..."the only GOOD Islamazi...is a DEAD ONE!"
BTW, I thought the Saudis were our ALLIES...and were on OUR side....how can they be involved in negotiations to stop Saudi funding of "TERRORISTS" like Hamas then?!?!
Jerusalem Post | 26 July 2002 | Michael Yaniv
Posted on 07/26/2002 10:08 AM Eastern by SJackson
Israel´s air strike against Hamas mastermind terrorist Saleh Shehadeh, which also killed 14 others, women and children included, was expectedly condemned by the Arab world as a horrible, inhumane act of terror and as a war crime. Saudi Arabia and Egypt called for the UN to protect the Palestinians against such acts which "have no ethical, moral or even military justification." Obviously, there was no mentioning that Shehadeh and his cronies sent hundreds of Israeli men, women, children and babies to their death and a lot more were maimed and severely injured.How can one explain this ridiculous farce and mockery of ethics, which is on the borderline of a macabre joke? How can people with minimal common sense accept or understand the frequent reoccurrence of Arabs´ systematic distortion of reality and blaming others for the consequences of their own, blood thirsty aggression?
Aggression and cruelty are common human traits. Just as humans can reach high levels of compassion, generosity and kindness, they can also be ferociously cruel to fellow human beings. History has ample examples of aggression and cruelty on a national level, which occur when an entire nation attacks one or more other nations. The Japanese and the Germans in World War II and the ethnic wars in the former Yugoslavia are vivid reminders. Yet the aggression of Arabs towards "infidels" in general, and towards Jews and Israel in particular, has another element of hostility unmatched in any other case. As much as vivid and full-fledged (hence, dubbed "three dimensional") the brutality and cruelty of the Nazis and the Japanese were, the Arabs have added an extra "oomph." They have created the "fourth dimension of aggression."
When the Romans, the Huns, the Barbarians, the Japanese, the Nazis, and so on and so forth encountered resistance to their unprovoked attacks, they understood the validity of their enemy’s armed resistance. Although they fought this resistance ferociously, they accepted it as a valid form of self-defense by the other side. The hunters understood that the prey didn´t want to be eaten. The resistance was legitimate and by itself it did not constitute a casus beli - a cause for war. The resistance of the attacked did not provide another "legitimization" of the attack. The predators didn´t need it. The goals of their attack provided all the needed justification of their aggression towards the victim.
When it comes to Muslim Arabs, it´s totally different.
When Israel decided to build a "security fence" in order to protect itself against terror attacks emanating from Judea and Samaria, Arabs unanimously condemned it, calling it a "racist act" and a form of hostility against Arabs. When Israel decided to unilaterally pull out of Lebanon, the Arab League unanimously voted against it and condemned it as an act of aggression. How can a person with average intelligence, middle of the road moral standards and minimum integrity not be totally appalled, repelled and bewildered by these outrageous, ridiculous and farfetched allegations? How could the Arabs attach a tag of violence and animosity to these Israeli acts, which bore no shred of violence and whose sole purpose was to protect the Israelis from the murderous violence of the other side?
The answer is embedded in the word "defense" and Islam´s historical attitude towards it, since the time of Mohammed. Mohammed and his thugs established the Muslim axiom that the other party´s defense efforts against Muslim aggression is itself considered aggression by definition. The attacked side has no "right" to protect itself. When the people of Mecca did not accept Mohammed´s new religion and defended themselves against his attacks, staged from Medina, their defensive measures were considered as casus beli. When Medina´s Jews refused to convert, their refusal was considered as an act of violence against Islam. Hence, both history and the Koran are infested with vivid acts and attitudes of cruelty and animosity towards Jews. The Jews are the enemies of Islam not because the Jews waged war against Islam, rather because the mere fact of their resistance to yield to Islam was considered an act of war. The war against the Jews has become Muslim "self defense".
Obviously, Mohammed and his warriors had to do some special "moralistic gymnastics" in order to make this absurdity appealing to any conventional standards of common sense. After all, Mohammed portrayed Islam as the compassionate way of the Lord of the Universe, who had supposedly conveyed His Word by other prophets prior to Mohammed. His Word meant justice, peace and compassion. How could these clear dilemmas and clashes of morality and common sense be reconciled? How could Mohammed suppress the innate barbaric qualities of the desert dwellers who had lived by the sword for ages?
Mohammed had a brilliant idea. All laws and standards of morality, compassion, fairness, justice, and integrity were valid and true and should be followed to the tee, provided they are exercised and followed within the world of Islam, within the Followers. However, as far as the non-believers, a.k.a. "infidels", were concerned, it´s Total War. It´s Jihad. If the infidels are not conquered, subjugated, or converted, any action they take that is not in tandem with the Muslims´ goals and aspirations was considered an act of war against Islam and, therefore, legitimized a full-fledged war by Islam against the "perpetrators". The resistance to Islam could even have included passive, non-violent defense.
Today´s Muslim Arabs continue this tradition, which has become imbedded in their heritage and national psyche. Anything that the Jews would do, no matter how non-hostile it is, will be considered as an act of aggression against the Arabs if it doesn´t serve their goals. Therefore, such an act will justify counter-measures of terrorism and murderous attacks to the best of the Arabs´ ability. If the attacked Jews exercise self-defense through force of arms and, moreover, inflict severe punishment on the Arab perpetrators, then the Arabs immediately develop a "selective amnesia", considering themselves innocent victims of the vicious enemy. Therefore, they see future hostile measures as immediately justified.
This is the only way to understand the scope, complexity and most importantly, unrelenting intensity of the Muslim aggression, as it has been unfolding recently both in Israel and in the war of the al-Qaida against the United States. Only when the victims and targets of Muslim aggression understand the true meaning of the "fourth dimension" of Arab hostility will they find the power and means to defeat it.
----------------------------------
The author is a freelance writer who lives in Massachusetts.
The wrong weapon? Why, yes! Yes, indeed! Oh, I most certainly agree, they should have used a different weapon!
But I do believe that my meaning and that of peres is quite different!
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.