Ordered to Die Quietly

Arutz Sheva ^ | 3-11-03 | Emanuel A. Winston

[anotherview]

Ha'aretz is very left-wing. They don't like President Bush or Prime Minister Sharon one little bit. So... take this with a huge grain of salt.

[anotherview]

Good. I hope everyone here understands Ha'aretz' bias (left wing).

[valkyrieanne]

Why all the surprise here? This is exactly the same thing the US told Israel during the 1991 Gulf War - sit tight and let *us* protect you; don't retaliate. We feared that if Israel let a couple fly at Iraq, the rest of the Arabs would become uncontrollable - as if we can control them anyway.

This is nothing new, and it's how we're going to "run it" - no retaliation for Israel if they want us to play ball with them.

[carton253]

I kind of figured they leaned heavily to the right. Got that from the few articles that I read.

I support Sharon and Likud also, but I love Benjamin Netanyahu....

[eaglebeak]

I agree. The administration seems to be calling the shots re Isreal and how she defends her own people. The patriot missiles have been notoriously unreliable in the past (Gulf War I), and to placate the Isrealis with communications feed and the patriot missiles seems insulting.

[SJackson]

Most do, but heck, Ha'aretz is a couple freepers favorite source for news on Israel.

BTW, Gov´t Raids Shas Radio Stations

The Shas Party convened an urgent meeting this afternoon, in light of the police raids today on 11 unlicensed religious radio stations. Police and Communications Authority personnel closed down the Jerusalem-area stations, confiscating much equipment.

"They have taken our transmitters in order to shut us up," Shas leaders said today, "but we will fight to the finish." The stations are popularly known as "the holy channels," and in fact broadcast mostly religious, inspirational, and charity-oriented programming.

[strela]

dezinformatsiya

[Bella_Bru]

no retaliation for Israel if they want us to play ball with them.

And we would tell any other country what they could do with their ball.

[anotherview]

I posted The Jerusalem Post article on the closing of the stations. My take on it is in the comments there. I expect I will be at odds with some here. Oh well...

My view of Ha'aretz is the same as my view of Arutz Sheva: biased, but valuable for getting a different viewpoint.

[SJackson]

The patriot missiles have been notoriously unreliable in the past (Gulf War I), and to placate the Isrealis with communications feed and the patriot missiles seems insulting.

Given both the access to the real time "air picture" and the widely reported IDF presence aside our special forces seaching for scuds inside Iraq, I think it would be safe to assume Israel will have a role in the case of a WMD attack. I suspect there are contingency plans in the event of a sustained attack from Hizbollah in the north as well.

[gcruse]

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher explains why blowing up Israelis different than blowing up Americans

DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

Richard Boucher, Spokesman

Washington, DC; September 27, 2001

...

QUESTION: To what extent does this campaign -- as you constantly review your Middle East policy, what -- how much influence does this campaign against terrorism have in that? What's the input? How does it weigh in here? See what I mean?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't.

QUESTION: It's obviously a factor --

MR. BOUCHER: We have talked about this on and off over the last few days. We recognize that there is an influence. Some have said it affects the atmosphere, the Palestinian/Israeli issues affect the atmosphere of cooperation. But, essentially, there are, on some planes, two different things. One is that there are violent people trying to destroy societies, ours, many others in the world. The world recognizes that and we are going to stop those people.

On the other hand, there are issues and violence and political issues that need to be resolved in the Middle East, Israelis and Palestinians. But we all recognize that the path to solve those is through negotiation and that we have devoted enormous efforts to getting back to that path of negotiation.

And we have called on the parties to do everything they can, particularly in the present circumstance, to make that possible.

I guess that's about as close as I can come to the kind of sophisticated analysis I'm sure you will want to do on your own. But they are clearly issues that are different, not only in geography but also, to some extent, in their nature.

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

[Mark17]

If Saddam uses WMDs on Israel, Sharon WILL nuke Iraq.

I think it is as simple as that. Is it just me, or does it appear that a lot of people have a hard time figuring this out?

[Stavka2]

The FSB which has been working closely with the Massad, for one. Why do you think Arafat returned empty handed from Russia all those times he went looking for support in declaring a state? Last time, Putin sent a junior, junior flunky to meet with AraRat.

[Stavka2]

Bush told Russia to sit back and not to bomb the Taliban after their trained Chechins blew up 3 apartment buildings, a subway underpass and a parade...what is new here? This is the same crap the US tells India constantly, when Pakistan sends its terrorists to kill Indians...seems some terrorists are not as bad as others.

[carton253]

Sharon will not nuke Iraq...

[Mark17]

Sharon will not nuke Iraq...

If Iraq uses WMD, you or I have no idea what he will do. One thing I am reasonably sure of, he won't take too kindly to it.

[carton253]

Sharon will not nuke Iraq... what will it get him?

No, he won't take it kindly... but I doubt he unleashes his greatest weapon first.

[Robert_Paulson2]

Consider it may be true.
Bush is NOT giving Israel requested aid as we speak.

He got a letter from FRIST and DASCHLE both demanding that the administration MOVE to assist Israel NOW...

and nothing has happened.

I am afraid that this "bible reading", "attending to his prayers", "born again" president, may have missed the part where God blesses those that bless Israel, and curses those that harm her.

ON the otherhand... there are those that say we are fighting this war with Iraq, to protect Israel, primarily... so they should stand down.

OR it really could be about the oil, and we have completely misread Bush's honest intentions. The fact that frist and daschle sent a letter begging for financial and military support from the Bush administration... was actually rather ominous for me.

President Bush could be twisting their arms to allow a palestinian state... for the likes of murderor arafat... or his appointed clone.

I don't know, I just don't know.

[Robert_Paulson2]

United States Senate

Office of the Majority Leader

Washington D.C. 20510

March 5, 2003

The President

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing in relation to our Nation's ongoing efforts in the war against terrorism. Last week, you laid out an ambitious goal that we all share -to build a democratic and peaceful Iraq that can in turn lead to a stable and democratic Middle East. We commend you for that vision and want to work with you to take the necessary steps to ensure it becomes a reality.

Securing Israel is also a vital first step in realizing that vision. We are deeply concerned for the economic and military crisis Israel is currently facing. As you know, these challenges are unprecedented: a severe economic recession, caused in large part by the campaign of violence and terror being waged against it. Now, with the possibility of conflict with Iraq, Israel is confronted with skyrocketing defense expenditures to ensure that the Israeli people are not once again made innocent victims of attack by Saddam Hussein. We are concerned that, if not addressed soon, these issues could severely affect Israel's short and long term security.

Israel' s per capita GDP has fallen by six percent in the last two years-a decline virtually unprecedented in any western industrialized democracy since the end of World War II. At the same time, its defense spending now exceeds 11 percent of its GDP-the highest of any democracy. To keep its forces at the necessary level of readiness while preparing to meet homeland security needs of a possible unconventional weapons attack from Iraq, Israel is in danger of mortgaging its future qualitative military edge. We cannot allow this to happen.

In the past, the United States has always been there to help Israel get through tough economic and military challenges-and grow stronger in the process: in the 1980s, when Israel' faced triple digit inflation, immediately after the Gulf War, and in the early 1990s, as Israel confronted the enormous challenge of absorbing hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the former Soviet Union.

The situation Israel faces today is even more serious, but with American help, can be overcome. Additional loan guarantees-which cost the American taxpayer nothing-can help jump start Israel' s economy, especially if accompanied by further economic restructuring. At least as important, the provision of additional military assistance now can help assure Israel's security into the future, and ensure that we not allow any margin of error to a key American ally confronting both terrorism and the threat of attack from unconventional weapons.

We will work closely with you in the months ahead to address our country's priorities at home and abroad. As we take the steps necessary to secure the United States, and as other states in the Middle East look to the United States to help provide for their security, we are confident that you will view sympathetically Israel's request for urgent economic and military assistance and include it in the upcoming emergency appropriations.

Sincerely yours,

Senator Tom Daschle, Democratic Leader

Senator Bill Frist, M.D., Majority Leader

[SuziQ]

The U.S. has also warned Israel that should it respond to an Iraqi attack with non-conventional weapons, it would immediately forfeit all international support.

The operative phrase here is NON-CONVENTIONAL. Of course if Ariel Sharon lobs a nuke into the Middle East, Israel will lose support. Nowhere in this article does it say that Israel cannot protect herself from attacks from Sadaam or anyone else.

It does sound as though the author of the Arutz Sheva piece is trying to stir up trouble where none should exist.