Whoever you are, true or troll, I ask you what in the ?? are you doing blaming us for Ariel Sharon's plan to redraw Israel's borders into more defensible ones by giving back Gaza? Go pound sand.
"Whoever you are, true or troll, I ask you what in the ?? are you doing blaming us for Ariel Sharon's plan to redraw Israel's borders into more defensible ones by giving back Gaza? Go pound sand."
I am no troll. I have an opinion that both the US & Israel has been far too soft trying to negotiate with terrorists (PLO). This has always failed and always will. Offering more concessions such as land emboldens these idiots further.
The point is Israel could and should have stayed in Gaza and given stronger ultimatums 10 years ago to the PLO, not given Arafat the friggin peace prize for 30 years of terrorism with a defined goal of the destruction of Israel.
I don't know what you are trying to say: that you agreed with Sharon's plan or not?
I'd just like to add here, that I have some contacts involved in the political system there, and I (non-military) was saying that I thought that it was a basically sensible idea: defensible borders, clear out Israelis in order to fascilitate bombing if necessary, etc.
I was told that the loss of 'eyes' on the ground, and the political difference of the level of official permission to act made it a totally irresponsible decision.
Meaning, while there were soldiers in Gaza, if they saw something suspicious, or a tunnel, or bombing making signs, they could act upon orders from their commanding officer. But once removed, and a border sealed, they would have to wait until a major provocation to act (basically raising the bar to making any reactive strike an act of war and involving the president). This has been brought home so clearly here. Had Israel still been in Gaza, this tunnel would have probably been discovered before this point.
Anyway, sorry if I didn't understand your post.
Sarah
I don't know what you are trying to say: that you agreed with Sharon's plan or not?
I'd just like to add here, that I have some contacts involved in the political system there, and I (non-military) was saying that I thought that it was a basically sensible idea: defensible borders, clear out Israelis in order to fascilitate bombing if necessary, etc.
I was told that the loss of 'eyes' on the ground, and the political difference of the level of official permission to act made it a totally irresponsible decision.
Meaning, while there were soldiers in Gaza, if they saw something suspicious, or a tunnel, or bombing making signs, they could act upon orders from their commanding officer. But once removed, and a border sealed, they would have to wait until a major provocation to act (basically raising the bar to making any reactive strike an act of war and involving the president). This has been brought home so clearly here. Had Israel still been in Gaza, this tunnel would have probably been discovered before this point.
Anyway, sorry if I didn't understand your post.
Sarah
please see my above post.