Sharon's plan is to drive Palestinians across the Jordan

THE leading Israeli historian Martin van Creveld predicts that a US attack on Iraq or a terrorist strike at home could trigger a massive mobilisation to clear the occupied territories of their two million Arabs

Two years ago, less than eight per cent of those who took part in a Gallup poll among Jewish Israelis said they were in favour of what is euphemistically called "transfer" - that is, the expulsion of perhaps two million Palestinians across the River Jordan. This month that figure reached 44 per cent.

Earlier this year, when a journalist asked Ariel Sharon whether he favoured such a move, the Israeli prime minister said he did not think in such terms. A glance at his memoirs, however, shows that he has not always been so fastidious.

In September 1970 King Hussein of Jordan fell on the Palestinians in his kingdom, killing perhaps 5,000 to 10,000. The then Gen Sharon, serving as Commanding Officer, Southern Front, argued that Israel's policy of helping the king was a mistake; instead it should have tried to topple the Hashemite regime.

He has often said since that Jordan, which, according to him, has a Palestinian majority even now, is the Palestinian state. The inference - that the Palestinians should go there - is clear.

During its 1948 War of Independence, Israel drove 650,000 Palestinians from their homes into neighbouring countries. If it were to try something similar today, the outcome could well be a regional war. More and more people in Jerusalem believe that such is Mr Sharon's objective.

It might explain why Mr Sharon, famous for his ability to plan ahead, appears not to have a plan. In fact, he has always harboured a very clear plan - nothing less than to rid Israel of the Palestinians.

Few people, least of all me, want the following events to happen. But such a scenario could easily come about. Mr Sharon would have to wait for a suitable opportunity - such as an American offensive against Iraq, which some Israelis think is going to take place in early summer.

Mr Sharon himself told Colin Powell, the secretary of state, that America should not allow the situation in Israel to delay the operation.

An uprising in Jordan, followed by the collapse of King Abdullah's regime, would also present such an opportunity - as would a spectacular act of terrorism inside Israel that killed hundreds.

First, the country's three ultra-modern submarines would take up firing positions out at sea. Borders would be closed, a news blackout imposed, and all foreign journalists rounded up and confined to a hotel as guests of the Government.

A force of 12 divisions, 11 of them armoured, plus various territorial units suitable for occupation duties, would be deployed: five against Egypt, three against Syria, and one opposite Lebanon. This would leave three to face east as well as enough forces to put a tank inside every Arab-Israeli village just in case their populations get any funny ideas.

The expulsion of the Palestinians would require only a few brigades. They would not drag people out of their houses but use heavy artillery to drive them out; the damage caused to Jenin would look like a pinprick in comparison.

Any outside intervention would be held off by the Israeli air force. In 1982, the last time it engaged in large-scale operations, it destroyed 19 Syrian anti-aircraft batteries and shot down 100 Syrian aircraft against the loss of one.

Its advantage is much greater now than it was then and would present an awesome threat to any Syrian armoured attack on the Golan Heights.

As for the Egyptians, they are separated from Israel by 150 miles or so of open desert. Judging by what happened in 1967, should they try to cross it they would be destroyed.

The Jordanian and Lebanese armed forces are too small to count and Iraq is in no position to intervene, given that it has not recovered its pre-1991 strength and is being held down by the Americans. Saddam Hussein may launch some of the 30 to 40 missiles he probably has.

The damage they can do, however, is limited. Should Saddam be mad enough to resort to weapons of mass destruction, then Israel's response would be so "awesome and terrible" (as Yitzhak Shamir, the former prime minister, once said) as to defy the imagination.

Some believe that the international community will not permit such an ethnic cleansing. I would not count on it. If Mr Sharon decides to go ahead, the only country that can stop him is the United States.

The US, however, regards itself as being at war with parts of the Muslim world that have supported Osama bin Laden. America will not necessarily object to that world being taught a lesson - particularly if it could be as swift and brutal as the 1967 campaign; and also particularly if it does not disrupt the flow of oil for too long.

Israeli military experts estimate that such a war could be over in just eight days. If the Arab states do not intervene, it will end with the Palestinians expelled and Jordan in ruins.

If they do intervene, the result will be the same, with the main Arab armies destroyed. Israel would, of course, take some casualties, especially in the north, where its population would come under fire from Hizbollah.

However, their number would be limited and Israel would stand triumphant, as it did in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. Are you listening Mr Arafat?

the U.S. is more of a Sharonista than Sharon is himself.

That must be why the President keeps saying he expects the Israeli's to move back from the West Bank, and why the mainstream media in the US keeps reporting that as a "demand", rather than an "expectation".

Their solution was to become a military power and to impose puppet rulers, and direct rule over all of their enemies, eventually the known world. As the Middle Eastern outpost of the West, in the current world war between the islamists and the west, Israel may have to do the same thing with all of their Arab neighbors.

That of course is what Israel tried to do with Arafat. The Palestinians were to be answerable to him and he was answerable to Israel. That's why Sharon kept ordering him to arrest militants and terrorists.

In due time, it will blow up I suspect.

I think you're right. Either that, or Russia will cede territory in order to buy China off.

Who knows, though? China may decide that Russia is more useful to them alive than she is dead.

Man, the Slavs have really gotten a raw deal for the last 200 years or so, haven't they?

Well said. A (very) few people here have their fault-finding radar honed in on Israel (and for some, anything Jewish). Somehow, their radar goes berserk when a flaw is detected there, while it gives only the slightest, if any, alarm over the flaws of others no matter how egregious.

But by golly, if you dare to make that simple observation, they squeal like stuck pigs and accuse you of playing the race card.

Yup. Nice and tidy little protection plan they got there. <G>

The Slavs have been dysfunctional most places. Granted Poland, The Czech Republic and Slovenia are moving on up now, and the C.R. did before WW II as well. The problem right now is that the Slavs just about everywhere have the highest abortion rates, and the lowest fertility rates, of anyplace on this planet. The fertility rate on average is about 1.5 (in a couple of Slav countries I recall it is about 1.3). And that is across the board, and across Orthodox and Catholic populations (and the Protestants in Moravia). And there has been little commentary about it. I know about it only because I have a considerable interest in fertility rates, and the Balkans, and thus it crossed my radar screen. In any event, the Slav population is headed at this point towards an implosion.

DentsRun: the U.S. is more of a Sharonista than Sharon is himself.

That must be why the President keeps saying he expects the Israeli's to move back from the West Bank.

Has Israel pulled out of the West Bank? I seem to recall Bush saying, he wanted Israel out "and I mean now!" That was three weeks ago and Sharon still isn't out. Sharon paid no more attention to him than he would to a mosquito. Bush doesn't tell Sharon what to do. I rather suspect it's the other way around.

Based on it's history up to this point, I am beginning to think that later historians, if there are any.... [emphasis added by Av]

That tore it general. You're performance is convincing me you are really a contrarian optimist who thinks he can shock the human race (or at least FReepers who mistake themselves for members) into reconsidering their headlong thrust into oblivion. You're wasting our time.

You almost had me convinced you were more pessimistic than me. Nice of you to try though. I doubt these clowns have an inkling. God bless you for trying.

Slavs just about everywhere have the highest abortion rates, and the lowest fertility rates, of anyplace on this planet.

That's fascinating. I had no idea.

The Slavs have had it rough. They've never really been out from under the domination of one Great Power or another for 200+ years. Europeans played them off against Turkey for ages. Russia used them to stir up trouble against Austria. And then from WWI through the Communist era they were crammed together in the worst possible way.

Like the Palestinians, though, they never do themselves any favors.

You are right. And I guess we'll just have to pat the "sensitive folk" on the back and reassure them that we are doing this all for their own good, since they obviously have no idea what monsters we are up against.

Even if they do acknowledge this, they will produce reams of material showing how such-and-such conditions led to this-or-that "negative acting-out" by the Islamists, and "if you were in their shoes..."

Bollocks to the lot of 'em! CHOOSE LIFE, I say, and put the murderers out of our misery.

What you say about Jonah Goldberg is not true.

McCain blasted evangelical leaders on February 28, 2000, or thereabouts. On March 1, 2000 Goldberg published a criticism of McCain for doing so: HEY JOHN: HERE'S HOW YA DO IT. In Goldberg's admittedly goofy way, it defends evangelicals from the demonization to which McCain was pandering.

On March 6, Goldberg published a further piece on the matter, IN DEFENSE OF BOB JONES UNIVERSITY.

Sound to me like you're running your Jews together. They really don't all look alike.

When has Dent'sRun ever written: "Benjamin Netanyahu is right; if we don't help Israel fight suicide bombing over there, we will someday have to fight it here at home."

We're already fighting it here at home. That's what 9/11 was all about.

Doesn't it strike you as strange that DentsRun always criticizes Israel, never sees any instance in which helping Israel is in our best interests? If for no other reason than the law of averages you'd think once in a while he'd write a post saying, "Hey, much as I hate to admit it, this time Sharon is right."

Clearly, his loyalty is suspect.

How can my loyalty to America be suspect when I'm the one defending America? Podhoretz and Safire, on the other hand, are more concerned about the welfare of a foreign country than they are about their own.

That of course is what Israel tried to do with Arafat.

Then they haven't gone far enough. If they are going to do what they should, they should take Mecca, destroy the black rock and shrine, and build a nice Jewish house of worship. Then they should take the House of Saud hostage, and shoot them in order of precedence, until they get one to convert to Judaism, whom they should put on the throne. Then they should round up the population, inform them that they are now Jewish, and that if they revert to Islam they will get the same punishment as now would be given a Moslem who converted to Judaism.

After that, they should get mean.

It also behooves a nation to defend her allies.

The amount of face we would lose by cutting and running on Israel is incalculable. The consequences over the long term would be devastating. It would convince the world that the US is an unreliable ally.

Goldberg was on both sides. Podhoretz, Kristol and Safire all came out with articles praising McCain for bashing evangelicals. Then Goldberg did his usual rewrite with some glib comments tossed in. He was late to the party however and backtracked when he saw McCain was getting no traction by bashing of Falwell and Robertson.

You're performance is convincing me you are really a contrarian optimist who thinks he can shock the human race . . . into reconsidering their headlong thrust into oblivion.

Actually I have not the slightest hope that there is anything within the power of human beings which will prevent people numbering in the BILLIONS from being violently killed during the coming days.

I'm no fan of Sulla. Sorry.

Well that's OK, Cicero himself defended the Sullan constitution in his day. As for my own attitude towards the late Dictator, see my homepage.

Nice...Why not rid the country of Jews? It would make for a safer U.S,

Lets try for starters that there is very little reason to question the loyalty of American Jews. There are any number of very large reasons to question the loyalty of Arabs and Muslims.

This does not mean all American Arabs & Muslims are disloyal, just that a much larger fraction than among American Jews are disloyal.

But the important thing is to get the U.S. to attack Iraq. Hence the year long drumbeat for war from Safire, Krauthammer, Podhoretz and Kristol.

Ahhh, yezz... behind it all, ve see ze JEWS, eh? (/sarcasm, with fake Nazi accent)

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.