Thursday, July 26, 2007

More, more, more, more, more weapons

Haaretz reports on arms transfer between Israel and the PA,

"This is the largest arms transfer authorized in recent years, and it is meant to aid forces loyal to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in preventing the possibility of a Hamas challenge and possible takeover similar to that of the Gaza Strip.

The weapons were delivered to the PA security forces three weeks ago following Israeli authorization.

The transfer of the M-16s was kept under strict confidence on both sides, in an effort to prevent any possible leak that could undermine Abbas' standing."

The Palestine Information Center also reported,

"Israeli premier Ehud Olmert is currently studying Abbas's request to allow entry of armored vehicles, bullet-proof vests and other military equipment in addition to the Badr forces stationed in Jordan to boost his power against Hamas."


Anonymous said...

Very interesting report.

Also interesting to recall that Abbas was the lead 'negotiator' for the PLO in the Oslo Accords.

Both Jimmy Carter in his recent book and Amira Hass in her outstanding 'Drinking from the Sea at Gaza' comment negatively on that agreement and (by implication) the work of the Palestinian negotiation team. No wonder the Israelis want Abbas.

- Rick

un autre said...

Olmert had already rejected such a request from Dahlan a few weeks ago, fearing the weapons would ultimately fall into Hamas's hands.
Whatever, Abbas is more and more demonstrating he has no more spinal column than he has political know-how.
Which is why Olmert should learn the lesson Hamas already learnt: not to take any risks with such an unreliable man.;-)

Joe said...


KGS said...

I agree that its stupid to re-arm Fattah, they'll eventually train these weapons against Israel. A terrorist is a terrorist (Hamas/Fattah/IJ/PFLP ect.), whether he's wrapped in scarf or a three piece suit.

What's even more disturbing is the 20 tons of explosives smuggled by Hamas under the Rafah border with Egypt, as well as anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons, as well as of thousands kalashnikovs.

Where indeed do they find the money for such weaponry while their people lack the basics?

Anonymous said...

In response to KGS -

Are you suggesting that Hamas should just prepare placards and leaflets to defend themselves for the next "incursion"?

Take a drive down to the Gaza border and take a look at the tanks and military hardware ammassed there.

Have you forgotten that it is a RIGHT to resist foreign occupation?

The great irony of this struggle is that the party which is vastly more militaristic and violent is deemed the 'victim' and the party which is truly weak and the victim is deemed the violent one.

Yuri Avnery's recent overview with comparisons to the US conquest of the Native peoples lands is on the mark.

- Rick

KGS said...

In regards to Rick's statements.

Israel has not dedicated the state's existence to the total destruction of the Palestinian people.

The Hamas as well as all the other Palestinian terror groups openly admit that the Israeli state is not an option.

Wrap your mind around that truth, then get back to me about whether or not its just "resistence", a euphamism for terrorism against Israeli citizens.

Your lack of mentioning the continual raining of rockets from Gaza into Israel, puts the tanks and other Israeli military vehicles sitting outside the Gaza border ....out of context.

If the Arab were to quit all forms of hostility today, renounce terror and accept all pre-existing agreements signed with Israel, serious negotiations would be forthcoming from the Israeli side.

One can only make peace with one's "former enemies", not with those who are "hooked on violence" as a way of life.

Anonymous said...

To KGS -

The pathetic and counter-productive Quassams are not "continually raining down". They are relatively infrequent and have done relatively little damage and destruction over the past year.

As for honoring past committments Israel has violated the Oslo Accords in fundamental ways. Jimmy Carter talks about his own experience with Israel reneging on their committments in his recent book. Overall the book portrays the history of the conflict in ways that are very much favorable to Israel - if anything he understates the criticism.

Who is a threat to whom? Hamas and the Palestinians are no threat to Israel which not only exists but is strong economically and militarily. To suggest that Hamas seriously threatens Israel is preposterous. A lie.

The problem "accepting the existence of the state of Israel" is that Israel does not define its borders nor citizenship. Which territorial Israel should one accept? 1948? 1967? The "land of Israel"? Should one accept an ethnically discriminatory Israel where any Jew anywhere in the world (or anyone who can produce a paper saying his grandmother was Jewish) has automatic benefits and privileges while any Arab has the opposite - discrimination, automatic restrictions and oppression?

Dear KGS - Would you please read Amira Hass' book "Drinking from the Sea at Gaza"? If you did, I believe your view would be greatly enhanced.

- Rick

KGS said...

Rick, your full of gas. Those "pathetic Qassems" do cause damage and loss of life. It is NO SECRET that they are fired into Israeli civil centers with the intention of inflicting as much damage and loss of life as possible.

But hey, don't take my word for it, just ask the people of Sederot. I wonder if you would be still calling Qaaems "pathetic" if you were the one running to the nearest bomb shelter, or wondering if you loved ones have found shelter as well.

The record is very clear about the OSLO years. Isreal has not been in defiance of any of the agreements. Trying to pin Palestinian intransigence and the failure of the Oslo accords on Israel, would force you to overlook every statement and action by Arafat and his band of merry thieves.

Nothing could be more clear of Arafat's intentions than

1.) the abconding of BILLIONS of dollars of US and other foreign aid into offshore bank accounts

2.) Creating competing militias with all strings leading to himself, creating a police state that had one militiaman per 100 people (more than the USSR or N.Korea)

3.) Though signing a non-violence agreement on the WH lawn, encourage, promoted and instilled a culture of death and violence that has become a "way of life" in Palestinian society.

4.) the murdering of Palestinians that were actually crucial in informing on acts of terrorism. Something HE AND THE PA were sworn to do.

5.) The catch and release policy of the PA, of people wanted by Israel was the hallmark of the Arafat years.

6.) That no Arab gov't in the region TRUSTED Arafat says more about his and the Fattah's claims than any charges leveled at the Israelis.

Jimmy Carter and "his new book" have been discredited as being a work of half truths and obfuscations. That he also stole maps and re-used them out of context does not work in his favor either.

Those US officials that were in the middle of the OSlo years are in much disagreement with Carter's take on just about everything he says. Even Saudi Prince Banadar disagrees with Carter. Clearly Carter has lost his luster.

For you to dismiss Hamas and Fattah's long term goals, (the destruction of Israel)forces you to overlook the Arab's strategy of wearing out the Israeli civilian population through attrition with devestating terrorist attacks, while playing the victim to their European supporters.

Of course it's not brute muscle force that they hope to eventually defeat Israel. I'ts with the hope of getting as many persons as yourself to side with them and pressure foreign governments ect.

You also overlook the (I must admit somewhat admirable) Arabs' ability to place things into the future. Westerns are keen to "want it all and right now", while the Arabs have a very keen patience. THAT is the difference in how strategies are planned.

As for Israel's borders, it has very fixed borders in place with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and with Egypt. UNSCR 242 puts the remaining lines of ceasefire with the negotiating parties of the Palestinians and with Syria (Golan Heights).

Israel does not have a policy to discriminate against Arabs in Israel. That it maintains the sovereign right to define itself as a Jewish state, Israel's right.

To say that it doesn't is to place it outside all the other remaining states of the world that also maintain that right as a sovereign entitey. Denying Israel that right is in fact discriminatory, and is something that non-Jews have done to Jews throughout history, through the practice of relgious, political, racial and social racist policies.

The new anti-Semitism is now defined as other states telling what Israel can and cannot be. Old wine in new sacks. I look at the oppression of Arabs by OTHER ARABS as being far more than Jews have ever done in their history with Arabs.

I would be more concerned with how Sudanese Arabs have basically gotten away with genocide of Christians/animistsand now fellow Muslims (dark Africans), or the Algerian civil war that has seen hundreds of thousands of people butchered, Eygpt's treatment of Sudanese refugees, Saudi Arabia's enslavement of Blacks and other non-Muslims ect ect.

The only reason why Israel is always at the top of the list (like in the supposed "new and improved" UNHRC) is due to politics, pure and simple.

Reading Leftist rags and revisionism of Israeli history by the "new historians" will not bring you any closer to the truth about the conflict. Quite the contrary.

sara without an 'h' said...

Have you ever lived in Gaza or the West Bank? Or southern Lebanon, for that matter? Just curious.

KGS said...

To Sara:

I'm just wondering why you wouldn't include S'derot or Israel in general? Don't you realize the mayhem Palestinian terrorism causes as well as the subsequent operations needed in bringing the terrorist attacks to a halt?

Just curious.