If we didn't report it it didn't happen
If we didn't report it it didn't happen
When Finance Minister Netanyahu resigned his position, ostensibly over disengagement - though possibly because PM Sharon signaled his intent to undo his work at the Finance Ministry - the New York Times wrote him a lovely good bye note, "Disengaging Mr Netanyahu":
He has certainly done all he can to fan Israelis' fears with fiery speeches warning that Gaza could become a base for radical Islamic terrorists. In resigning from his post, Mr. Netanyahu is making the political calculation that he can cordon off the far-right wing of Likud from Mr. Sharon, and then manage to look prescient if the Gaza pullout is a disaster.
Let's be clear, Netanyahu was probably motivated in some part by self interest. But it's ridiculous to say that if the Gaza pullout woud be a disaster he would "...manage to look prescient." Come on given the Palestinian behavior over the past several years only someone ideologically blinded could not have expected the worst. Anyone who expected the worst was a pragmatist; those who didn't were living in a world where the sky wasn't blue.
Let's just go over what's happened in the past week:
1) The Palestinians destroyed the standing buildings that used to be synagogues.
2) Hamas blew a whole in the security fence and the border between Gaza and Egypt was open to uncontrolled traffic both ways.
3) So many arms came into Gaza that the prices for weaponry and ordnance dropped precipitously.
4) There are indications that Al Qaeda is planning or has set up a base in Gaza.
5) The Egyptian army did nothing to stem the tide of the traffic either way ensuring that the security situation would deterirate.
6) Once again (or more) Abbas said that he'll confront Hamas. (He sounds like Annie. "Tomorrow, Tomorrow, Tomorrow ....")
Were any of these outcomes unforeseeable?
Netanyahu was not engaging in empty scare tactics. He was warning the Israeli public of the high risk Israel was undertaking for uncertain rewards. Yes he's been made to look prescient. But it's better than being made to look blind.
Technorati tags: Israel, terror, Netanyahu, Gaza,New York Times.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.
Posted by David Gerstman at September 16, 2005 01:45 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.israpundit.com/mt-tb.cgi/10557
1
.
BobW
said:
If the real history books record anything about Natanyahu it should be his acceptance of former Citygroup Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer as Governor of the Bank of Israel.
Kol tuv,
BobW
Posted by: BobW on September 16, 2005 02:46 PM
2
.
georg von mecklenburg
said:
We are dealing with pimps and whores who act as governmental officials. Everything they say should be discounted as mere nonsense.
Posted by: georg von mecklenburg on September 17, 2005 02:08 AM
3
.
Miss Mabrouk
said:
And in Egypt our military refuses to be seen as the jailors of the palestinian people, thus the border will for the most part remain soft. Now, what does that mean for security in Gaza - and Sharm El Sheikh?
http://missmabrouk.blogspot.com
Posted by: Miss Mabrouk on September 17, 2005 05:36 AM
If we didn't report it it didn't happen
When Finance Minister Netanyahu resigned his position, ostensibly over disengagement - though possibly because PM Sharon signaled his intent to undo his work at the Finance Ministry - the New York Times wrote him a lovely good bye note, "Disengaging Mr Netanyahu":
Let's be clear, Netanyahu was probably motivated in some part by self interest. But it's ridiculous to say that if the Gaza pullout woud be a disaster he would "...manage to look prescient." Come on given the Palestinian behavior over the past several years only someone ideologically blinded could not have expected the worst. Anyone who expected the worst was a pragmatist; those who didn't were living in a world where the sky wasn't blue.
Let's just go over what's happened in the past week:
1) The Palestinians destroyed the standing buildings that used to be synagogues.
2) Hamas blew a whole in the security fence and the border between Gaza and Egypt was open to uncontrolled traffic both ways.
3) So many arms came into Gaza that the prices for weaponry and ordnance dropped precipitously.
4) There are indications that Al Qaeda is planning or has set up a base in Gaza.
5) The Egyptian army did nothing to stem the tide of the traffic either way ensuring that the security situation would deterirate.
6) Once again (or more) Abbas said that he'll confront Hamas. (He sounds like Annie. "Tomorrow, Tomorrow, Tomorrow ....")
Were any of these outcomes unforeseeable?
Netanyahu was not engaging in empty scare tactics. He was warning the Israeli public of the high risk Israel was undertaking for uncertain rewards. Yes he's been made to look prescient. But it's better than being made to look blind.
Technorati tags: Israel, terror, Netanyahu, Gaza,New York Times.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.
Posted by David Gerstman at September 16, 2005 01:45 PM