Powell Demands Abbas Stop Terrorists

[drdon326]

- Faced with a sudden setback to Middle East peace prospects, Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) insisted Friday that new Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas bring under control terror groups that are killing Israelis.

"He's got to get those terrorists under control," Powell said after six Israelis were killed in a bombing and shooting attack at a Gaza crossing. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) responded by cutting all contact with Abbas.


"I hope that's just a temporary breach," Powell said in an interview with Michael Reagan on the Radio America Network.


The terrorists are not going to destroy Israel. "It's not going to accomplish anything. It hasn't accomplished anything," Powell said.


Among the three groups that claimed responsibility for the attack was the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which has ties to Abbas' ruling Fatah (news - web sites) movement.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050115/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_israel_palestinians

================================================================

suuuuuure......any day now.

[MSgt213]

1. Maybe Abbas should invade Israel.

[King Mongo]

4. Occupation for security

Possible. Some Israelis seem to believe that an occupation is the only way to gain security. So, in order to gain security, Palestinians must occupy Israel.

[Chipper Chat]

2. Hey - y'think countries are tired of the USA trying to boss them around?

Y'think?

[bemildred]

3. Maybe Mr Powell could loan Mr Abbas our troops

to fight the "terrorists" with,
as soon as we manage to stop the "terrorists" in Iraq.

But until the US military manages the feat, a sort of
feasibility demonstration, it seems a bit fatuous to demand
that the much less well equipped Mr Abbas do what the mighty
US and Israeli militaries have not been able to do.

[eyl]

5. In the past

the Palestinian security forces have proved quite effective blocking terrorists; their limiting factor has always been political will, not capability.

[King Mongo]

6. before

That was before 2000, when they were allowed to carry guns. It's quite entertaining how Sharon prevents and then blames while expanding.

[bemildred]

7. Bullshit. nt

[Violet_Crumble]

8. It was complete bullshit...

Boy. Am I just being overly sensitive to bullshit, or is there more of it than usual in some of the threads I've perused today?

Violet...

[bemildred]

9. Seemed to be a lot of "faith based" stuff today.

[QueerJustice]

10. sometimes when I read a post and I find...

that I do not agree with that content...(I do agree with Eyl BTW.)..

I dont attack the argument by saying that its Bulls--t

[bemildred]

12. He makes no argument.

I was rather hoping to provoke an actual argument or even better
some sort of evidence, but no such luck, all we get is baseless
opinion presented as though it were fact.

[King Mongo]

13. google

Do a google. You'll read news clippings about Palestinian security forces fighting against the Hamas. That all happened, of course, prior to 2000 when the Palestinian security forces were allowed to carry guns.

Of course, there were situations where Palestinians wanted by Israel were protected by the Palestinian Security Forces and there were situations where individual Palestinian Security Forces used violence against Israel. Yet, you must recognize that Palestine is occupied by Israel, Israel is grabbing land from Palestinians and thus Palestinians have the right to fight against Israel as well as fighting against Palestinian crime. It is simply wrong for Palestinians to help Israel unless Israel ends the unnecessary occupation and recognizes the Palestinian citizenship of the illegal settlers.

[bemildred]

14. True, I'm aware that the Palestinians fight among themselves,

so to speak, from time to time. But the issue would be to "stop
the terrorists" from attacking Israel 100% when the "terrorists" don't
want to be stopped, with the means available to the PNA police/militias.
That would approximate the task that the IDF and the US military have
set themselves respectively and failed at, and what is demanded of Mr
Abbas and his minions now.

The issue you bring up, that the IDF demands they do it while unarmed
or badly armed is of course an important one too. And, it does tie into
the issue I raised, that the IDF and US military are much better equipped
and funded than the PNA forces, and yet they have failed to accomplish
the task. Hence, that was the crux of why it is a fatuous demand to
make. Makes one think of Catch-22 somehow.

[eyl]

15. You're comparing two different things

The PA forces don't need all the capabilities of the IDF to stop terrorism.

Terrorism is a phenomenon which straddles the line between crime and warfare, and the responses to it threfore straddle law enforcement and warfare. Since Israel removed itself from the Palestinian cities during Oslo, it no longer has control of the ground - most importantly, its forces can't move freely inside cities without starting a firefight, and therefore a large amount of force is required. PA forces, OTOH, function within their society, and therefore don't have that problem - they can use techniques closer to law enforcement (especially since the various factions will be relatively reluctant to oppose them with live fire). In addition, they have access to better intelligence than the IDF, again allowing them to function more precisely, and therefore requiring less force.

[bemildred]

16. More baseless opinion presented as though it were fact.

What is called "terrorism" is a tactic of warfare, neither more nor
less. It has been common, I repeat common, in insurrections against
occupying powers for at least two hundred years, and is to be expected
in all such cases. All this other stuff is babble, like it really
matters to the dead how exactly they were blown up.

If you really want an end to the killing, then make a political
settlement with whatever legitimate leadership of the Palestinians
you can find to negotiate with. Otherwise, you are just blowing smoke
and whining about the bad air.

[eyl]

17. Terrorism is not a tactic of warfare alone

or did the US government call in an airstrike on the Unabomber when I wasn't looking?

It's a tactic used by non-state actors, and whether it's responded to as a crime or an act of war is dependent on several factors, most notably its extent and if it has a safe territory to operate from. If you change those acting against it, you can change the methods needed as well, as in this case (I notice you didn't counter my claim that the PA don't need as much military muscle as Israel to fight terrorism; if that's so, what matter if it technically classified as "war" or "crime"?)

[bemildred]

18. Sigh.

I did not say is was a tactic of warfare alone, nor did I mean that.

Although, you will find that in most cases persons that resort to it do
consider that they are at war, whether they happen to be "state actors"
or not, e.g. Tim McVey; and war is conducted by non-state actors all
the time, again I refer to Iraq and the Palestinians. The Unabomber
was certifiable and what occurred with him is indicative of nothing
in general.

Generally this tactic is called "terrorism" when the agency applying
the label wishes to consider it a crime rather an act of war; and that
is usually aimed at de-legitimizing resistance against them, treating
the perpetrators as criminals rather than soldiers, again witness
Iraq and the Palestinians, and it's almost de rigeur in these colonial
wars these days to use the term.

But it is still objectively horseshit, a propaganda term.

I did not counter your claim that "the PA don't need as much military
muscle as Israel to fight terrorism" because I don't disagree with it.
I see no point if trying to make the PNA a military match for Israel,
I am more in favor of de-militarizing Israel and the PNA both and working
out a political settlement, as I said before.

[bemildred]

19. Explain to me:

What magic capability is it that a poorly armed Palestinian force has
to "stop terrorism" that a well-armed IDF or US military force does not?
Is there a special Palestinian "able to stop terrorism" gene?

The only way to "stop terrorism" is to construct a Palestinian government
with sufficient legitimacy to demand the allegiance of the vast majority
of the Palestinian people and the wherewithal to enforce it's will on
those few holdouts that might persist in resistance. If you aim for
anything less than that, or put roadblocks in the way of bringing that
about, then you are blowing smoke and whining about the bad air.

[pelsar]

20. bemildred....

yes that is the goal, and in the long term only that will work.....

[bemildred]

21. Yes. Thank you. nt

[Matilda]

11. That's a very good point!

Pot calling kettle black.

[number6]

22. Good one

"Maybe Mr Powell could loan Mr Abbas our troops

to fight the "terrorists" with,
as soon as we manage to stop the "terrorists" in Iraq.

But until the US military manages the feat, ...."

if we could just capture Saddam er ah,
knock of Usay and Kusay er ah, turn over sovereignty,
um ah .., hold elections, everything would just be all-rat ..