Powered by WebAds

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Classic

I'm so glad that the disengagement was so easy, at least Reuters says it was:
Israel shows moving settlements is not so hard
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - In a few long days, Israeli forces have buried any idea that giving up settlements on land Palestinians want for a state would be impossibly traumatic.
I'm so relieved to know that I was just misinterpreting the trauma that I thought I saw in all of the footage and reporting of the disengagement. Thanks to Reuters for clearing it all up.

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello! This is what we were warning all of you idiots who were pro-disengagement was going to happen!

12:51 PM  
Blogger rebba shlita said...

of course it was easy thats because no one is throwing anyone from reuters out their homes.

12:54 PM  
Anonymous Hanan said...

Do you have a link to that story?

1:07 PM  
Blogger orthomom said...

Yes, click on the word "Reuters."

1:10 PM  
Blogger Michael said...

There was a (at least one) columnist in Ha'aretz who, over the weekend, wrote that the relative ease of the disengagement (no lethal violence, accomplished in just over a week etc) dispelled the myth that settlements could never be dismantled.

Seems to me like Reuters is just paraphrasing, saying that it's not impossible or excessively traumatic to the extent that it can't be done. It has been done and is a significant precedent both those on the Left and those in the PA will not ignore as 'peace negotiations' resume.

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's sad that the bar for trauma around the world as been lowered so far that if people don't kill each other then there was no trauma. Because, for the most part, the settler communities left without killing people, they obviously weren't traumatized.

Israel is now truly the light to the nations for demonstrating how people with disagreements can democratically make a decision and then follow through with as much care as possible.

3:36 PM  
Blogger Krum as a bagel said...

Of course, the correct lesson from last week is the exact opposite: if evacuating 8000 people from a land that is arguably not even part of biblical israel was so difficult, how much more so the west bank:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1124331697068&apage=1

3:46 PM  
Blogger AMSHINOVER said...

ugh! now this whole easy process,is fighting in court over what to do with the 36 shuls

4:21 PM  
Anonymous uncle moishy said...

Certainly not easy.

But not as difficult as it might have been.

Not as difficult as some had predicted it would be.

Sharon talked up the threat of civil war. That never happened.

But while it could've been worse, at this point, I agree with Krum (citing the JPost article): Multiplying this by a factor of 25 or so in the west bank, which is far more integrated with pre-67 Israel and which has much stronger religious and historical ties to the Jewish people, is too daunting a task to even contemplate.

But the day may come when contemplating it for communities on the other side of the security fence may not be so daunting. If those settlements can no longer attract more than a relative handful of new residents, as the 4 WB settlements just evacuated stopped doing at some point, and as the Gaza settlements never did, then evacuating them will become a much lesser hurdle.

Moving forward, the challenge for the settler movement is clearly to bolster the settler population on the other side of the fence. This will not be easy if the common perception is that those communities are doomed to relive Gaza's fate. And if the gov't chooses to make it harder for them (e.g., by not hooking up new settlements to the various utilities), then it will be a serious challenge indeed.

6:20 PM  
Anonymous Moishysfanclub said...

Uncle Moishy:
Is this a topic you actually do know something about? You're still a jerk.

6:53 PM  
Blogger 贝贝 said...

The Tax Return Crack-Up<3>
Granted, there are usuallyMicrosoft Office 2010write-ups when presidential contenders make their tax returns available, but the coverage falls far short of the Office 2010
full court press (pardon the pun) that the Clintons have received. What's Microsoft Office 2007different now?Office 2007One possibility is that most upper middle class Democrats, and therefore most Microsoft OfficeOffice 2007 keyeditors and reporters of our nation's big papers as well as Office 2007 downloadtelevision producers, are Obama supporters who think that Hillary should hurry up Office 2007 Professionaland drop out of the race already.Microsoft outlook
Microsoft outlook 2010Whom elite liberals are pulling for really does shape political coverage in ways

3:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home