Can someone please explain to me why Israel needs to keep the Sheba Farms. Is it in a strategic location like the Golan Heights?
Home | 
Can someone please explain to me why Israel needs to keep the Sheba Farms. Is it in a strategic location like the Golan Heights?
"It is cheap to attack Israel. I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves." - Geert Wilders
It has been Syrian from 1923 until 1967 without any doubt. Piles of documents proof this. Only ever since sweaty pig Nasrallah entered the scene did Lebanon (read: Hezbollah) start claiming this 25 square kilometers hillside of the Golan Heights, and of course, nutheads like Dhimmy Carter and a whole bunch of Abu's, Ahmed's and Mohammed's went for it as well.Originally Posted by Yala
The handful of Druze living there prefer to remain part of Israel, not keen at all to be thrown back to Syria, let alone to Mr. piggy's Shia terrorists.
Google Sheeba Farms and you find tons of references, and yes, also the false claims without proof.
It is a part of the Golan, technically.
It's strategic significance, though, is not in its strategic location, but in the question of ownership and its implications. If we "give back" to Lebanon land that isn't, and has never been, Lebanese, who is to say that they (and their other neighbors, won't proceed to lay equally baseless claims on other lands within Israel?
“This is a reality but I won’t deal with it in terms of recognizing or admitting it.â€
Khaled Mashaal, Hamas leader
Exactly.
Piggy Nasrallah in one interview already mentioned that he has his eyes on the deserted Shia villages in the North of Israel proper.
Recent interview with Naseralla and Seniora suggest that the "Shaba Farms" are infact a code word for the whole of Golan Hights. What we are dealing here right now, is a Salami tactic to win back politicaly territories they lost due to thier own agression.
The question the West has to consider is whether to reward agression or not.
Because of precedent. Countries don't simply 'get' territory just because they like to scream about it.
Oh really? Then what do you call what happened in Gaza?
"It is cheap to attack Israel. I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves." - Geert Wilders
Right - and who were the ones that screamed about it? Some hotheads in orange, "honestly copied" from Ukrainian protesters who in turn "honestly copied" it from the Dutch, citizens, sporters and sports fans alike. How original. It even put the Dutch Embassy in a bad position when some extreme lefties complained to the Embassy that they were "taking sides" in an internal Israeli affair when they flew the Dutch flag with an orange banner on the Dutch Queen's birthday. The nuts didn't know that orange happens to be the color of the Dutch Royal family, the House of Orange (got it?). Anyway, I am digressing - the thread is about Screaming about Gaza....no, sorry, it was about the Sheeba Farms
Ummm ok and I wasn't even against disengagment from Gaza. In hindsight it might have been a mistake, maybe not if we look at the big picture. I also would've been satisfied if the Israeli gov't retaliated against qassams launched from Gaza as they promised they would. The gov't also left and is leaving the Israeli towns surrounding Gaza in very dangerous, vulnerable positions and they treated/treat the Gaza evacuees like garbage as if they didn't encourage them to move there in the first place.Right - and who were the ones that screamed about it? Some hotheads in orange, "honestly copied" from Ukrainian protesters who in turn "honestly copied" it from the Dutch, citizens, sporters and sports fans alike. How original. It even put the Dutch Embassy in a bad position when some extreme lefties complained to the Embassy that they were "taking sides" in an internal Israeli affair when they flew the Dutch flag with an orange banner on the Dutch Queen's birthday. The nuts didn't know that orange happens to be the color of the Dutch Royal family, the House of Orange (got it?). Anyway, I am digressing - the thread is about Screaming about Gaza....no, sorry, it was about the Sheeba Farms
But anyway, I wasn't stating my opinion of the Gaza withdrawal only responding to Medio's post saying we shouldn't evacuate the Sheba b/c it would set a precedent. I think we are way beyond logic and setting precedents. Too many Israelis bought into the "big lie" and they are ready to set precedents all over the place by giving up most of Israel to terrorists. I guess some have selective memories and they "forgot" that they got attacked many times before 1967, before "occupation."
"It is cheap to attack Israel. I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves." - Geert Wilders
Your point is what?
You said we shouldn't give back Sheba b/c it woud set a precedent and that "countries don't simply 'get' territory just because they like to scream about it." Well what do you call giving back Gaza just b/c they "screamed about it" in return for no peace treaty and nothing? Israel already set a precedent, that if the Palestinians, Hezbollah, whoever screams enough and commits enough terrorist acts they will get what they want.
"It is cheap to attack Israel. I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves." - Geert Wilders
The expullsion of Jewish inhabbitors of Gaza strip was both racist and stupid. No argue about that. It'd be smart not to repeat it again.
The precedent have been done by Rabin in 1976 pull out of the eastern bank of the Suez Canal. Maybe even before, by Ben-Gurion in 1957 or even before in 1949 when Israel caved infront of threats of Britain (Sinai 1949, who was certain Israel is becoming a communist state) or the USA and USSR (Sinai 1957), and failed to continue the war so to liberate the rest of Jerusalem and Hebron.
Well, I agree with that to an extent, but I think Ariel Sharon gave up Gaza with no intentions of giving up the WB. I think the "convergence plan" was all Olmert.
Who knows there may be such a division between Hamas and Fatah that they may not be able to reconcile. Gaza may become Hamasstan. We need to look at the bigger picture and focus on that, not on giving more land to terrorists whose only will in life is to kill Jews. Let's be honest, does anyone think the Palestinians can run their own state? Does anyone think they can have a state in 2 seperate locations with Israel in the middle? That was the dumbest idea ever.
Exactly what I was trying to explain to Medio. Precedents have been set for decades that if you try to mess with Israel they will kill a few of you but eventually give you whatever you want.The precedent have been done by Rabin in 1976 pull out of the eastern bank of the Suez Canal. Maybe even before, by Ben-Gurion in 1957 or even before in 1949 when Israel caved infront of threats of Britain (Sinai 1949, who was certain Israel is becoming a communist state) or the USA and USSR (Sinai 1957), and failed to continue the war so to liberate the rest of Jerusalem and Hebron.
"It is cheap to attack Israel. I am certainly not going to make a cheap attack on Israel by howling in the woods with the rest of the wolves." - Geert Wilders
No that's not it at all. "Land" is not fungible. My backyard is not the same thing as your backyard. Gaza specifically was a strategic political gambit. In order to give back Shebaa Farms or Golan or E Jerusalem or any other place the Arabs have decided is the 17th most holy place in their world-system Israel would need to assert some strategic upside to doing so. Just having the Palestinians squawk their human interest stories like so many college Freshman and NPR reporters is just nonsense. A precident is something through which you assert that strategic advantage. It has less than zero to do with idiotic notions of what you or I did yesterday.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks