Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

  1. #1
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

    Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    They've never protected Israel before. Why should anyone believe it would be different now?

    www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=187516

    American proposal to establish a multi-national force in the West Bank could be way to expedite a withdrawal following any peace deal with PA. Israel is concerned about an American proposal to establish a multi-national force in the West Bank as one of the ways to expedite an Israeli withdrawal following any peace deal with the Palestinian Authority. The idea is being promoted by US National Security Advisor James Jones, who served as security coordinator to the West Bank under former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Australia/Israel
    Posts
    1,365

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    I'm not opposed to a multinational force in and of itself, but it has to have a clear and unambiguous mandate to be proactive, not just sit on the border and passively spectate like in Lebanon. Also none of this UN bullshit. Either NATO or a US-led force, preferably with Israeli observers.

  3. #3
    GratefulFred
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    It's a real bad idea. An Arab attacks from the West Bank and the US troops don't pursue them because they are afraid for their lives. Under Obama they may even let the Pals hide rather than inflame the Arab world.

    It's worse than the UN in Lebannon because the UN knows we can at any time attack into Lebannon. Putting the US in their place will be a buffer for the terrorists and we won't be able to do anything unless we want to risk a fall out with the US.

    I don't at all like the idea of being face to face against American soldiers.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Mil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,242

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    How much do they really want to commit to Israel security? If the multi-national force can surround Israel then Israel can easily lower its defensive spending.
    Mil - stands for the countless MILlions of reasons not to work.

  5. #5
    GratefulFred
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mil View Post
    How much do they really want to commit to Israel security? If the multi-national force can surround Israel then Israel can easily lower its defensive spending.
    A terrorist attacks from the west bank and we can't go after them because American troops are in the way.

    Palestinians riot in East Jerusalem and American troops are in the middle and some die.

    Whatever we pay now to maintain our security and it is working is worth so much more than putting Americans in harms way.

  6. #6
    gwb56
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    A very very bad idea. Especially with the Obama administration at the helm. And the idea of blue helmets in Israel is a much worse scenario. Israel must remain free to exorcise their right to self-defense. The rest of the world needs to buzz-off!

    I see not much difference from when the allies bombed Berlin.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

    What has happened in the free world from then? What a shame!

    Oh, and let those that say Israel is guilty of war crimes move to Gaza.
    Last edited by gwb56; 09-22-2010 at 05:38 PM. Reason: Point needed to be made

  7. #7
    THG
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    No way that the world will buzz-off in this matter.



    Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    Jerusalem,13 Elul 5727
    18 September 1967
    TOP SECRET

    To : Mr Adi Yafeh, Political Secretary to the Prime Minister
    From : Legal Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    Subject: Settlement in the Administered Territories

    At your and Mr Raviv’s request, I am enclosing herewith a copy of my memorandum of 14.9.67 on the above subject, which I submitted to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. My conclusion is that civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

    Regards,
    [signed]
    T. Meron

    Copy: Mr A. Shimoni, Director of the Minister’s Office


    Source: Israel State Archives, 153.8/7921/3A. Legal opinion numbered as document 289-291, with unnumbered cover notes.


  8. #8
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    Can someone besides our obligatory Swedish Palestinian verify this? Also what is the legal standing of a memo?

    K thanks.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    Also I wonder how ethnic cleansing against Jews plays in International Law. Please do tell us.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.p.../article/9714/

    Visiting Stockholm and Gothenburg, the two biggest cities, I got a sense that Sweden is now a country where fear and loathing reign. People from both the left and right said they felt dismayed, sad, depressed and shocked over the electoral success of the right-wing Sweden Democrats, which got 5.7 per cent of the vote.

    Since the election on 19 September, thousands of people have joined mourning marches, protests against xenophobia and Facebook campaigns such as ‘Sweden Democrats in Parliament? No thanks’. Newspaper columnists are still, two weeks later, asking: How could this have happened in egalitarian, liberal, solidarity-loving Sweden? What will the rest of the world think? And who the hell are those 300,000 people who voted for the Sweden Democrats anyway?

    The near-singular obsession with this single-issue party – the Sweden Democrats’ issue being that the root of all problems lies with immigrants – is letting the political elites off the hook. Both before and after the election, obsessing over the Sweden Democrats allowed mainstream politicians to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy telling the Swedish people how much the elite is not like them. Politicians have refused to debate with the Sweden Democrats, and on election night the leader of the Left Party even refused, on live TV, to get his make-up done in the same room as the Sweden Democrat leader. At the big Gothenburg Book Fair last weekend, where the who’s who of Sweden’s metropolitan establishment gather to discuss politics and culture and to sip cocktails into the small hours, the rise of the Sweden Democrats was on everyone’s minds and lips.

    But in truth, 19 September was an election with no winners. The Social Democrats, who have been in power for all but 14 of the past 93 years, managed to get just over 30 per cent of the vote. It was the first time they lost two consecutive elections. So with the Social Democrats’ support stagnating, the centre-right alliance securing only a very narrow victory and unable to form a majority government, and the smaller parties doing worse than expected, there are many vital questions all Swedish politicians should be facing up to: Why do people feel disconnected from politics? Why has PR-speak replaced grand, competing, political visions in Sweden, as elsewhere?

    The Social Democrats in particular need to face up to their rapidly growing irrelevance. Once a political colossus and long seen as Sweden’s natural rulers, the party’s support has sunk to an all-time low. The party itself realises it is in the midst of a crisis. Why else would its leader, Mona Sahlin, have set up a crisis group the day after the election? Why else would there be internal rumblings about whether or not Sahlin should resign, as well as fierce disputes about whether or not it was a good idea to enter into a coalition with the Green Party and the Left Party this year? Clearly, the Social Democrats are trying to work out how to win back their lost votes. However, they are underestimating the extent of their crisis. This cannot be fixed with better strategising or by appointing a leader with a different personality, because what we are witnessing here is, essentially, the downfall of labourism in Sweden.

    Amidst all the self-loathing and outrage in post-election Sweden, there have been a few sensible analyses of the Social Democrats’ downfall. An article in the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter asserted that the Social Democrat Party is now just one party amongst many others. Once the democratic world’s most successful political organisation, its epoch of grandeur is now over.

    Dagens Nyheter pointed out that the Social Democrats’ propensity for political and ideological renewal, their choice of strong leaders with radical social visions, and their rootedness in social movements and cooperatives all ended in the 1990s. Since then, an inability to forge new ideas, combined with a withering organisation, have led to steep decline. Kjell Östberg, a history professor, told Dagens Nyheter that the downfall of the Social Democrats can be explained at least in part by the decline of its strong organisational make-up.

    Membership in Social Democrat-related social movements is certainly decreasing year on year in Sweden, meaning that the historical role of the social movements – pressurising the party to renew itself as needed and providing the leadership with new ideas – is no longer relevant. As Östberg said, the current party leadership ‘appears more geared towards recruiting communications strategists’.

    Traditionally, the cradle-to-grave welfare state largely overseen by the Social Democrats also encompassed people’s political lives – from involvement in the labour movement’s children’s organisation Unga Örnar (Young Eagles) and the youth organisation SSU, to membership in the trade union confederation. In other words, the Social Democrats were not just an aloof party. This party was bound up with a political identity, colouring people’s family, community and professional lives.

    Today, the Social Democrats can no longer even pretend to be steered by the people for the people. This is not a party built, and supported, from below, but one run by various strategists and PR experts. This hollowing out represents an historic removal of ‘the social’ (the people) from social democracy.

    They are not alone in this, of course. The conservative party, the New Moderates – who, after this year’s election, are as big as the Social Democrats for the first time ever, gaining 30 per cent of the votes – has hardly got the backing of a sprawling social movement. It also relies on marketing, PR and image management. In 2006, the Moderates rebranded themselves as the New Moderates, got a new logo and added the tagline ‘Sweden’s only workers’ party’. This year’s televised election debate between the seven party leaders from the centre-right alliance and the red-green coalition resembled a business contract bidding rather than an impassioned political fight over who should rule the country. Meanwhile, the Sweden Democrats, shut out from the media spotlight and dismissed as lunatic racists by the metropolitan elites, appeared actually to be listening to people.

    A majority of Swedes still feel duty-bound – and proud – to vote. This year, election participation was up to 82 per cent, compared with 80 per cent in 2006. Yet this does not necessarily translate into political involvement. The election was certainly a heightened drama this year, with two political blocs facing each other for the first time and the spectre of racism haunting Swedes in the form of the Sweden Democrats. All this may have spurred people to go to the polling stations on 19 September. But there was a strong sense that many were voting strategically, against their least favourite party rather than for something. And in the run-up to the election, there were reports of a lack of canvassers as well as a dearth of visitors and volunteers at the traditional huts that the parties set up in squares around the country. This is usually where members of the public get a chance to discuss politics with party representatives.

    But Social Democracy is not simply suffering from a communication problem, which could be fixed by recruiting more volunteers or setting up more electoral huts. Instead it is time to accept what for many is a hard truth: Social Democracy as we’ve known it is no longer relevant. It has lost its political purpose and its support base. Instead of succumbing to the breast-beating of the metropolitan elites, devastated over how Sweden’s image as the world’s most tolerant country has been shattered, Swedes ought to put pressure on politicians to face up to their dearth of ideas and their inability to tap into what kind of future people aspire to.

    Nathalie Rothschild is commissioning editor of spiked.

  11. #11
    THG
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mediocrates View Post
    Can someone besides our obligatory Swedish Palestinian verify this?
    I'm an Israeli citizen working at the Embassy of Israel in Stockholm, Sweden.

  12. #12
    THG
    Guest

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    A senior legal official who secretly warned the government of Israel after the Six Day War of 1967 that it would be illegal to build Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories has said, that he still believes that he was right.

    The declaration by Theodor Meron, the Israeli Foreign Ministry's legal adviser at the time and today one of the world's leading international jurists, is a serious blow to Israel's persistent argument that the settlements do not violate international law.

    The legal opinion, a copy of which has been obtained by The New York Times, was marked "Top Secret" and "Extremely Urgent" and reached the unequivocal conclusion, in the words of its author's summary, "that civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention."

    You can read more about the secret memo in the article "Israel's Tragedy Foretold" written by Gershom Gorenberg. This article should verify the correctness of the secret memo in my previous post.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/op...gorenberg.html

  13. #13
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

    Re: Israel alarmed at yet another multinational force proposal

    I'm familiar with South Jerusalem blog. Gorenberg has a made a career fighting the Jewish population of Yesha. History requires verification and review.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •