Israel Defense Forces attempt to take out Arafat
March 28, 2001 1:15 PM   Subscribe

Israel Defense Forces attempt to take out Arafat One target in Ramallah, in the West Bank, and four in Gaza were hit, all belonging to Arafat's elite personal bodyguard unit, Force 17.
posted by Neb (30 comments total)
 
Actually, after a bit more reading, it looks like they were trying to get revenge for some Force 17 supported bombings, rather than trying to take out Arafat. Sorry for the inaccurate headline. :)
posted by Neb at 1:19 PM on March 28, 2001


Seeing as how they alerted the Palestinians to evacuate the building first, and all that....
posted by briank at 1:25 PM on March 28, 2001


Right-o Neb. Arafat was safely in Amman at the time.
posted by iceberg273 at 1:34 PM on March 28, 2001


Well that didn't take long. How long has Sharon been in office?
posted by jpoulos at 1:34 PM on March 28, 2001


Why can't we all just get along?

This will go on and on and on and on and on...........

Just like the situations in and around Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo.......

I just hope we don't get over involved as we have in the past.

USAF CCT 92-97
posted by a3matrix at 2:07 PM on March 28, 2001


someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's common practice for the israelis to alert arafat before they bomb his buildings. there was another bombing a few months ago where that happened.

I guess they're making a *point*? striking fear into the palestinian rank-and-file? head-of-state courtesy? fear of really impelling the palestinians to explode, joinign them forever as an enraged people (nullifying any chance of controlling them ever again)? ritual combat?

rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 2:14 PM on March 28, 2001


The Isreali military is apparently doint it's best to encourage Palestinian moderates to become extremists so they can have a proper apocalyptic war with each other.
posted by Loudmax at 2:20 PM on March 28, 2001


"... common practice for the israelis to alert arafat before they bomb ..."

Sharon just wants to make sure that while Israel bombs the Palestinians into the stone age, it does so in a polite and business-like manner. How nice.
posted by y6y6y6 at 2:22 PM on March 28, 2001


I say, good, because only when the "Palestinians" (a political term, really) realize there will be 1-for-1 retaliation will it be possible to negotiate something meaningful.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:51 PM on March 28, 2001


....Or perhaps Israel is planning on the ritual lulling the Palestinians to sleep so that when they want to take out Arafat, they can do so quite effectively...
posted by fooljay at 2:52 PM on March 28, 2001


(a fake political term, that is)
posted by ParisParamus at 2:52 PM on March 28, 2001


A touchy subject, indeed, for posters. Let me adknlwedge in a straight forward fashion that I am very sympathtic toward Israel while at the same time recognizing its faults and shortcomings.
The Israeli papers were very clear that Sharon would do nothing dramatic when the suicide bombers in action lest it get the Arab nations that were meeting at the summit to find a cause to unite, something Israel of course did not want.
the attack took place once the summit ended, a short time later, as was stated or predicted by Israeli papers.
Israel is not interested in "taking out" Arafat--who else is there at this time to sit down with for peace making, if that is to take place.
The U.S. has not been asked now or before to intervene. We station no troops (though we have had some on and off for exercies with Israeli military) on Israeli soil, though we have forces in Kuwait and in Saudi Arabia.
The Israelis and their religion (for those who are believers) is perhaps old and outmoded. They still believe in an eye for an eye. Unlike other more advanced peoples, they seem unwilling to turn the other cheek.
For those readers who are at this point anti-Israel, there could be an endless give and take as to rights and wrongs. This will have to do though because I am trying to shed my perspective on the URL.
posted by Postroad at 3:17 PM on March 28, 2001


"Israel is not interested in "taking out" Arafat--who else is there at this time to sit down with for peace making, if that is to take place."

Postroad, what you write is a recognition that the whole "process" is a sham. That there would be no "peace process" sans Arafat is admitting that there is no peace process. What happens when Arafat dies, be it of old age, disease, or bullet (Israeli or Arab)? There isn't a single democratic, or even quasi-democratic political entity anywhere in the Arab world, and certainly not Chez the Palistineans. The one positive thing I can say about the Bush administration is that they will not pursue the nauseating policies of the Clinton administration.
posted by ParisParamus at 4:13 PM on March 28, 2001


I appreciate your astue remarks, Paris, and should note too that Arafat has been rumored for some time to be ill.
If he were to die, there would be someone, perhaps not a Palestinian, who could take charge were peace meetings to start up again. We are all, alas, dispensable.
As for your hopes for the Bush administration: I am of the belief that their actions are not always going to correspond with their talk. Clinton's attempts at peace making annoyed both camps--Palestinians and Israelis--but then he did manage to get them to sit down more frequently than has been done in the past.
Bush at this point (his spokespeople) are taking a very pro-Israeli stand against Palestinians and their intifada. This is not likely to give them a belief in his even handedness.
posted by Postroad at 5:51 PM on March 28, 2001


"The Israelis and their religion (for those who are believers) is perhaps old and outmoded. They still believe in an eye for an eye. Unlike other more advanced peoples, they seem unwilling to turn the other cheek."

My reaction when I read this, Postroad, was to say "go to hell."

I stopped and shuddered, and wondered what you meant.

You say you recognize Israel's faults and shortcomings, and it seems you consider Judaism to be one of them. Jews are primitive, or at least less advanced, than whom?

Where did you learn that kind of bigoted nonsense?
posted by dfowler at 7:08 PM on March 28, 2001


ParisParamus, please don't tell me you're one of those people who thinks the Palestinians don't really exist.

I understand that this makes it alot easier to commit ethnic cleansing, but it is a pretty base way to justify explusion and murder. It's also pretty lame to get hung up on terms, names and apellations when the real issue is the displacement of a people... I don't think there will be peace there until both sides recognize the basic truths: The Israelis created their state by 'moving' (a nice way to say it) the Palestinians, and the Palestinians will not get theirs by moving the Israelis.
posted by chaz at 8:22 PM on March 28, 2001


"Palestinians" exist as people, but not as a people. The term didn't really even exist before the 1960's, except, perhaps to describe Jews. In any case, there already is a Palestine: its called Jordan; it's just that living in Jordan means living in poverty and under oppression (like everywhere else in the Arab world). But this is all beside the point, which is that Arafat and his cronies have no interest in co-existing with Israel, and that hopefully, the days of feckless passivity to the Arafat are over. Let the Israelis play hard ball with the "Palestinians for a decade or so; let Arafat die, the Palestinians get it, and then some kind of peace might emerge.
posted by ParisParamus at 8:48 PM on March 28, 2001


You are factually incorrect, and spouting direct phrases "there already is a Palestine: it's called Jordan" directly from the propaganda handbook, but you've overstated even their claim (they like to say that the term was invented in 1918) which, even if it were true, really has no bearing on the situation.

Your contention that Palestinians only live in Palestine/Israel because it's worse in Jordan is laughable! Again, the depth of your ignorance means this statement isn't worth debating on its factual relevance, but from the human side: do you really think that people have the desire (or means) to move from the land they've farmed and lived on for anywhere from 2000-200 years, where all their family and friends have lived for decades and decades? The simple fact is that even under repressive conditions, people like to stay in their homes, where what they know, who they love, and just about everythign they hold dear is nearby. Only under the threat of death do people leave these things.

The fact that you have strong opinions gives me hope that you will take the time to really look into the issues and history of the region-- while it is difficult to find 'truth' in History, especially if you have strong feeling for one side, a better understanding of the real factors (both human and institutional) will serve you well in being truly informed and rational about the issue.

Be warned though that the attitudes you currently espouse about Arabs and the Palestinians only seeks to dehumanize the enemy, to wipe them out mentally as a preamble to the real thing. This type of language and revisionism has proved very dangerous in the past, and serves no one in the long run.
posted by chaz at 9:16 PM on March 28, 2001


Wow, I can't believe that as 'civilised' as we have become, we still hold true the outdated notion of nationality. Why is it not possible for humans to stop labelling themselves. Why do we feel the need to belong to a group rather than a collective race?

I live in Northern Ireland - another one of those areas of contention, a place where people of different traditions can't even sort out who is/isn't allowed to walk up a road. I'm just getting so tired of it all, and apathy solves no problems either - but it is sometimes better to be apathetic than be constantly pissed off at the narrow mindedness of the majority.
posted by twistedonion at 2:40 AM on March 29, 2001


twistedonion: why should we even need to "belong to" a collective race, as opposed to simply existing in our own right, as individuals?
posted by frednorman at 2:46 AM on March 29, 2001


the "Palestinians" (a political term, really)... (a fake political term, that is)...

Quite right - they're actually all from Guyana and only went there to stir up toruble.
posted by Mocata at 3:14 AM on March 29, 2001


Did you know Yassar Arafat was born in Cairo? I think Upper West Siders and North West Floridians should be given autonomy as well.
posted by ParisParamus at 4:45 AM on March 29, 2001


Paris:
I'm Greek, I was born in London England. Does that make me any less Greek?
And NW Floridians do have equal political rights, speak the same language and identify nationally with the rest of the American population, if I am not mistaken. Plus the US army does not have a habit of brutal force use against them, no?
The argument about Palestinians not being a "real nation" is so unfounded as to leave me speechless... so let me just repost this link for a reasoned historical perspective...
posted by talos at 4:57 AM on March 29, 2001


Wait. You've just changed the analogy. The closer one is, you, asking to establish a new British territory near Athens. But the bottom line is that the Palestinian leadership, and certainly Arafat, doesn't want Israel to exist at all. The terrorism and rock throwing isn't to secure a Palestinian state; it's to, however Quixotically, do away with Israel.
posted by ParisParamus at 5:11 AM on March 29, 2001


frednorman, it would be so nice if we could live as individuals without a need to belong, unfortunately we are little more than animals with a pack instinct - the majority feel the need for leaders and a sense of belonging. Maybe once we can get over the notion of nationalism we can also get over the need to belong.

Patriotism sucks - it does far more damage than good, but unfortunately it is something that needs to be removed globally, for as long as it exists the world is never going to at peace. imho anyway.
posted by twistedonion at 5:20 AM on March 29, 2001


for Dfowler: I learned this sort of thinking from my rabbi. Show me how "advanced" religions turn the other cheek.
posted by Postroad at 6:06 AM on March 29, 2001


Postroad:

I'm not sure I understand your point. It seems in your first post that you are saying that "advanced" religions turn the other cheek, and that Judaism, being an "eye for an eye" belief (as you put it), is "old and outmoded."

Now you're telling me to "show you how 'advanced' religions turn the other cheek." That's more or less my line, from my reaction to your post.

Maybe there was something in the tone of your first post that I didn't get. It seems to me that you're flip-flopping.

By the way, one question. Your rabbi tells you that Judaism is "old and outmoded" and not one of the "advanced" religions of the world?
posted by dfowler at 8:17 AM on March 29, 2001


Paris, what's more absurd, Palestinians demanding a state in the land they've lived on for over 2,000 years, or Jews from Europe, Africa, Brooklyn, Russia, or the Middle East demanding not only the land they took in 1948, but land they conquered in 1967?

Let's talk about real issues, and not about whether or not the Israel approved leader of the Palestinians was born in Cairo or Gaza.
posted by chaz at 4:40 PM on March 29, 2001


Who approved the "Leaders"? There's no democracy there. As for Israel, it was duly created by the UN and Great Britain. Moreover, the land currently being claimed by the Palestinians was, I believe, pretty empty in 1947, and well before.

In any case, the Web design rip-off discussion is much more interesting than this!
posted by ParisParamus at 4:58 PM on March 29, 2001


Who approved the "Leaders"? There's no democracy there. As for Israel, it was duly created by the UN and Great Britain. Moreover, the land currently being claimed by the Palestinians was, I believe, pretty empty in 1947, and well before.

In any case, the Web design rip-off discussion is much more interesting than this!
posted by ParisParamus at 4:58 PM on March 29, 2001


« Older This copywriter enjoys going to work in the...   |   The Planet of the Apes Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments