Abbas’ Resignation
Yahoo reports that Abbas has resigned as prime minister and Arafat is once again in charge of the terrorist support organization known as the PLO. Has the “peace process” failed? Are more attacks on Israel forthcoming?
I think that the “resignation” is a positive turn of events in Israel’s war against terrorism. Despite the pretence of change in the Palestinian leadership, Abbas was never in charge of the PLO. He has been Arafat’s close confederate for many years and is just as responsible for the terrorism the PLO has carried out as Arafat. When Bush made it clear to Arafat that he would refuse to deal with him, Arafat chose his right-hand man as a puppet through whom he expected to prolong his hold on power. My guess is that Abbas was so impressed with the respect he got from Bush and Sharon, that he let his position go to his head and crossed Arafat. In an attempt to gain legitimacy, he supported a truce between Israel and the three main terrorist organizations (Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades) that was doomed from the start. In retaliation, Arafat used his control over the terrorist groups intensify the attacks on Israel, ending the “truce,” and dispelling any pretense that Abbas was in charge of the PLO or able to control the terrorist groups under Arafat’s leadership.
Abbas’ ouster benefits Israel because Bush cannot pressure Israel to negotiate with any more terrorists, at least not until Arafat chooses another collaborator to present as his “successor.” With Abbas out of the picture, Israel can resume its badly-needed hunt for terrorist leaders. If its attacks are to be successful however, they must not be tainted with the same timid uncertainty and moral compromising as America’s attack on Iraq. As Mike pointed out, during the latest failed attack on the head of Hamas, “the attack failed because Israel used a smaller bomb to avoid harming civilians.” Israel may have saved a civilian life or two, but by failing to kill the leader of Hamas, it has virtually guaranteed that dozens of innocent Israeli civilians will die. If he wants to win the war, (and that’s what it is) Sharon must learn to stop apologizing for civilian casualties and defend Israel with the same uncompromising and unrelenting attitude as those who wish to destroy it.
“As Mike pointed out, during the latest failed attack on the head of Hamas, “the attack failed because Israel used a smaller bomb to avoid harming civilians.” Israel may have saved a civilian life or two, but by failing to kill the leader of Hamas, it has virtually guaranteed that dozens of innocent Israeli civilians will die.”
Wow, you are explicitly excusing killing innocents (read: civilians)…Rothbards says it best:
“.if Jones finds that his property is being stolen by Smith, he has the right to repel him and try to catch him; but he has no right to repel him by bombing a building and murdering innocent people or to catch him by spraying machine gun fire into an innocent crowd. If he does this, he is as much (or more of) a criminal aggressor as Smith is.”
You must admit that killing those “one or two civilians” would be murder, though I doubt such “moral thoughts” and “ethical questions” are important when war is on. Oooops, I forgot:
“‘They’ (Palestinians) don’t consider the value of innocent Israelis when ‘they’ bomb a bus.”
Hmmm, do I smell collectivism?
Comment by Mike — 9/6/2003 @ 9:32 am