On the other foot

[Pitch]

Sharon Orders Bush To Withdraw From Afghanistan

April 5, 2002



Bench Press



EAST JERUSALEM. Concluding his remarks at a Palestinian Chamber of Commerce

dinner, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon surprised the three-member

audience when he announced that Operation Enduring Freedom had run its

course, and therefore the United States, in the name of peace, must withdraw

its troops from Afghanistan.



"Israel recognizes the rights of sovereign states to defend themselves from

terror," Sharon said, "but the World Trade Center atrocity occurred nearly

seven months ago, there have been no further such incidents in the U.S., and

the American incursion into Afghanistan is no longer helpful. Meanwhile, as

a result of America's aggression, Afghani families have had their homes

destroyed and innocent Afghani civilians have lost their lives."



Asked whether the terrorist threat from the Taliban justified a continued

U.S. presence, Sharon responded that this cycle of violence was "unhelpful

to peace in that troubled land. It’s time America recognized that it must

respect national borders and the legitimate aspirations of those with whom

it disagrees."



With spontaneous anti-American demonstrations breaking out in Islamic

capitals, Paris, France, and Berkeley, California, it's clear that world

opinion is confirming the Israelis' counsel to America: The cause of peace

is not being served by chasing down the last few members of the Taliban. In

a presentation on Egypt’s government-sponsored television station,

al-Stabubak, a spokesman for Egyptian President Mubarak appealed to the

American people: “Can you not see that the Taliban has legitimate beefs . .

. while the exorbitant military spending habits of your own Congress reveal

fraudulent pork? The arrogance of your government is astounding. It acts

as though only Arabs engage in suicide attacks.”



Interviewing Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, correspondent Leslie

Stahl asked whether the U.S. effort in Afghanistan had simply deteriorated

into a personal vendetta by George W. Bush against Osama Bin Laden. "I'm a

public servant, not a psychologist," Peres replied, "but my dear friend

George Bush, with whom I've shared many a falafel, is obviously obsessed

with the individual, and this vengeful obsession is now counter-productive

to the peace process. Mr. Bin Laden is a religious man, and used to work in

the American interest against the Soviets – he’s obviously capable of peace.

And, as we all know, he wasn’t even present in the U.S. on September 11. I’

m afraid the ‘terrorist’ label is blinding my dear friend George Bush to the

opportunities for peace in this region."



[In response, a Bush spokesperson issued the brief statement that the

President had indeed enjoyed sharing falafel with his dear friend Shimon

Peres, and that this obviously contradicted the latter’s comment that the

President was blind to peas.]



After interceding in a food fight in the Knesset dining room between Arab

Members, Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer was asked whether he

supported the Prime Minister's ministrations. "Listen," he said, wiping

some hummus from his brow, "I'm an old soldier, and recognize peaceful

people better than most. Despite what you see on the television, the

Afghanis are a peaceful people. So are the more moderate elements of the

Taliban. After all, 'Islam' means 'peace'. America's sending troops

thousands of miles simply to humiliate and inflict misery on these peaceful

people is a reckless military endeavor and, more important, does nothing to

further the cause of peace. Indeed, it is more likely to provoke the

militants. Prime Minister Sharon is correct – if America does not withdraw

immediately, the cycle of violence will continue to spiral out of control."



The Taliban remnant in Afghanistan seems to be paying attention to Sharon.

There has not been a single shot fired against American troops – who

continued their assault on suspected Taliban positions – in the twelve hours

since the Prime Minister’s directive.



But there is far from unanimity on Sharon’s position within Israel. Prime

Minister-wannabe Benjamin Netanyahu issued a counter-statement that Israel

should continue to give America the green light to rout terrorism “by

whatever means necessary.” The reactionary hard-line right-wing former PM

warned that “terror is an evil that knows not negotiation” and urged “my

good friend, President Bush, to stay the course.”



Reached at his ranch in the Negev, Prime Minister Sharon was asked today

whether he stands by his remarks of the previous night. "The situation

speaks for itself. Aside from the incidents on September 11, there has been

no terrorist activity in the U.S. And yet America seems intent on stirring

up the pot in a very dangerous part of the world. Not only are innocent

lives being lost because of America's actions, but what if Pakistan, Iraq,

Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Kuwait, or

Berkeley, California get involved – it’s a powder keg.”



When challenged by what authority he would presume to order the U.S. to do

anything, Sharon said that he answers to "a higher authority."



God?



"Well, Him, too, but I was referring to the Arab 'street', and, boy, are

they meshugge!"



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Thread Not Written By Me*Quoting another source*

[amerlop]

Yes, we all know what a dove Sharon is! (sarcasm)


Well, I think that the US may have made their point in Afghanistan. I know they wanna find Bin Laden, but if the world opionion turns against them about their current occupation, you will see even more terrorist groups and Taliban sympathizers

[Pitch]

The point is the occupation of Afghanistan by the United States,
is as wrong (or right) as the Isreali occupation of supposedly
'claimed' Palestinian territory. Our great leader (*cough) George
Dubya has no right to tell Isreal to withdraw from the territory
if the US further remains in Afghanistan.

[Hero]

indeed, but I personally think Israel has just cause in their recent actions.

[rezo]

and what of their practice?

The point is the occupation of Afghanistan by the United States,
is as wrong (or right) as the Isreali occupation of supposedly
'claimed' Palestinian territory. Our great leader (*cough) George
Dubya has no right to tell Isreal to withdraw from the territory
if the US further remains in Afghanistan.

then, you think both should exit?

[Pitch]

Originally posted by rezo
and what of their practice?




then, you think both should exit?

I made no such remark.
Personally, I think to accomplish anything,
not matter the illegallity of the occupation,
it is needed. I think both Armies, those of the
United States and Isreal should advance upon
their targets until terrorism and war ended.

[rezo]

so you're on the other half then.

You're saying that the US and israel should build armies
and use them against their enemies while accepting the
loss of innocent people in the territory they're attacking
as acceptable terms towards reaching their goal?

the practicing of war and terrorism to end war and terrorism.


As long as the practice of war is the way it is, don't
expect it to solve anything. Or are you content with
simply shifting the problems to other people?

[Hero]

Here's a hypothetical:

how many failed peace talks must be made, how much 'understanding' and appeasement must be met before it's at the limit? Is it true that all situations, under all circumstances, can be diffused through non-forceful means? Even if such a stance is adopted, what would the people who adopt it do in reaction if their ideology failed?

[Pitch]

so you're on the other half then.

You're saying that the US and israel should build armies
and use them against their enemies while accepting the
loss of innocent people in the territory they're attacking
as acceptable terms towards reaching their goal?

Exactly. I think Israel and the United States should send armies
and special agents to take down enemies even if it means the accidental loss if innocent civlians.

the practicing of war and terrorism to end war and terrorism.

How so?

[rezo]

Hero, if your ideologies fail, then you are a failure.

If you decide to go against them to get your goal, that
would be advocating something wrong.So you would lose
any justification, and would be acting for self-interests.

It would mean the side of the form idealists, and the
side they're against would both be wrong, and I suppose
the outcome wouldn't really matter if only self-interests
were served.

damn. am certain that didn't come out right. . .anyways. . .



War can be handled properly. There are interested parties
in a war. Those interested parties are allowed to die.
If a soldier agrees to a conflict, and another soldier
agrees to the same, then the combat is consentual, and
there is nothing wrong with either dying. So, if we are
using force to reach our goals, it should only be against
the interested parties that are also participating. This
does not excuse the killing of civilians because you don't
want to put yourself at risk.

you are at war. you are the one who should
be at risk.

but the common practice of war is cowardly. All of the
interested parties are doing things wrong to protect their
own hides, and so any ideal that supports a war is usually
lost once the war is in practice.

They wanted to stop the death of the jews in concentration camps
yes? Or that is one of the successes of WW2. . .an eventual one.
but how many civilians were killed by the allies? I'd love to
see a tally for both sides. Hard to be the "good guys" when
you're accepting what the "bad guys" are accepting. In a war between
two screw ups that can't be stopped, I'd be more interested in attempting to end it somehow(not like I am doing that now. shaking my fist on a message board isn't anything) and failing, and then cleaning up the eventual mess than to simply decide that I should
give up on the very ideals that are responsible for my action(ending
terrorism in their country) in order to get my goal. All that does is shift the problem to a new location. You can't get support from people who are against you when your actions are so contradictory.