Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Mutiny fear in Israeli army as religious Zionists gain influence


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
213 replies to this topic

#211 taxi

taxi

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,471 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 06

Posted 18 July 2012 - 07:05 PM

Israel withdrew from Sinai due to immense international pressure, especially from US and the USSR. Furthermore, Israel did not originally undergo that campaign alone and were aided by both the British and the French (which both could very much do without being associated as having helped Israel secure Sinai).

When Israel invaded Sinai again in the late 60's and 70's, Egypt offered peace, recognition of Israel and the permission of Israeli ships through Suez and Israel refused to accept this. It was only after Egypt launched a major military campaign against Israel in Sinai in 1973 that Israel eventually conceded to a withdrawal and agreement.

This also ties into the Golan Heights. There is a reason why the Assad family has been left in power for decades in Syria and it is directly related to Golan Heights, for which the Assad family was very handsomely rewarded both politically and financially.

As for Gaza (which the 'disengagement plan' was a Sharon devised policy), perhaps we might take heed to the words of top Sharon aide Dov Weisglass on the matter where he stated that the policy would prevent the possibility of a Palestinian state for years to come. Israel also maintains control over Gaza's airspace, borders, power, infrastructure and import/export...but in the 'name of peace' of course.



Israel does not maintain control over Gaza's borders. Egypt is in full control of Gaza's border with Egypt. The restriction on Gaza came only after Hamas was elected into power.

As for Egypt, everything you've written is a total fabrication. The Egyptian attack in 1973 was easily repelled by the Israelis. The Israelis then began to cross the Suez as part of their counter-attack. Israel had the entire Egyptian third army trapped until the USA put massive diplomatic pressure on the Israelis to withdraw.. The piece agreement had absolutely nothing to do with:

Egypt launched a major military campaign against Israel in Sinai in 1973 that Israel eventually conceded to a withdrawal and agreement.


Furthermore, the Sinai wasn't returned until several years later. Israel didn't reject the "Sadat Initiative". It was part of the process that led to the eventual negotiations that led to the peace treaty. In fact, Israel supported the initiatiave, and most speculate it was Jimmy Carter who slowed things down in order to secure the USA's position with Egypt in the cold war. Sadat had been invited by the Israelis to speak before the Knesset. Even then things weren't really slowed down at all. Sadat spoke in December of 1977 and gave his proposal for peace. By 1978 the Camp David Accords were signed, and by March of 1979 a full peace treaty had been reached.

The Egyptian leader who signed the deal was assassinated by his own people. The peace deal which had come out of the Camp David Accords, not pressure by Egypt to "concede". THe only thing Israel got in return from giving up huge amounts of land was a peace treaty. Egypt got billions of dollars a year.

#212 dank.

dank.

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,854 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 06

Posted 18 July 2012 - 09:21 PM


Posted Image


#213 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,831 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 18 July 2012 - 10:24 PM

Israel does not maintain control over Gaza's borders. Egypt is in full control of Gaza's border with Egypt. The restriction on Gaza came only after Hamas was elected into power.

As for Egypt, everything you've written is a total fabrication. The Egyptian attack in 1973 was easily repelled by the Israelis. The Israelis then began to cross the Suez as part of their counter-attack. Israel had the entire Egyptian third army trapped until the USA put massive diplomatic pressure on the Israelis to withdraw..


Israel does not maintain control over Gaza's borders? Israel maintains full control of 51Km of Gaza's 62Km borders. Egypt did not maintain any control over its border with Gaza's until 2005 after reaching an agreement with Israel on this premise in light of their 'disengagement plan'. It had nothing to do with Hamas, which was elected into power two years after later 2007.

And I am absolutely amazed at how people so casually and willfully deny historical facts, and brush them off as 'fabrications' to maintain a certain perspective or position. Then again, this is probably because most people get their information sourced from history textbooks that they 'teach' in school as well as their 'co-educators' (i.e. the mainstream media).

Egypt caught Israel completely off-guard with their strategy in 1973 and this Egyptian campaign was and still is regarded as the 'greatest military victory of Arabs' against Israel in perhaps decades. It created significant turmoil within the Israeli government and military. It was not until the USA began flying in weapons and supplies to Israel under Operation Nickel Grass that they began to make some successful counter-push against Egypt.

The fact is that Israel held the false presumption that any Arab advance would be easily and swiftly repelled and defeated but instead found themselves with their backs to the wall. Had it not been for the US intervention to supply Israel with weaponry and supplies, Israel could very well have suffered a devastating defeat as opposed to simply losing Sinai and may very well have used nuclear/atomic weapons as a desperation measure to go out with a bang (which is what they were threatening to do).

The concession of Sinai remains to be seen in Israel as a complete failure on their part and it was the Egyptian Operation Badr that forced Israel into realizing that negotiations were now a requirement.

Furthermore, the Sinai wasn't returned until several years later. Israel didn't reject the "Sadat Initiative". It was part of the process that led to the eventual negotiations that led to the peace treaty. In fact, Israel supported the initiatiave, and most speculate it was Jimmy Carter who slowed things down in order to secure the USA's position with Egypt in the cold war. Sadat had been invited by the Israelis to speak before the Knesset. Even then things weren't really slowed down at all. Sadat spoke in December of 1977 and gave his proposal for peace. By 1978 the Camp David Accords were signed, and by March of 1979 a full peace treaty had been reached.

The Egyptian leader who signed the deal was assassinated by his own people. The peace deal which had come out of the Camp David Accords, not pressure by Egypt to "concede". THe only thing Israel got in return from giving up huge amounts of land was a peace treaty. Egypt got billions of dollars a year.


Sadat's peace initiative began in 1971 so the speech you mention came 6 years after the beginning. The reason it took 6 years is simply due to the fact that Israel's condition for peace was maintaining its control over Sinai. The reason Israel conceded Sinai was because they realized this was a necessity after the 1973 military campaign. Kissinger tried his best to delay any ceasefire agreements because the belief was that Israel would be victorious with a matter of days.

Of course the logical question would be why Israel would ever consider giving up Sinai when they staunchly referred to it as 'part of Israel' and especially considering the Israeli motto that 'Israel is not in the business of conceding territory' (which is what led to Operation Badr in the first place). If Israel had any glimmer of maintaining possession of Sinai they never would have conceded it (and rest assured they never had any plans of conceding it permanently).

Egypt received billions of $ per year to remain 'friendly' with Israel.

And I love how you refer to Israel as giving-up 'huge amounts of land' as if they are the poor, oppressed victims who have been subjugated for centuries when in fact every inch of land they currently rest on has been usurped with atrocious aggression and oppression.

And last I checked, however many 'billions of $' Egypt is receiving, it pales in comparison to what the Zionists receive for the simple gesture of giving back someone else's land.

Sadat was assassinated for numerous reasons but for a second there I thought you were referring to Yitzhak Rabin.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

11477626583_2368927097.jpg     49997_b70e6ae14ce1652fa11bd1dda624afd1.g   7649118508_ce3e8a74a1_o.jpg

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#214 taxi

taxi

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,471 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 06

Posted 19 July 2012 - 12:13 AM

Israel does not maintain control over Gaza's borders? Israel maintains full control of 51Km of Gaza's 62Km borders. Egypt did not maintain any control over its border with Gaza's until 2005 after reaching an agreement with Israel on this premise in light of their 'disengagement plan'. It had nothing to do with Hamas, which was elected into power two years after later 2007.

And I am absolutely amazed at how people so casually and willfully deny historical facts, and brush them off as 'fabrications' to maintain a certain perspective or position. Then again, this is probably because most people get their information sourced from history textbooks that they 'teach' in school as well as their 'co-educators' (i.e. the mainstream media).

Egypt caught Israel completely off-guard with their strategy in 1973 and this Egyptian campaign was and still is regarded as the 'greatest military victory of Arabs' against Israel in perhaps decades. It created significant turmoil within the Israeli government and military. It was not until the USA began flying in weapons and supplies to Israel under Operation Nickel Grass that they began to make some successful counter-push against Egypt.

The fact is that Israel held the false presumption that any Arab advance would be easily and swiftly repelled and defeated but instead found themselves with their backs to the wall. Had it not been for the US intervention to supply Israel with weaponry and supplies, Israel could very well have suffered a devastating defeat as opposed to simply losing Sinai and may very well have used nuclear/atomic weapons as a desperation measure to go out with a bang (which is what they were threatening to do).

The concession of Sinai remains to be seen in Israel as a complete failure on their part and it was the Egyptian Operation Badr that forced Israel into realizing that negotiations were now a requirement.



Sadat's peace initiative began in 1971 so the speech you mention came 6 years after the beginning. The reason it took 6 years is simply due to the fact that Israel's condition for peace was maintaining its control over Sinai. The reason Israel conceded Sinai was because they realized this was a necessity after the 1973 military campaign. Kissinger tried his best to delay any ceasefire agreements because the belief was that Israel would be victorious with a matter of days.

Of course the logical question would be why Israel would ever consider giving up Sinai when they staunchly referred to it as 'part of Israel' and especially considering the Israeli motto that 'Israel is not in the business of conceding territory' (which is what led to Operation Badr in the first place). If Israel had any glimmer of maintaining possession of Sinai they never would have conceded it (and rest assured they never had any plans of conceding it permanently).

Egypt received billions of $ per year to remain 'friendly' with Israel.

And I love how you refer to Israel as giving-up 'huge amounts of land' as if they are the poor, oppressed victims who have been subjugated for centuries when in fact every inch of land they currently rest on has been usurped with atrocious aggression and oppression.

And last I checked, however many 'billions of $' Egypt is receiving, it pales in comparison to what the Zionists receive for the simple gesture of giving back someone else's land.

Sadat was assassinated for numerous reasons but for a second there I thought you were referring to Yitzhak Rabin.


You do realize that 2005 was eight years ago. So you agree. For over eight years and since Israeli disengagement from Gaza, Israel has no had control over Gaza's border with Egypt. And here's a little fact for you, Israel will always control the majority of Gaza's borders, because those borders just happen to be actually with Israel. This is all a bit of a red herring anyways. This was in response to the argument that Israel is trying to establish Eretz Israel, which includes the Gaza Strip. Regardless of who controls the Gaza Strips borders, there are no Jews in Gaza. If Israel was trying to make Gaza part of Israel, why would they withdraw all the Jews?

Your argument also contradicts itself. If Sadat was trying to push peace since 1971, then why did he make one of the greatest military strike ever in 1973? Seems a bit odd that if Israel was the constant aggressor, then Egypt would be the one joining forces with Israel's neighbours and attacking it. The truth is Sadat made an offer for peace, but it was not comprehensive and permanent. It essentially amounted to a ceasefire in exchange for Israel giving up a strategic position. Sadat meanwhile, was stocking up huge forces, which was why he was succesful in the intial days of the Yom Kippur war. If he was ready for peace, how did he manage to rebuild his forces for war again so quickly? The fact is that in 1971, Sadat did not include formal recognition of Israel in his proposal, which was what he Israelis were looking for....Not the best deal for Israel. They give up every strategic position they'd acquired in exchange for....not being recognized.

Here is the abstract to a paper written on the subject:

http://www.jstor.org...=21100924900641

You'll notice it specifically states that Sadat was unwilling to compromise in any way on his position in 1971. It was not until after 1973 that he offered Israel full recognition. Had he offered that earlier he would have been expelled from the Arab league, which he was as soon as he did.

I agree with your point that the 1973 war did humble the Israelis and force them to reconsider their position, but it had the same effect on the Egyptians. Both countries could see after 1973 that continual war was getting them nowhere and both peoples were there to stay. Israel gave up huge amounts of land and Egypt became the first arab country to offer Israel recognition. It was a mutual attitude shift.

I'm not making the argument that the Israelis acted perfectly, but you seem to be under the impression that they are always in the wrong. This attitude is a major obstacle to peace. Basically your argument is that Israel is in the wrong from the get go, so any attrocity commited against them is excusable and act they make, even if in self defence, cannot be excused. Hardly productive.




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.