Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
@ Sebastien Zorn: Good point, Sebastian.
@ Noah: Noah,There is substantial evidence that this is indeed the view of Gantz, Ashkenazi, and Barak. Dr. Martin Sherman has provided numerous quotations from these individuals over the years that demonstrate that this is their point of view. In addition, they are all “fellows” of an organization called the the “National Institute for Strategic Studies,” affiliated with Tel Aviv University and funded with foreign donations, which recently published a report advocating the abandonment of the settlements in central Judea-Samaria, even without a peace agreement with the PLO, and negotiations with the PLO to achieve the “two state solution” and and a handover of Judea-Samaria to them.
@ Adam Dalgliesh:
I agree. He doesn’t know what he is talking about.
Specifically, I don’t believe the entire population agrees on those key parameters , specifically on distribution of the “Land”.
I know many “Center-Leftists” who voted for B&W or even Ehud Barak or Meretz who while they realize the “Arabs” are not our friends, would still like to give up J&S and force a separation (e.g. Like Gaza).
They would be willing to give up the “Land” just be done with the “Arabs”.
While I can’t say for certain, I imagine like many Generals this is the viewpoint of Gantz.
Ted Belman Said:
Does it have to do with the Trump plan, and if so, would Ganz or Lapid be any less inclined to give away the store? Do you believe that there is any chance that Likud would replace Bibi — from what I read, I understand that he is personally popular within Likud and in the nation, more so than the other candidates, individually — and if so, with whom?
@ Ted Belman: Ted said:
Starts like the lead-in or preview for next weeks TV Series, “Life & Times of the Israeli Prime Minister” (or is there a better title).
I think it is boiling down to
a) a unity government of all Zionist parties without the Hareidim or
b) a Likud government with Liberman.
I think Trump is quietly pushing for the first of the two.
From my point of view, either of these options are OK but both should involve a new social contract with the Hareidim.
One more thing. Bibi must go for a reason you don’t even know about.
Will the cases against Bibi turn into actual indictments in the near future? Do his lawyers have an ace up their sleeves to require further investigation and delay the proceeding?
If he is indicted that could very likely change the dynamics for Likud MKs to accept an of their MKs to be a PM candidate in a unity government
Unity is government will occur or there will be new elections. Ben did a decent explanation. The best I have seen for any American (public or private).
He has a real feel for Israeli politics and US media relationship with Israel.
Side Note The Director of the Presidents Office said, Rivilin is likely to use out of the box mechanisms not to have a third election which are within his power. He said when it was clear one party had 61 seats Rivlin had no choice.
Please remember Rivlin Does NOT LIKE Bibi. So since Blue/White keeps saying we are okay with another Likud MK being Prime Minister in a Unity Government and Telem (Yaalon plus 2 others) who left the Likud because of Bibi who would never relent and sit in a government lead by Bibi, Rivlin may spring a name or two in questioning MKS asking them if they would work with Gideon Saar for example.
I believe this has a much better chance the UTJ or Shas relenting to Lieberman’s demands. Liberman will not relent from his demands so that means UTF & Shas are very unlikely to be the next government.
I happen to agree with Ben.
Ben is yet another thick-headed jerk.
Nothing Leiberman says can be trusted. He is no ‘hawk.” Remember, it was Leiberman who proposed a territorial swap” with the PLO, in line with Obama’s proposalsfor such a “swap” leading to a state based on the pre-67 borders. Leiberman’s proposal would have reduced Israels with at its narrowist point to something like five miles. Fortunately the Arabs rejected it.
Given his 180 political turn from one “camp” to the other one, nothing Leiberman says can be trusted. He has committed his party to support Gantz for Prime Minister, So he will go along with anything Gantz wants. And Gantz wants the PLO-Hamas representatives in the government.
Gantz is not the patriotic general that Leiberman thinks he is. In fact, he is a
moral traitor. I say “moral traitor” because I have no idea what treason is in Israeli law. But he has certainly betrayed his country. Because Israelis and diaspora Jews are so stupid and thick headed, they are all going along with the betrayal or actively supporting it.
The situation reminds me of the novel “The Bridge Over the River Kwai,” by Pierre Boule, where Colonel Nicholson believes he is a patriotic British officer, and his men believe in him, when in fact he is aiding and abetting the Japanese enemy/