I posted on a thread last night...that I am praying that "the old soldier" Sharon, has something up his sleeve, because Fox showed footage of him campaigning in Gaza 3-4 years ago, PROMISING the people there, that their settlements would stay....
NOW, suppose that President Bush came out tomorrow and told the American people that he was bringing all the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq immediately. SOME people would be ecstatic, BUT most of the families of our wounded and dead military would think RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT-it has all been for NOTHING....because he would be acknowledging that the Taliban would be back in power in Afghanistan, and al-Queda would be in power in Iraq..
THAT I think is how these Israelis feel that are being told NOW, that they have to leave GAZA.
But, what if Pres. Bush and Sharon agreed to do this, so that all of the groups, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and al-queda set up shop in GAZA.....JUST CALL AN AIRSTIKE and BOOM! gone....and you haven't blown up Israelis...
THAT would be the ONLY scenario that would make sense to me right now.
What do you think?
I would take back any critisism I've had of this plan if it were to really happen! It's just not rational, otherwise. Giving in to terrorists is so wrong.
It's worse than that. Imagine that President Bush ran for re-election against a candidate who was clearly calling for the troops to come home immediately, and President Bush staked out a clear position (as he did) that they had to stay until the job was done.
Then, a year or two after winning the election, he announced that he was changing his mind.
Moreover, because Israel is a party-based system, he put his change of mind to a two separate referendums, one among the membership of Likud and one among the executive leadership of his party. He pledged to abide by the results, but when he lost by a wide majority he said that he would ignore the vote.
Even more, since he needed cabinet approval for the destruction of the Jewish communities of Gaza, he summarily fired those members of his party in the cabinet who voted against disengagement and broke alliances with other political parties so that he could bring others into his cabinet who would vote with him. In other words, he continuously shuffled the cabinet deck to get the results that he wanted.
I'm not too optimistic, but I love your scenario : )