Posted on 06/06/2004 10:22:24 PM PDT by Piranha
US Secretary of State Colin Powell warned Sunday against instituting a Palestinian state that is smaller and weaker than envisaged by the Road Map peace process.
Speaking to CNN, Powell said a unified Palestinian state should be created on the West Bank with connections to the Gaza Strip, rather than 'bantustans' - apartheid-like cordoned-off areas that were created in pre-1990 South Africa.
"The West Bank should not be sliced off. This would be unacceptable," he said.
As if Israel didn't have enough trouble in the world with specious comparisons to South Africa.
Man, this guy annoys me!
The Palis deserve nothing more than to meet their maker.
At least the guy was aptly named. He's a genuine pain in the rectum.
I believe that he is kept around because he has direct lines of communication with the Euroweenines, due to his sympathies with their views. His loss might mean we wouldn't communicate so well with them. Frankly Scarlet, at this point I don't give a damn.
Powell should have been jetesoned a long time ago. His blame Israel first on a whim modus operandi stinks.
I don't care what Colon Bowell thinks and I don't Israelis do either.
I don't care what Colon Bowell thinks and I don't think Israelis do either.
Of course. He is Abu Powell.
I sure hope President Bush can find a way to dump him. He's really very weak.
I wouldn't be surprised if Prime Minister Sharon's strong (some would say obsessive) push to win approval of his disengagement plan turns out to be an attempt to win over Colin Powell to Israel's side.
I still blame Powell for a good part of President Bush's political troubles. If you remember, Powell hadn't insisted on pegging the Iraq War on Saddam's immediate ability to deploy weapons of mass destruction (as he spelled out in his infamous speech to the UN Security Council). If Powell hadn't done this, we would be in a much stronger position internally in the US as well as with other countries around the world.
When Powell resigns, Bush loyalists will breathe a sigh of relief as they are doing with Tenet, and wonder why in the world it took so long.
In the third paragraph of the previous post, the word "hadn't" should not be there. Please ignore it.
i think your reaction is a bit quick and misdirected. he was comparing the layout of the areas to what happened in south africa. you need a workable solution for both sides, really, or why bother with the whole thing? if we are to do this, the palis need a single area, not broken up islands. do you want them constantly passing through israel? think about it. having islands of palestine in israel isnt a solution for either side.
If you remember, Powell hadn't insisted on pegging the Iraq War on Saddam's immediate
ability to deploy weapons of mass destruction (as he spelled out in his infamous speech to the UN Security Council).
Saddam's immediate
ability to deploy weapons of mass destruction (
Powell needs to go just as urgently as Tenet.
Powell is gone after the election.
I agree with you.
Powell is calling for contiguity between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. That means that Israel has to be broken into two, or the two areas are separated by a bridge or tunnel.
If the two areas could be joined by a bridge and tunnel, then why can't discontiguous areas in the West Bank be joined by bridge and tunnel as well?
Fundamentally, the word "Bantustans" is emotionally charged around the world, although not in the US (except on college campuses). A comment like this one by the Secretary of State of the US can do a lot to reinforce the attitude of people around the world who want to deligitimize Israel the way that they did the apartheid government of South Africa. In my opinion, this was deliberate usage of provocative, highly-charged anti-Israel language.
On May 28, 2003, Paul Wolfowitz was quoted as saying that there were many legitimate reasons for the US to attack Iraq, but "[f]or bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue -- weapons of mass destruction -- because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."
I think he meant that the Defense Department was comfortable that this was a necessary war, but the State Department, under Powell, insisted that we find the single reason that he -- wrongly -- believed would electrify world opinion. As a result, the government settled on WMD and made Powell, as the champion of this approach, deliver the speech to the UN Security Council.
Now Powell is running to disassociate himself with the WMD theory and President Bush's reelection is at risk -- and with it, the war against Islamic terror.
I think Powell was instructed by GW to do the UN thing you object to, based on Tenet's 'slam-dunk' aaurance.
coherent, contiguous land is a non-starter, it's already been turned down by Arafat. The return of 4 million arabs to Israel is the vital point. GWB recognized the insanity of that for a day or till, till the King of Jordan slapped some sense into him.
As to Sharon's efforts to win approval of the disengagement plan, Powell's statement is his payback. If Sharon did it for Bush's sake, he's in for some disappointment. If it's in the context of an eventual unilateral disengagement, with or without US support, Sharon may well be onto something, though it would be nice to know his thoughts.
The State Dept. getting it's marching orders from their real boss, Jacques Chirac
Secretary Powell CNN Interview- chopped up West Bank unacceptable
Interview on CNN's Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/33169.htm
Secretary Colin L. Powell
Normandy, France
June 6, 2004
(12:05 p.m. EDT)
... WOLF: We only have a minute or two left, but the President, last night when he met with Jacques Chirac, spoke of the Israeli-Palestinian problem and he spoke about a two-state solution, Israel along Palestine, and he spoke about Palestine being contiguous, a contiguous Palestine, the West Bank and Gaza. What exactly did he mean by that?
SECRETARY POWELL: What he meant by that is that in the West Bank you've got to have a coherent, contiguous land which, joined with Palestine, would -- with Gaza, would constitute the state of Palestine. He was making the point that you can't have a bunch of little Bantustans or the whole West Bank chopped up into noncoherent, noncontiguous pieces, and say this is an acceptable state.
The President wants the Palestinian people to have a state of their own, which would include Gaza and significant chunks of the West Bank, with some alignment of the armistice line, as he has said previously. But he is going to be doing everything he can to help Mr. Sharon with his plan of evacuating all the settlements in Gaza, beginning with the evacuation of settlements in the West Bank, and then get back into the roadmap and help the Palestinian people put an end to terrorism that comes out of Palestinian communities and help them reform their political system and their security system so that Israel can feel comfortable leaving Gaza and turning it over to Palestinian control.
And we're working with the Egyptians, who will be helping with the security in Gaza. So an opportunity is being presented to us, and the President fully intends to take advantage of that opportunity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.