Thailog80 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 Sharon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 I'm no doctor, but Sharon looks pretty well screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 In emergency surgery for a cerebral hemorrhage now. I think no matter how he pulls through, the Israeli government's going to be reworked however they do it in the Knesset. And I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. The Palestinians view Sharon in roughly the same way the Israelis view Arafat (i.e. a murdering terrorist bastard). With both out of the way (and again, I've got to believe Sharon's done politically even if he recovers), maybe the region has a chance of settling down. Or maybe the new Israeli PM will be some hard-line nut case. About as likely either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Now being called a 'massive' stroke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 In emergency surgery for a cerebral hemorrhage now. I think no matter how he pulls through, the Israeli government's going to be reworked however they do it in the Knesset. And I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. The Palestinians view Sharon in roughly the same way the Israelis view Arafat (i.e. a murdering terrorist bastard). With both out of the way (and again, I've got to believe Sharon's done politically even if he recovers), maybe the region has a chance of settling down. Or maybe the new Israeli PM will be some hard-line nut case. About as likely either way. 553660[/snapback] But Sharon was also able to carry the Israeli hard liners, which Labor could never deliver. It still remains to be seen if Arabs can deliver someone to deal if a more dovish PM is elected. (yeah right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 But Sharon was also able to carry the Israeli hard liners, which Labor could never deliver. It still remains to be seen if Arabs can deliver someone to deal if a more dovish PM is elected. (yeah right) 554750[/snapback] Which explains why he started another party and found Likud to be "insufferable"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Which explains why he started another party and found Likud to be "insufferable"? 554769[/snapback] Well, well, well, look who came out of hiding. I suppose that you can name another Israeli politician that will parachute right in and get the same internal backing that Sharon had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Well, well, well, look who came out of hiding. I suppose that you can name another Israeli politician that will parachute right in and get the same internal backing that Sharon had. 555207[/snapback] Hmmm, wasn't so long ago I was making the same observation about Arafat on the Palestinian side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Hmmm, wasn't so long ago I was making the same observation about Arafat on the Palestinian side. 555217[/snapback] Yeah, because Arafat had really done a lot to move the peace process forward This is what gets me about Sharon's critics. You can't go one inch without a mention taht he's a hawk and a hard liner, while ignoring that he has been able to go the furthest of any Israeli PM in actually ceding territory back to Palestinians and setting a workable framework for continuing negotiations. And Arafat's legacy is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Yeah, because Arafat had really done a lot to move the peace process forward This is what gets me about Sharon's critics. You can't go one inch without a mention taht he's a hawk and a hard liner, while ignoring that he has been able to go the furthest of any Israeli PM in actually ceding territory back to Palestinians and setting a workable framework for continuing negotiations. And Arafat's legacy is.... 555261[/snapback] Some people never change. I can always count on you to put words into my mouth. Where in my post did I say he was a hawk and a hardliner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 And Arafat's legacy is.... 555261[/snapback] Black September and he Munich massacre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Some people never change. I can always count on you to put words into my mouth. Where in my post did I say he was a hawk and a hardliner? 555310[/snapback] You didn't. But he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Black September and he Munich massacre 555928[/snapback] And Sharon's legacy is the Sabra and Shatila massacres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 the douchebags have spoken Douchebag #1 Douchebag #2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Robertson: "God said, 'This land belongs to me, you better leave it alone.'" Really, Pat? In English, as the Bible was originally written? Did He use the split subject-verb form, too? Or are you just a #$%^monger in a suit? I hope you burst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 the douchebags have spokenDouchebag #1 Douchebag #2 556351[/snapback] If Sharon did indeed know what the phalangists were up to in Sabra and Shatila then I have little problem with the comments of Douchebag #1 on this occasion. I have little sympathy for someone who facilitates the massacre of hundreds if not thousands of old men, women and children (any men of fighting age had left the camps). Sabra and Shatila Strange that the chief witness against Sharon happened to be killed in a car bombing before he could give his evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 If Sharon did indeed know what the phalangists were up to in Sabra and Shatila then I have little problem with the comments of Douchebag #1 on this occasion. I have little sympathy for someone who facilitates the massacre of hundreds if not thousands of old men, women and children (any men of fighting age had left the camps). Sabra and Shatila Strange that the chief witness against Sharon happened to be killed in a car bombing before he could give his evidence. 556419[/snapback] And I'm sure those atrocities hadn't been provoked with equal or WORSE happenings by the Muslim side in Lebanon. I know a Lebanese Christian who fled that country back in the early 80s. He told me stories of how his church was burnt to the ground by Muslim extremists and how ethnic cleansing was performed on a near-daily basis by Muslim militias. Please, PLEASE don't tell me you're naiive enough to believe that the Muslims are without blood on the hands in what has to rank as the bloodiest, nastiest civil war in all of recorded history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 And I'm sure those atrocities hadn't been provoked with equal or WORSE happenings by the Muslim side in Lebanon. I know a Lebanese Christian who fled that country back in the early 80s. He told me stories of how his church was burnt to the ground by Muslim extremists and how ethnic cleansing was performed on a near-daily basis by Muslim militias. Please, PLEASE don't tell me you're naiive enough to believe that the Muslims are without blood on the hands in what has to rank as the bloodiest, nastiest civil war in all of recorded history. 556815[/snapback] I think you know me well enough by now to know that I wouldn't claim that. However, one atrocity does not excuse another. You can't justify massacreing civilians by saying that the other side also kills civilians. That's an excuse that Hamas and their ilk frequently uses - "Israel kills our civilians so we have a right to kill theirs". It doesn't wash when they use it and it shouldn't work when used by others either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I think you know me well enough by now to know that I wouldn't claim that. However, one atrocity does not excuse another. You can't justify massacreing civilians by saying that the other side also kills civilians. That's an excuse that Hamas and their ilk frequently uses - "Israel kills our civilians so we have a right to kill theirs". It doesn't wash when they use it and it shouldn't work when used by others either. 556888[/snapback] I couldn't agree more. Just wanted to clarify that you didn't hold a belief of bloodlessness on the Muslims' hands. However, it's a tough cycle to break is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Really, Pat? In English, as the Bible was originally written? Did He use the split subject-verb form, too? Or are you just a #$%^monger in a suit? I hope you burst. 556371[/snapback] Is anyone else going to laugh their asses off when that POS Pat Robertson buys the farm? What a scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts