is that he would have the credibility on the right to stick to a real peace plan, and make it happen, should there ever be one.

Of course, just like Itzhak Rabin, he is likely most threatened by the terrorists on the extremist fringe of the hard right.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

that is says, hopefully, is that when one is put in the position of power in Israel, easy rhetoric becomes less important, and harsh reality becomes paramount.

Sharon used inflammotory words and actions to gain power, now Netanyahu is attempting the same.

But whoever is PM, they eventually moderate their tone.

The other thing is says is that the neo-cons are now to the right of Sharon.  That is not a comforting thought.

I hope that he overwhelmingly loses his planed challenge to Sharon and that he never returns to Israeli politcs.

Regarding Sharon, shouldn't we welcome him becoming more moderate?  OTOH, he only pulled out of Gaza to save the West Bank settlements in perpetuity.  He still has a long way to go.

.
Sharon has George Be Quiet sitting on his lap from the outset of his election in February 2001.  Sharon was given the freedom to suppress the Palestinian uprising, continue military rule in occupied territories, inflict the Jenin massacre with impunity, criminal bombing of appartment building in Gaza city with a one ton bomb dropped from a F16 to assassinate a wanted terrorist, and establish harsh rule in Rafah on the Gaza border with Egypt.

Deal made with George is to pull out of Gaza, in return the Israelis will remain in East Jerusalem and bleed the local Palestinians to move out. The large settlements near Jerusalem on the West Bank will be enlarged and incorporated in Israel.

The former PM is a chickenhawk, political tactics for a power grab, he needs the extreme right religious parties in the future, so the basta** resigns when all policies have been set for withdrawal from Gaza. It was he who launched a hate attack and incitement to violence in 1994 which led to the assassination of Israeli PM Rabin, partner in peace with Clinton and Arafat. The chickenhawk is not worthy to be mentioned in same breath with his brother.

George used to announce the Palestinians will have their own state by the end of 2005, one year beyond Election 2004. Soon the promise will be adapted as follows: by the end of 2009!  Bush, as Blair, do not deliver on their promises.

.

~~~

Amnesia and Gaza Genocide

I have the sense that Netanyahu's resignation is expressly for maneuvering himself into position to take maximum advantage of what he likely anticipates as a US attack against Iran.

Certainly he'd be challenging Sharon anyway, though why he backed off of his earlier challenges to the "Gaza settlement withdrawl" raises some suspicion as to his motives now.

Hopefully the Israeli people will be smarter than the US public was with Bush. I hope they recognize that Netanyahu's extreme and aggressive ideological position vis a vis Iran and elsewhere will bring more calamity upon them in the end, not less.

defeat the sound bite

Sharon has moderated his views. Just a couple years ago he was saying that withdrawing from Netzarim (isolated Gaza settlement) is the equivalent of giving up Tel Aviv. Now he's forcing it through. He has also spoken of Israel as an occupying nation and of the need for a Palestinian state. You might say that his vision of what such a state should look like is a bad joke, and you'd be right. However, words matter. So does the precedent of withdrawal. Both were absolute tabus for the Israeli right which saw the idea of a Palestinian state as unacceptable and the land itself as holy land given by God to the Jews.  It's a bit like the Pope suddenly talking about the need for gay marriage and a woman's right to choose - even if what he meant by them were some weak version of civil unions and abortion legal for eight weeks it would still be a major development.

Another thing worth noting is that Sharon's chosen successor, Ehud Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem, has gone much further, talking about the need to unilaterally withdraw to something close to the borders Israel proposed at Taba, not including sharing E. Jerusalem. He even called the largest W. Bank settlement, Ariel, a terrible mistake, though did also see it as to large to evacuate.  Enough - no. But if the center right starts thinking this way in Israel then we're talking real progress.  Now someone on the Palestinian side has to break it to them that there is going to be no right of return.