Sharon as Prime Minister.

IceBlaZe

Atheist Proselytizer
Joined
Nov 18, 2001
Messages
4,740
Location
Israel
Don't you think the fact is extremely amusing? :D

It makes me chuckle in a regrettive way.

The man directly outright lied to the Israeli PM then-Menachem Begin about how far the Israeli Invasion in Lebanon will go.

The Kahan Commission found General Sharon to bear personal responsibility on the Sabra and Shatila massacre. :crazyeye:

In those days, my mom used to say "If he becomes our Prime Minister I will leave the country".

...The Minister of Defense, Mr. Ariel Sharon
We have found, as has been detailed in this report, that the Minister of Defense bears personal responsibility. In our opinion, it is fitting that the Minister of Defense draw the appropriate personal conclusions arising out of the defects revealed with regard to the manner in which he discharged the duties of his office - and if necessary, that the Prime Minister consider whether he should exercise his authority under Section 21-A(a) of the Basic Law: the Government, according to which "the Prime Minister may, after informing the Cabinet of his intention to do so, remove a minister from office."...


Source: Reports of the Commission of Inquiry into the Events at the Refugee Camps in Beirut (The Kahan Commission), February 8th 1983.

Mr. Sharon was found responsible for ignoring the danger of bloodshed and revenge when he approved the entry of the Phalangists into the camps as well as not taking appropriate measures to prevent bloodshed.

He used to say that he will see the creation of a Palestinian State as a personal insult :p

So, what do you think about Sharon as a PM, a wise move or a sad reflection of the situation in the middle east that even Israel elects a leader such as he? :confused:
 
I consider Sharon to be on par with characters like Hussein and Arafat. Despite the fact that he was elected, he is just as morally deprave and does not allow any room for the "peace process."
 
Oh no, an ME thread, I can hear the stampede from my bedroom...
 
Ariel Sharon is a great and noble leader, and the best possible PM apart from Netanyahu. He is a lovely, saintly, fit, slim hero of a man, and I want to bear his children.
 
Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
Ariel Sharon is a great and noble leader, and the best possible PM apart from Netanyahu. He is a lovely, saintly, fit, slim hero of a man, and I want to bear his children.

Please report this to the "I like you" thread.
 
Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux


Please report this to the "I like you" thread.

:lol:

but seriously, on the first day he got elected, i knew there would be thousands of deaths in near future. woa, what a prediction!
 
Well, maybe it's because elected after the beginning of the al akza intifada violence :D
 
Ehud Barak, a man that gave everything and got a war and changed his position every 24 hours was the alternative. Otherwise, Sharon would'nt have been elected.


But, Sharon sucks as a PM.
He was elected to wage war againts the Palestinian terror, and he failed. Defensive Shield should've been done immediately after he the elections, not a year and 400 deaths later.
 
Did Sharon receive some rehabilitation after 1983 ?
I don't know, but sometimes that happens.

Otherwise I think that the credentials of Sharon were less worse than the credentials of his (main) opponent in the eyes of a majority of the Israeli voters.
 
how did he got elected if you israeli didn't like him? will he got elected the next time? (just want an opinion of someone from that region.)
 
it may be me, but i have a feeling that if Sharon saw a fire, he'd try to put it out using petrol...

Then again, i don't think there's anyone living now who could solve the problems of the ME on there own. I really don't envy those who choose to make their lives there. :(
 
Ehud Barak didn't really give anything.

He offered something, he never took any actions that seemed positive to the Palestinian Street.
 
Originally posted by Toasty
I consider Sharon to be on par with characters like Hussein and Arafat. Despite the fact that he was elected, he is just as morally deprave and does not allow any room for the "peace process."
I agree with this 100%. Arafat and Sharon are mirror images of each other, the same no-compromise, power-hungry, racist, nationalist, slaughterers of innocence on opposite sides of the fence.

Both the Israeli people and the Palestinean people deserve better.
 
I agree with this 100%. Arafat and Sharon are mirror images of each other, the same no-compromise, power-hungry, racist, nationalist, slaughterers of innocence on opposite sides of the fence

I think you are way overboard here.

Sharon might be a nationalist, but other than that, he never showed a policy, remark, note or quote that support any of your other claims.

He is from the right, so obviously he will seek deals that are less neutral, "power-hungry"? Not more than Bush or Blair. Tough places bring tough leaders.
Racist? Since when? When did he ever say anything racist?
Slaughterer of Innocent? Rarely. And not on a scale comparable with Arafat or Hussein!
 
And is it forgivable if you only slaughter innocents "rarely"?
 
Well, First of all, Sharon didn't slaughter any innocents in S&B case, he only chose to be *light headed* on the possibility of it.

Arafat directly implemented murder of thousands of Israeli civilians.
Hussein gassed 5000 kurds.

Can't you see the difference?

The only other case is in 1953 when an Arab village was allegedly massacred (under Sharon's command), but that version is not supported.

There are a few versions for the Village case, and Arabs are known for their choose of propagandic history and use of words, so I would take the "ruthless massacre" version with more than a grain of salt.
 
I don't think Sharon is a great PM as you might want during times of war (anyone knows where Churchill is? ;) ) but I don't thnik he's as bad as Barak. Sharon isn't good enough to win the war or to make the economy thrive but he has been able to stop the deterioration in the situation of both during Barak's time. I don't see what his past has to do with how he is as a prime minister, and if it does it would be only fair to include all his past and not just a low point. In any case I think he showed a fairly peaceful approach for a likud member and I won't be surprised if the likud candidate will be Netanyahu instead of him. I don't think there's too much toblame him for the situation - the only military solutions to the problem would be to kick away or kill every Palestinian, and that's not something he's about to do anytime soon (unless you consider Arafat as the only Palestinian ;) ), and at the same time making another peace agreement with the current Palestinian leadership would be as smart as hiring "pal-kal ltd." to rebuild Versai halls.... In other words - there's no real solution. Even though I have to say in the last couple of weeks the situation has calmed down a bit.
 
Originally posted by IceBlaZe
an Arab village was allegedly massacred (under Sharon's command), but that version is not supported.

There are a few versions for the Village case, and Arabs are known for their choose of propagandic history and use of words, so I would take the "ruthless massacre" version with more than a grain of salt.

Could it be the village of Jenin? :crazyeye:
 
Back
Top Bottom