Monday, January 09, 2006

Eric, you really are obnoxious. You get point after point wrong and you claim I am lying. No apology from you when it is pointed out you are wrong, for example, the meaning of the term "ethnic cleansing". And you push falsehoods and try to get away with it. You lied and said Egypt attacked Israel in 1967. I pointed out to you that you get basic facts wrong, the fact is it was Israel that attacked Egypt. Without skipping a beat, you ignore the fact that you were wrong and launch into excuses for Israel attacking. And they didn't "have to" as Menachem Begin admits: "In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."

Israel wanted another war and rejected attempts to prevent it. "U.N. Secretary-General U Thant proposed (with the support of Israel's closest allies, the US and Canada) the repositioning of UNEF on the Israeli side of the border", Israel rejected this.
And the history shows that Israel was rejecting the diplomatic attempts to address the Straits, Egypt accepted but Israel rejected a special mediator to deal with the situation.

"Reaching Cairo just after the blockade was announced, U Thant elicited a "very significant" (his words) assent from Nasser to a new diplomatic initiative: the appointment of a special UN representative to mediate the crisis, and a two-week moratorium on all belligerent acts in the Straits. Israel peremptorily rejected both of U Thant's proposals." "Nasser repeatedly expressed willingness to submit the Straits dispute to the World Court" Israel REFUSED.

"Alongside U Thant, the U.S. also tried its hand at mediation in late May and early June. Nasser agreed to send his vice-president to Washington to explore a diplomatic settlement BUT "Just two days before the Egyptian's scheduled arrival, however, Israel attacked."

"the U.S. had called for "any recurrence of hostilities or any violation by any party" to be referred back to the U.N. Even "U.S. officials and legal scholars, not to mention U.N. secretaries-general Hammarskjold and U Thant, stressed that this was a "complicated" jurisdictional dispute warranting mediation" Israel wanted war, not mediation, and it used anything it could as an excuse to attack.

No comments: