When President Bush agreed to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's peace plan for the Israelis and the Palestinians, he forgot one thing - the Palestinians! Bush and Sharon made a deal without consulting one of the two principals.
This exposes a major reason for the unrest in the Middle East and hatred for America - America's one-sided favoritism to Israel. This is not good for anyone. Howard Dean said we need to level the playing field in our dealings with Israel and the Palestinians. This is a reasonable idea. But in our dealings with Israel we throw reason out the door, and then wonder why things are going so bad.
Israel's excessive influence over the politicians in Washington is why, according to the executive director of the 9/11 commission, Philip Zelikow, we are at war in Iraq. He stated in a speech at the University of Virginia on Sept. 10, 2002: "Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat is and actually has been since 1990 - it's the threat against Israel."
I don't think Israel is worth American lives and money.
-- Robert L. Johnson, St Petersburg
Bush and Sharon want peace
Re: Sharon gets what he wants.
This headline was disappointing and points to a continuing preconceived bias when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was, also, inaccurate.
First, although all people of good will seek a reasonable, just solution to the problem, it is contradictory and hypocritical for the Times to criticize Prime Minister Sharon for intransigence, as it often has, on the one hand, and then continue to demonize him when he proposes to leave Gaza, thereby creating, finally, the beginnings of a de facto Palestinian state, although this action puts his status at risk in his own political party.
Second, there has been no positive movement, only violence, between the Israelis and Palestinian since the collapse in 2000 of the Camp David negotiations. Those negotiations offered the Palestinians more than 95 percent of the territory they sought in the West Bank and Gaza and compensation for any territory Israel sought to keep because of existing "settlements," really suburbs, as your reporters know, adjoining Jerusalem. Unfortunately, "the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity," and there are always consequences to missed opportunities, especially when one's response to discourse is violence.
Third, although I am sure Sharon and all Israelis are gratified at President Bush's statement of policy, he was not giving Sharon what he wants, but simply acknowledging the realities on the ground and the fact that almost no Israelis would accept the return of millions of hostile Arab refugees, kept in camps by their Arab brethren for 50 years, to Israel. It's not going to happen.
So, supporting peace means recognizing this reality. So is incorporating the Jerusalem suburbs, your "settlements," into Israel, partly so that Israel will have the "defensible borders," which even the United Nations acknowledged it is entitled to in Resolution 242, so often distorted by Israel's critics, including the St. Petersburg Times.
Frankly, I thought one of the objectives of those who seek peace was to secure these refugees a home in a Palestinian state (something that would have been easily accomplished by Jordan and Egypt in the 19 years that those countries ruled the West Bank and Gaza), not attempt to destroy Israel by insisting, as has never occurred in history with refugee problems, that hostile refugees be reintegrated into an overpopulated country smaller than Delaware. In fact, in general, it makes no sense for those who claim to seek peace to continue to support unreasonable demands from either side that cannot and will not be met.
The president and Prime Minister Sharon are not getting what they want, not yet, because what they want for Israel and the Palestinians is peace. This process can only successfully begin again when realities on the ground are faced and accepted, including Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state with defensible borders. We Americans would surely accept no less if we were in the same position.
-- Martin Altner, Safety Harbor
Policy won't promote stability
President Bush can't think of any mistakes he has ever made, but I can think of a long list of them. The latest is his support of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is flagrantly violating international law by denying Palestinians the right to return to the land where they have lived for many generations.
On the other hand, Jews are allowed to "return" to Israel, whether or not they - or any of their ancestors - have ever been there before! If the United States supports a policy like this, in which the indigenous people are not allowed to return to their land, how can there ever be stability in the Middle East?
-- Melva Underbakke, Temple Terrace
Ironic "realities'
There is a profound irony in President Bush's citing "new realities on the ground," Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's long-time formulation, in supporting Sharon's plan, which provides for Israel's retention of some West Bank settlements. If the Zionists and their supporters had acknowledged realities on the ground, realities of much longer tenure than the settlements, there would be no Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The photograph on the front page of the April 15 Times represents another reality. Bush is two steps behind and to Sharon's left, the traditional protocol position for a subservient accompanying the leader. But the major shift in policy toward Israel and the Palestinians may work for Bush. It may provide the margin of support for his re-election, despite his disastrous performance to date.
-- Paul F. Peters, Largo
Wrecking the road map
With his latest moves, President Bush's Mideast policy has gone from stupid to insane. To sanction Israeli West Bank settlements as a fact accomplished, and remove the possibility of displaced Palestinians to return to Israel is to destroy any chance for the "road map to peace" to succeed. Our credibility as an honest broker for peace has also been destroyed throughout the Mideast and the world.
It appears that our president is in the pocket of the person he calls "a man of peace," Israel's Ariel Sharon. Or could this be another ploy to win re-election, like brother Jeb's idea of awarding drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants?
The only salvation I see of our domestic and world policies is a change of administrations this November.
-- Bill Kelley, Spring Hill
Pinellas Democrats are better than that
I am writing as the chairman of the Pinellas County Democratic Party regarding your April 16 editorial Advertising dysfunction. I believe you have a wrong impression of the current Pinellas County Democratic Party and of Pinellas Democrats in general.
First, regarding the shameful action of the St. Petersburg Democratic Club: The ad was the personal opinion of the writer and does not in any way represent the Democratic Party or any presidential campaign. The state party and party chairman Scott Maddox, Pinellas County Democratic Executive Committee Board, and I acted immediately when we learned of the ad from the national media.
The club was chartered many years ago and we realize memberships of clubs change from time to time, so it is probable that there was a shift in leadership and philosophy. That is no excuse for the club's action. After reviewing all options we decided that revocation of their charter is appropriate.
Universally, we all agree that this type of behavior is reprehensible and will not be condoned on any level at any time.
Second, Since I have been Pinellas County Democratic Executive Committee chair we have increased memberships and we have had more voters join the Democratic Party than the main opposition party in this past quarter. We are also raising money. Your exact statement, "But then dysfunction is the key trait of Pinellas Democrats" is incorrect. There are more than 200,000 hard-working registered Democrats in Pinellas County from all walks of life from teacher to soldier, from all races, and all income levels. Your statement is misinformed, insulting, and warrants an apology.
Third, your statement that "the Democrats can almost never come up with credible candidates for countywide office" is way off base. We have outstanding, dedicated and hard-working elected Democrats in Pinellas County. Their skills, abilities, and long working hours should be praised, not attacked. Also we have had, and currently have, highly qualified candidates running for countywide office who deserve better treatment from "Florida's Best Newspaper."
I realize editorials are just the opinion of a few people within your large organization and do not represent the views of all of your employees. I respect your right to have an opinion. I also know that the words of a few people have an impact on the many.
-- Kevin Jensen, Clearwater
Arrogant taunting
Re: Advertising dysfunction.
Well so much for the "liberal" media. This editorial is just a little unfair. Perhaps space constraints prevented greater balance. It's true. Certain individuals ran an ad no office-holding Democrat could have imagined. If they'd asked me, I'd have told them, "Don't do it."
I guess that's the part that hurts the most: the "It couldn't even stop a couple of oddballs," part. How in heaven's name could we stop them? One of them was ejected from the Democratic Executive Committee years ago. I never liked these guys anyway.
My biggest criticism of them was saying bad things about fellow Democrats. I can't rake them over the coals in the paper now without being a hypocrite. Suffice it to say that, in my humble opinion, they do not show the party at its best or brightest. They do not deserve to be remembered with men like Perkins T. Shelton, for instance.
The part at the end is a slap in the face for every hard-working Democrat who has gotten elected in this Republican stronghold. Registered voter numbers don't tell the whole story. It's really about powerful individuals behind the scenes with money and influence to make - or break - a candidate. The Republicans have the advantage now. That's gonna change.
My mom says I should see the editorial as constructive criticism. It sounded more like arrogant taunting to me. I guess I should listen to her. She was a lifelong Republican who just became a Democrat. She was recruited by our best recruiting tool - George W. Bush.
-- Philipp Michel Reichold, Largo
Tampa City Council is off task
Re: City resolution doesn't favor the Patriot Act, April 16.
What in the world is the Tampa City Council doing in national policy and law? Who provided the council members with detailed information regarding the safeguards in the Patriot Act? Don't we have a congressman and two senators? Will Rep. Jim Davis now decide what potholes to fill?
Small-time authority has gone to the heads of the council members. If they spend their time on national issues they should return part of their salaries being paid to work on local issues.
-- James C. Slack, Tampa
Share your opinions
Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to 727 893-8675 or through our Web site at: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.
