Announcement

**Winston** · March 28, 2006, 01:55

Well, happy election day, Israel!

And may the least damaging side win.

**notyoueither** · March 28, 2006, 03:31

Originally posted by Az

I presume this sentiment may be linked to the Avigdor Lieberman phenomenon.

It's a great example, but I was alluding to the insane voting patterns, generally.

Is he actually proposing carving out largely Arab areas of Israel, throwing them at the Palestininians, and walking away?

**muxec** · March 28, 2006, 07:23

Advertisement:
By voting for right and centrist parties you lower the number of arab rpresentative in the 17th parlament.

Here is my opinion on some parties.

Kadima
(---)Remove settlements and divide Jerusalem.
(--)Corrupted leaders in general.
(-)Shimon Peres personally.
(+)Ability to make important decisions.

Avoda
(----)Territories to arabs.
(--)Peretz personally
(--)Peretz's "proletarian" education
(--)Economical policy
(-)Bad reputation of many candidates in the middle of the list. For example Matan Vilnai.

Meretz
(-------)Teritories, arabs etc...
(-)Economy
(+)Desire, and, probably, ability to really do something with education. Secular.

Israel Beitenu
(++)Terror handling plans
(+)Liberman's reputation
(-)Blurry internal policy plans
(-)Economical plans

Likud
(+)Anti-terror and settlements
(+)Economical
(+)Good reputation of some candidates
(-)Limor Livanat and what happened to education in Israel
(-)Other

Shinui
(---)No desire to fulfil promises. If they will they will have nothing to promise next time.

Also all candidates get (-) for lies, (-) for f**king own nation and (-) for being too greedy.

I tossed my 10 agaroth coin and voted Likud.

**lord of the mark** · March 28, 2006, 09:22

Originally posted by notyoueither

Is he actually proposing carving out largely Arab areas of Israel, throwing them at the Palestininians, and walking away?

its not as crazy as it sounds. You have to think about it in the context of the negotiations over final boundaries.

Almost every mainstream Israeli political party, including, AFAIK, Labour under Peretz, considers the 1948 armistice line unacceptable as a boundary. The "waist" of Israel is too thin, and the capital in Jerusalem is too vulnerable, etc. Ergo every peace plan Israel has ever seriously considered includes SOME annexations of territory in the West Bank. Since the areas that all Israeli govt have wanted to keep are the same areas where all Israeli govts encouraged settlements, annexing those areas to Israel would solve most of the settlement problem as well.

However those Palestinians who are willing to take these concerns seriously, insist that they should not have a net loss of territory due to it, but should be compensated with lands that were under Israeli control before 1967. So theyd be keeping the pre-67 lines as a split, at least in principle.

Mainstream dovish Israelis have accepted this concept, and its probably the case that it will have to be accepted in any final status agreement.

So the question becomes, which lands to the Pals get as compensation? From an Israeli POV, its reasonable to ask, why NOT give them certain blocks of Arab villages? Where, it is claimed, most of the inhabitants, though Israeli citizens, do not identify with the Israeli state, and DO identify as Palestinians. Is not insisting on keeping those villages IN Israel, while the PA gets empty land as compensation, really a sign that the Pals aim for TWO Palestinian states?

Now of course there are other reasons they may want to stay in Israel. Superior social services being one of them. And I presume there is debate about what their level of identification with the Israeli state really is, etc.

To me insisting on the possibility of the arab villages being the compensation makes sense as an Israeli negotiating position. Whats odd about Leiberman, is that he would A. Make it a central part of his platform and B. Seems to talk about doing it unilaterally.

**Eli** · March 28, 2006, 09:49

Ale Yarok.

**muxec** · March 28, 2006, 11:04

Originally posted by Eli
Ale Yarok.

If you vote against all you can vote gimlaim.

**Eli** · March 28, 2006, 11:27

I didnt vote against all. I voted for Ale Yarok because I agree with them.

**lord of the mark** · March 28, 2006, 11:44

Looks like turnout is lower than last election

**Eli** · March 28, 2006, 13:11

Not directly connected to the elections, but very important nevertheless:

Today, for the first time, a Katyusha rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip towards Israeli territory.

Ashkelon is now fully in range of the Palestinian weapons.

**Eli** · March 28, 2006, 15:03

It's over.

The Media poll results:
Kadima - 29-33.
Labor - 20-22.
Liberman - 12-14.
Likud - 11-13.

**lord of the mark** · March 28, 2006, 15:06

Originally posted by Eli
It's over.

The Media poll results:
Kadima - 29-33.
Labor - 20-22.
Liberman - 12-14.
Likud - 11-13.

meltdown for all big parties!!!! where are the votes going? The pensioners?

What the hell is happening over there?

**Eli** · March 28, 2006, 15:08

The Pensioners got 6-8 seats. That's the big surprise.

All the rest, Shas, Mafdal, Meretz, Hadash, are as usual.

**lord of the mark** · March 28, 2006, 15:18

bye-bye, Bibi. Shalom v lehitraot. Or maybe not lehitraot.

Kadima-Labour-Pensioners, plus EITHER Meretz, OR Shas, OR Israel Beitenu.

Not as bad for Peretz as it might have been.

Can Kadima hold together with disappointing results, or have they lowered expectations sufficiently?

OTOH, lets not forget how historic this is.

The first time in Israeli history that a party other than Mapai-Labour or Likud has come in first in an election for the knesset. What Rafi couldnt do, what Democratic Movement for Change couldnt do, what Mercaz couldnt do, etc, etc.

A Big Bang indeed.

Oh, and mazel tov to Ehud Olmert, the next Prime Minister of Israel.