News
3 rockets hit Eilat, Aqaba
By Ynet and Wire Services
Published: 19.08.05, 14:34
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
12 Talkbacks for this article
1. And so it begins
Eyal ,   Tlv.il   (08.19.05)
phase II
2. Arabs Say; "Thank You For Ethnically Cleansing Jews"
Yishai Kohen ,   YeShA, Israel   (08.19.05)
Expect more. And soon enough, Sharon's own ranch will be in range.
3. the terrorists
Mihael ,   istanbul   (08.19.05)
MR SHARON dld you see? leaving gaza meaned that terrorısts wln the battle please combat and klll all terrorlst members ın palestina
4. Mr Bush can you see by the Kassam's early light?
(08.19.05)
5. The US is already reaping rewards of Isreali capitulation
James Meeker ,   USA   (08.19.05)
to terror. That was real fast.
6. syrla ls father of al kalde lran ls the mother
mihael ,   istanbul   (08.19.05)
mr sharon please warn these countrles they are behlnd the attacks l thınk amerlca must combate wlth these countrles cruel l admlre usa and lsrael s declslon syrla ls the polslnous snake .... GOd blesses all lsrael especlally mr sharon
7. opportunists
Joel ,   TA   (08.19.05)
everyone pointing to these attacks and saying they are the result of the disengagement are disingenous opportunists just like BB. What, there were not attacks when the settlements were secure in gaza??? there wasnt terrorism when BB was prime minister and was promising no Palestinian state??? there was terrorism before the disengagement and there will be terrorism after it. Israel needs to do what is in its strategic interest to fight this threat. Being in Gaza gives us NOTHING, there is zero strategic value to Gaza; occupying there only morally complicates the situation. Please, someone here who is so fervantly against Sharon and the pullout; forget the rhetoric for a second, and rationally explain the strategic value of having 8000 settlers among 1 million palestinians in the Gaza strip??? Please, im interested....
8. We should now Disengage from Eilat
Dudu ,   Kfar Sava   (08.19.05)
This just shows how stupid it was to settle in Eilat in the first place. Far away from the Israeli heartland and lacking Jewish history, what do we have to do in that place, right next to all those arabs in Akaba? If we can remove 8000 Gaza settlers we can also remove 40000 Red Sea settlers.
9. It's on the other side
Egyptian ,   Egypt   (08.19.05)
10. shows al qaeda's manliness - maybe Viagra will help!
(08.19.05)
11. i dont' think we needed this attack to prove that al-qaeda i
alex ,   usa   (08.19.05)
i dont' think we needed this attack to prove that al-qaeda is a bunch of cowards.
12. al qaeda
Howard ,   Pacific Coast, USA   (08.20.05)
I agree with Joel (TA), #10, and alex. Also I agree with Mihael about Syria (where did the Katyushas come from?) and Iran, except that you forgot to include the Saudis, who still finance a worldwide network of extremist imams as well as hamas, and who don't particularly want anyone to remember this. Dudu, get real. Eilat is legally part of Israel. There is no possible basis for a legal challenge to Israel's right to hold Eilat. The only groups that challenge Israel's right to Eilat are the ones that refuse to acknowledge Israel's right to exist in the first place, and these people are passive cowards, terrorist cowards, greedy demagogues or gullible simpletons. The legal situation with respect to Gaza is a lot murkier. Eilat's citizens are all Israelis, whatever their ethnicity, whereas the Palestinians in Gaza have never been Israeli citizens. The withdrawal from Gaza was necessary in large part because annexing the territories and swearing those Palestinians in as full citizens of Israel would leave Israel with a Jewish MINORITY, in which case Abbas would be elected PM of Israel. Since it is not possible for the Gazan status quo to continue indefinitely (the Palestinian population in Gaza doubles every generation), it is better to manage the disengagement while Israel is strong and can manage the situation, rather than holding on until it has to happen at a much more dangerous moment. It's difficult to explain why disengagement opponents STILL don't get the point. Re the terrorist attack, I offer my condolences to the families f the murdered Jordanian soldiers and my sympathy to the Israeli taxi driver who was lightly injured. I have a feeling that what REALLY happened here is that this al qaeda group intended to use all 3 rockets against the US Navy (the US being al qaeda's fixation; since when has Israel been their priority?), but they were too inept to hit the ships, and then the ships left port. These idiots probably stood around worrying that they would be mocked for their poor aim, and wondered what target they could fire at with rocket #3 that they couldn't possibly miss. One of them probably said, "we can't possibly miss a COUNTRY. Let's fire at Israel." So these brave and talented Islamic holy warriors made a pothole in a road and scared a taxi driver. Then these ever-truthful and honorable would-be martyrs put up the press release to say "we really intended that all along." Yes, folks, al qaeda has decided that the way to beat Israel and the US is to create a pothole in an Israeli road (no doubt this pothole will cripple the Israeli economy) and blow up a Jordanian warehouse and a Jordanian hospital. Oh, and to do no damage at all to the US Navy ships that they were really told to attack. I think that each al qaida terrorist coward deserve our scorn as well as a bullet in the back of the head. Oh - and let's see who among the Arabs condemns this one, shall we?
Back to article