Home > Community Lounge > Politics > The Petraeus Briefing: Biden's Embarrassment Is Not The Whole Story

The Petraeus Briefing: Biden's Embarrassment Is Not The Whole Story

  1. The Petraeus Briefing:
    Biden's Embarrassment Is Not The Whole Story

    By Mark Perry

    March 15, 2010 "Foreign Policy" March 13, 2010 -- On Jan. 16, two days after a killer earthquake hit Haiti, a team of senior military officers from the U.S. Central Command (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus to underline his growing worries at the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide, 45-minute PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior Pentagon officer later bluntly described it) "too old, too slow ... and too late."

    The January Mullen briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus's instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. "Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling," a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. "America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding." But Petraeus wasn't finished: two days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command -- or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. Petraeus's reason was straightforward: with U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict.

    [UPDATE: A senior military officer denied Sunday that Petraeus sent a paper to the White House.

    "CENTCOM did have a team brief the CJCS on concerns revolving around the Palestinian issue, and CENTCOM did propose a UCP change, but to CJCS, not to the WH," the officer said via email. "GEN Petraeus was not certain what might have been conveyed to the WH (if anything) from that brief to CJCS."

    (UCP means "unified combatant command," like CENTCOM; CJCS refers to Mullen; and WH is the White House.)]

    The Mullen briefing and Petraeus's request hit the White House like a bombshell. While Petraeus's request that CENTCOM be expanded to include the Palestinians was denied ("it was dead on arrival," a Pentagon officer confirms), the Obama administration decided it would redouble its efforts -- pressing Israel once again on the settlements issue, sending Mitchell on a visit to a number of Arab capitals and dispatching Mullen for a carefully arranged meeting with the chief of the Israeli General Staff, Lt. General Gabi Ashkenazi. While the American press speculated that Mullen's trip focused on Iran, the JCS Chairman actually carried a blunt, and tough, message on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: that Israel had to see its conflict with the Palestinians "in a larger, regional, context" -- as having a direct impact on America's status in the region. Certainly, it was thought, Israel would get the message.

    Israel didn't. When Vice President Joe Biden was embarrassed by an Israeli announcement that the Netanyahu government was building 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, the administration reacted. But no one was more outraged than Biden who, according to the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, engaged in a private, and angry, exchange with the Israeli Prime Minister. Not surprisingly, what Biden told Netanyahu reflected the importance the administration attached to Petraeus's Mullen briefing: "This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden reportedly told Netanyahu. "What you're doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace." Yedioth Ahronoth went on to report: "The vice president told his Israeli hosts that since many people in the Muslim world perceived a connection between Israel's actions and US policy, any decision about construction that undermines Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem could have an impact on the personal safety of American troops fighting against Islamic terrorism." The message couldn't be plainer: Israel's intransigence could cost American lives.

    There are important and powerful lobbies in America: the NRA, the American Medical Association, the lawyers -- and the Israeli lobby. But no lobby is as important, or as powerful, as the U.S. military. While commentators and pundits might reflect that Joe Biden's trip to Israel has forever shifted America's relationship with its erstwhile ally in the region, the real break came in January, when David Petraeus sent a briefing team to the Pentagon with a stark warning: America's relationship with Israel is important, but not as important as the lives of America's soldiers. Maybe Israel gets the message now.

    Mark Perry's newest book is Talking To Terrorists
     
  2. [UPDATE 2--from Mark Perry: A senior military officer told Foreign Policy by email that one minor detail in my report, "The Petraeus Briefing" was incorrect: a request from General Petraeus for the Palestinian occupied territories (but, as I made clear, not Israel itself), be brought within CENTCOM's region of operation was sent to JCS Chairman Mullen - and not directly to the White House. My information was based on conversations with CENTCOM officials, who believed they were giving me correct information. It is significant that the correction was made, not because it is an important detail, but because it is was inconsequential to the overall narrative. In effect, the U.S. military has clearly said there was nothing in this report that could be denied.]

    http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/po..._biden_s_embarrassment_is_not_the_whole_story
     
  3. What a load of crap. Of course, patreus, the most political of generals, wants to expand his empire. And McMullen, who seems to regularly confuse his position with Secretary of State, prefers pontificating on global politics to focusing on his actual job. Of course, it is perfectly obvious what these two brass hats are ultimately up to. Setting up Israel as the fall guy if or when their naive nation-building exercises in iraq and afghanistan fail.

    I would have supported Obama if he had fired both of these dolts on the spot.
     
  4. It should be pointed out that Israel has no allies other than the US. These people will go it alone if they have to, no question about it. I am not pro either side, but foreign policy was totally ignored by Bush the idiot. Now, we have more idiots stirring things up. It is amazing this conflict hasn't turned into one of Biblical proportions by now.
     
  5. Who else?
     
  6. Okay, thanks. Things aren't as one-sided as I thought.
     
  7. It's a classic arab personality trait to blame others for their problems. There is not a representative, stable government in the entire arab world, they oppress their people, they are corrupt, their populations funnel enormous amounts of money to al qaeda, yet the entire reason for all their problems is the US supporting israel. yeah, that make sense.

    Other than maybe Patreus and McMullen, does anyone really think the key to peace in afghanistan is a settlement of the israel-palestinian conflict? Or that islamist terrorism would disappear if there was no israel?
     
  8. The entire GOP must have classic Arab personality traits, as they blame others for their problems...

    Makes sense, given the primary Muslim culture's fundamentalist attitude and the GOP's fundamentalist attitude are like identical fundamentalist religious ideologically driven twins...

     
  9. Hey Mom0, I lightly researched the topic and have a question for you.

    Regarding this statement - The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions saying that the strategic relationship with the United States encourages Israel to pursue aggressive and expansionist policies and practices

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

    Why does Israel pursue these aggressive policies leading to unending hostilities against UN mandate :confused:
     
  10. Its all pretty simple.

    Isreal wants to exist and they are going to do what they think is necessary to exist. They will use the U.S. for money and protection when it serves their interests.

    AAA - got it right about the Muslim governments. They steal the wealth of the land their people and blame America.

    The Isreali conflict has almost nothing to do with our real status.

    Our real status has to do with the projection of force and ability to control the aftermath.

    Bush was the mofo who set up that problem. Perhaps to spike oil prices and let his cronies gorge on pentagon funds.
    I do not blame Obama for that.

    What I do blame Obama for is that he is making us look like a bunch panzies the world over. Particularly with respect to Iran.
     
  11. But why then the "..Israel to pursue aggressive and expansionist policies and practices". Isn't that counter-productive in the long run :confused:

    What is the difference here between Muslim and US governments then :confused:
     
  12. With respect to your second question...
    As of late - I would say nothing.
    In the us it is simply an indirect theft and it is probably a smaller amount of GDP.. (they put themoney in their friends pocket until they leave office.)

    Whereas in Middle East the leaders channel it to their own pockets.
     
  13. This seems to be an often quoted untruth as the Palestinians seem to be a fairly distinct group that had roots in the area well before the Arab Muslim conquest. I would hazard a guess that most Palestinians could make a better case of belonging than many of the rather Germanic and Slavic looking new Israelis.

    The could hardly be regarded as a firm friend and the up and coming regime change in the UK will put Israel / UK relations back in the cold for a while as the Conservative party are known to pander to the Arab bloc.

    Germany is a friend of sorts but don't expect them to step up for you if you mess with their markets.

    India could be a good buddy a promising partner for the future.

    Japan does not have any friends or really wants them for that matter.
     
  14. Didn't I hear that grass roots trade unions in the UK were planning on boycotting Israeli products?

    http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=155395

    In any case, I'm not sure Israel can count on the UK as an ally for much longer. The tide has turned. Comparisons with South African Apartheid are becoming more prevalent. The Muslim population is growing significantly there too.

    I'm not so sure about Japan too but for different reasons.
     
  15. Israelis are a 20th century invention. By ethnically cleansing the Arab people from what is now Israel proper, and then stealing more of their land on the West Bank, the Israelis have created the Palestinian people.
     
  16. The complete withdrawal from the Sinai, Jordan, Lebanon, Gaza... are these the "aggressive and expansionist policies and practices" you're talking about. Or you're talking about the 1967 UN "land for peace" resolution to which Israel said "YES" and the arab world said their infamous "no peace, no recognition and no negotiations with Israel"? Or perhaps you're talking about the Barak/Clinton peace offer to Arafat, who walked out without even making a counter-offer?
     
  17. Everytime the Israeli / Palestinian conflict flares up some elements of the unions talk about a boycott though it usually amounts to nothing.



    Perception seems to be everything Israeli now in the eyes of the UK public appears as an oppressor and thats a view held across the political spectrum. I for one have doubts on the UK's Islamic populations leverage, we went into Afghanistan barely pausing for thought and were a willing partner in the Iraq venture, if we are so afraid of British Pakistanis why would we shoot, mortar and grenade their cousins back home in the tribal lands. :)
     
  18. Is that the new tool in your Zionist arsenal of lies? If everything fails, let us try stealing the Palestinian people's identity from them? Why not stick to your real origins my newly converted Jewish Khazara friend?"

    That is OK Mom0, I just love how your story keeps on changing. If anything, it shows how "credible" you guys are.
     
  19. Palestini as it was known to the Greeks in 5 BC stretched from Phoenicia to Egypt the people of that land Muslims, Jews and Christians are fairly distinct in culture and genealogy. It was never an empty land awaiting settlement and its undeniable that both Jewish and Muslim Palestinians suffered invasion and conquest over the ages and both have a diaspora.
     
  20. LOL, love how a Khazara thief from central Asia is deciding if I have an identity or not.

    As I told you before Mom0, any self respecting Zionist propagandist will not be caught making such silly claims as yours. It seems that you are in your early stages of Zionist training.

    Keep up the good work Mom0.
     
  21. The above is one of the worst revisionist tracts floating about the web and flies in the face of all historical facts, its what the IHR would write if they were not so in love with Hitler and had a hard on for Israel instead. There were nomadic Arab tribes in the area but there was a greater number of Muslim, Jewish and Christian Palestinians involved semi pastoral and permanent agricultural activities in the area.
     
  22. What do yo believe the is the key to israeli-palestinian conflict is? Tell me in the affirmative. Not what it is not


     
  23. As you were informed by me and others, you need to sharpen your lying and propaganda skills Mom0. Part of sharpening such skill is not to insult your opponents by asking such stupid questions My Khazara friend. Do not misunderstand me my friend; I know that answers to every stupid question of yours. I just find it insulting that you are importing such questions from other sites and blogs run by people with identical intelligence levels as yours.

    What caused me stomach cramps from laughter is the "When was it founded" :D


    Oh and by the way;

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=96551157190

    And

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4fe_1265381379&c=1
     
  24. What I find interesting - is when I meet people in the states who are not muslim... but come from the middle east... 100 percent of them have told me they are not arab.

    When I look up the definition of Arab I learn there is no real definition. it is sort of a self Identification....


    So given we do not really have a definition of arab... how the heck can I take either side seriously when one side argues arabs were not here and the other side argues arabs were there.
     
  25. I have answered you many times and proved you wrong many times on the SAME EXACT LIES you are posting. It is so sad that you are not willing to think out of the box and do something creative. Instead, you resort back to the same stupid tactics over and over and over again Mom0. In one of my last dialogues with you, I told you exactly what you will do, and you, being the armature you are, did exactly what I have expected you to do. You know why Mom0? Because, you were taught not think on your own but rather follow orders.

    http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&postid=2762782

    And because I knew that you will not be able to help yourself and think out of the box, I have saved such correspondence between you and I. Why you ask? Very simple Mom0! It is because I know that right after I post my answers to you, you will, yet again, wait for few days, come back and post the same lies again and challenge me to answer them. Very silly and only makes you look armature and vindictive in front of everyone in here Mom0, don't you think? I know that THEY have told you that this is the best way to spread your lies but come on man...Think of the advarse effect it will do to you as a human.
     
  26. Here you go my friend; this is from a previous post I made to answer you:

    Notice that you started with the claim that we are Jordanians. It seems that your friends told you to let go this lie for it will only serve to belittle you.

    You then came up with the following lie;

     
  27. Please read above my central Asian Khazara friend.
     
  28. The Petraeus Briefing:
    Biden's Embarrassment Is Not The Whole Story

    By Mark Perry

    March 15, 2010 "Foreign Policy" March 13, 2010 -- On Jan. 16, two days after a killer earthquake hit Haiti, a team of senior military officers from the U.S. Central Command (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus to underline his growing worries at the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide, 45-minute PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior Pentagon officer later bluntly described it) "too old, too slow ... and too late."

    The January Mullen briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus's instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. "Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling," a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. "America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding." But Petraeus wasn't finished: two days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command -- or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. Petraeus's reason was straightforward: with U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict.

    [UPDATE: A senior military officer denied Sunday that Petraeus sent a paper to the White House.

    "CENTCOM did have a team brief the CJCS on concerns revolving around the Palestinian issue, and CENTCOM did propose a UCP change, but to CJCS, not to the WH," the officer said via email. "GEN Petraeus was not certain what might have been conveyed to the WH (if anything) from that brief to CJCS."

    (UCP means "unified combatant command," like CENTCOM; CJCS refers to Mullen; and WH is the White House.)]

    The Mullen briefing and Petraeus's request hit the White House like a bombshell. While Petraeus's request that CENTCOM be expanded to include the Palestinians was denied ("it was dead on arrival," a Pentagon officer confirms), the Obama administration decided it would redouble its efforts -- pressing Israel once again on the settlements issue, sending Mitchell on a visit to a number of Arab capitals and dispatching Mullen for a carefully arranged meeting with the chief of the Israeli General Staff, Lt. General Gabi Ashkenazi. While the American press speculated that Mullen's trip focused on Iran, the JCS Chairman actually carried a blunt, and tough, message on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: that Israel had to see its conflict with the Palestinians "in a larger, regional, context" -- as having a direct impact on America's status in the region. Certainly, it was thought, Israel would get the message.

    Israel didn't. When Vice President Joe Biden was embarrassed by an Israeli announcement that the Netanyahu government was building 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, the administration reacted. But no one was more outraged than Biden who, according to the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, engaged in a private, and angry, exchange with the Israeli Prime Minister. Not surprisingly, what Biden told Netanyahu reflected the importance the administration attached to Petraeus's Mullen briefing: "This is starting to get dangerous for us," Biden reportedly told Netanyahu. "What you're doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace." Yedioth Ahronoth went on to report: "The vice president told his Israeli hosts that since many people in the Muslim world perceived a connection between Israel's actions and US policy, any decision about construction that undermines Palestinian rights in East Jerusalem could have an impact on the personal safety of American troops fighting against Islamic terrorism." The message couldn't be plainer: Israel's intransigence could cost American lives.

    There are important and powerful lobbies in America: the NRA, the American Medical Association, the lawyers -- and the Israeli lobby. But no lobby is as important, or as powerful, as the U.S. military. While commentators and pundits might reflect that Joe Biden's trip to Israel has forever shifted America's relationship with its erstwhile ally in the region, the real break came in January, when David Petraeus sent a briefing team to the Pentagon with a stark warning: America's relationship with Israel is important, but not as important as the lives of America's soldiers. Maybe Israel gets the message now.

    Mark Perry's newest book is Talking To Terrorists
     
  29. your definition is logical - but just doing a check on the internet - it does not seem to be standard.

    For instance check out this lack of specificity from wikipedia

    Arab people (Arabic: عربي‎, ʿarabi) or Arabs (العرب al-ʿarab) are a panethnicity of peoples of various ancestral origins, religious backgrounds and historic identities, whose members, on an individual basis, identify as such on one or more of linguistic, cultural, political, or genealogical grounds.[11] Those self-identifing as Arab, however, rarely do so on their own. Most hold multiple identities, with a more localized prioritized ethnic identity — such as Egyptian, Lebanese, or Palestinian — in addition to further tribal, village and clan identities.

    But thank you for the explanation about the snootiness. My friends mom did seem to be insulted when I asked if they were arab. (they moved here from lebanon)
     
  30. For what it is worth, I have a few official British reports dated on or before 1946, and in almost all cases the non-jewish population in Palestine is referred to as "Arabs of Palestine".
     
  31. Hi Barth,

    And guess which language these Arabs speak? The same language as Syrians, who are also Arabs, Lebanese who are also Arabs, Jordanians, Iraqis, Libyans, Egyptians, and Moroccans and so on and so forth.

    In the Middle East, contrary to the Zionist liar Mom0, your title is given to you according to the language you speak. If you spoke Assyrian, You are "Ashury", if you spoke Keldani, you are, you guessed it, keldani, if you spoke Kurdish, you are Kurdi, if you spoke Farisi (Persian), you are Farisi and if you spoke Arabic, guess what your name would be?

    The reason we spoke Arabic is due to the fact that the language of commerce, throughout the Islamic dynasty was Arabic. For you to economically survive, you had to speak it Barth. Prior to the introduction of Arabic, the whole greater Syria region spoke Aramaic and for the same exact reason. Canaanites and their sub division, the Phoenicians spoke Aramaic, Assyrians and their sub divisions spoke Aramaic and so on.

    By the way, guess what we call English speaking people in the Middle East? Yes sir, we call you "Engeleesey"

    As for the people jim met, most likely they are right! If jim lives in, Chicago or the mid west then most of these Christian Middle Easterns he met are either Asyrians or Caldanians.


    Regards,

    Sameeh
     
  32. Oh Yeah, I forgot about this lie which you repeated twice already. When did you guys decided to use it? I have to give it to you guys, there is no limit to how far you would go to promote a fraud. Now that you guys are resoved to the tragic fact that you no longer able to deny who we are, why not default to what you do best...Steal their identity and claim it to be yours. But wait a minute, I thought you claimed that there was no Palestinians in earlier posts Mom0? :D

    Good one my central Asian khazara friend.
     
  33. I feel compelled to follow up with the terminology used in the same reports, when referencing Jews:

    "Jews of Palestine".............or.............."Palestinian Jewry"
     
  34. In Palestine, there are Palestinian Jews, Christians, Druz and Muslims. Palestinian Jews were expelled from Palestine along with their Muslim and Christian brethrens and some of them ended up in refugee camps along with other Palestinians.

    The tragic twist of events happened when Sharon sent his rabid Falangah death squads to Sabra and Shateelah refugee camps. In there, Jewish Palestinian civilians were massacred along side their Christian and Muslim brethrens...under the watchful eyes of Sharon and his men who watch with content, from surrounding buildings roof tops, the rape and killing of innocent girls and women.
     


  35. LOL Mom0! I especially loved the "Historical fart" part. Honestly man, what lead you to deteriorate that fast? :D
     
  36. What time frame are you referencing ? The Jews have always had a sizable remnent in "Palestine", this is an historical fact.
     
  37. Prior to the zionists washing on our shores like wet rats. from between the early 1900 until 1947- 1948.

    And no they did not Barth, they, in 1936 had only 5% of Palestine for the obvious reason that they were not agrarians.
     
  38. Behind the goofy books and funny headgear, the fundamental battle at this point is over access to fresh water and arable land, is it not?
     
  39. Hi Ricter,

    The moment the Zionists run out of water to steal, you would see the Israelis with duel citizenship, who constitute about 90% of their population, flee Palestine in droves to one of the other 3 options that they considered to steal before they decided to go for Palestine.

    The early Zionist leaders considered Uganda, Argentina and Cyprus before they finally settled on Palestine by the way.

    You will see the Mom0s of the future making the claim that "if you talk about Argentineans, most likely, you meant Jews." :D


    Regards,

    Sameeh
     
  40. Oh yeah and did you know most of Israels leaders were born out with Palestine as well.

    Ben Gurion born in Plońsk, Russian Empire

    Moshe Sharett born Kherson, Russian Empire, served as an officer in the Turkish army

    Levi Eshkol born Oratov, Imperial Russian Empire

    Golda Meir born Kiev, Imperial Russian Empire

    Menachem Begin born Brest, Belarus formerly Imperial Russia

    Yitzhak Shamir born Ruzhinoy, Russian Empire (now in Belarus) former terrorist

    Shimon Peres born Wiszniewo, Belarus formerly Poland
     
  41. Ok so who on the list I posted was born in Israel/Palestine I would be more than happy to be corrected but supporting information would be appreciated.
    Looking at the current demographics I would hazard a guess that most Palestinians are now native born.
     
  42. Ahhhhhhhhhh Mom0, not only that you are in control of most of the water resources in the West Bank, which is occupied by you in violation of all international laws and against the well of the whole world, you are also stealing water from Lebanon and Syria.

    The following, my friend Mom0, is from the an Israeli orginization

    For residents of the Occupied Territories, the primary result of the change in the law and transfer of powers over the water sector to Israeli bodies was the drastic restriction on drilling new wells to meet their water needs. According to military orders, drilling a well required obtaining a permit, which entailed a lengthy and complicated bureaucratic process. The vast majority of applications submitted during the occupation were denied. The few that were granted were solely for domestic use, and were less than the number of wells that, after 1967, had ceased to be used due to improper maintenance or because they had dried up.

    It should be emphasized that the legal and institutional changes that Israel instituted in the water sector in the Occupied Territories are not intrinsically unacceptable. They conformed to the approach taken in Israel 's water sector and could, in principle, have led to a more efficient supply of water to the Palestinians. However, Israel utilized these changes to exclusively promote Israeli interests, almost completely ignoring the needs of the Palestinian population, which was left to face a growing water shortage.


    http://www.btselem.org/english/Water/Shared_Sources.asp

    Below, please check a report by the same organization Mom0. Please keep in mind that the following report is based on the West Bank which is illegally occupied:

    The gap in water consumption between Palestinians and Israelis

    The discrimination in utilization of the resources shared by Israel and the Palestinian Authority is clearly seen in the figures on water consumption by the two populations. Per capita water consumption in the West Bank for domestic, urban, and industrial use is only 22 cubic meters a year, which translates into 60 liters per person per day.

    There is a huge gap between Israeli and Palestinian consumption. The average Israeli consumes for domestic and urban use approximately 104 cubic meters a year, or 280 liters per person per day. In other words, per capita use in Israel is four and a half times higher than in the Occupied Territories . To make a more precise comparison, by also taking into account industrial water consumption in Israel, per capita use per year reaches 120 cubic meters - 330 liters per person a day - or five and a half times Palestinian per capita consumption.

    The World Health Organization and the United States Agency for International Development recommend 100 liters of water per person per day as the minimum quantity for basic consumption. This amount includes, in addition to domestic use, consumption in hospitals, schools, businesses, and other public institutions. Palestinian daily consumption is 40 percent less than the recommended quantity.


    http://www.btselem.org/english/Water/Consumption_Gap.asp


    And what is it with you Mom0? Why do you resort to such language whenever you lose an argument? We are discussing an issue here.