we can argue whether we should care too much about the agreement with the so-called 'palestinians'. what is really stupid about this article is the neverending efforts by die-hard leftists to link all woos of the israeli society with the investments in judea and samaria. did Shtrasler imply that the hundreds of thousands of people that live there would not be cared about had they resided within the green line? or did he mean that they could have instead settled in the negev and forgotten (ie. cost no money) like the rest of the people there. if this is the case, then Shtrasler is right, they wouldn't cost money. and btw, does one really believe that money taken from the settlements would be spent on roads and health? had the exit from gaza cost 1 billion nis less, more roads would be built?
200 feared dead in latest migrant disaster off Libya's coast (AP)
from the article: The ashes on the prophets' eyes