Ted,
No, I am saying that it encourages more distrust and fear that potentially could lead to more violence.
I forgot, you are of the opinion the Mid-East got into this pickle because people were just not working hard at this peace thing. You have been holding onto this false premise for a long time, and the article is perhaps too much of shock to you.
But as far as what is going on in Israel, it has exactly zero impact. They already know all this.
Anyway, don't feel bad about being completely wrong about the whole situation. There are millions who subscribe to your point of view, which is that all international conflicts are just big misunderstandings, and if you let the diplomats, and even the world leaders just talk to each other, the misunderstandings will be removed, and there will be peace.
This was the basis of the attack of Walter Mondale (and his supporters in liberal press) on Reagan. They said that the situation between the US and USSR was so pitiful (at the time of the campaign) because Reagan didn't meat any Russian leader (this was a period when they (russian leaders) kept falling like flies), that Reagan did not start any arms control negotiation, no arms control treates were signed.
Anyway, there was a fundamental conflict between the East and the West. The Communists were trying to export their ideology, take over the world, defeat the free world. Reagan made them suffer some setbacks, then Gorbachev came along, and abandoned the plan to export communism, even let go the subjugated Easter Europe.
Change of policy removed the fundamental conflict. The problem was solved completely. All the "work" that went into arms control, millions of man-hours put into negotiations achieved absolutely nothing.
The same applies here. You may remember the time I had a great laugh at Scumbria's list of Clinton interantional achievements, at the top of which was the peace process in Israel. It absolutely clear to me that it would fail, so now I can say "I told you so".
Basically, the cause of conflict has not been solved / removed / addressed, and without that, all the coffees, teas, dinners, fruitless sessions, empty promises, disingenuous hand shakes, all are meaningless. If they put in 10 times as many hours, "worked" harder on the "peace thing", drank 10 time as much coffee, the result would have been exactly the same - zero, nothing.
In my mind,its irresponsible journalism.......do you not agree, or does having more fighting please you?
The fighting is completely unrelated to what's printed in NY Times. No, fighting does not please me. Where did you get the impression?
While I wish leaders like Reagan and Gorbachev came along, and just lead the 2 sides in a direction where their goals do not clash, I am not optimistic it will happen. Arafat is certainly not Gorbachev, and I doubt Sharon is Reagan.
Joe |
