Again - it's a simplification. No nation is going to live under any UN law, which is an oxymoron. The settlements are not the problem. I do agree that the PR makes Israel looks less sympathetic. If there were peace, most settlements would be dismantled, with only the larger ones staying with some type of compensation and limited right of return to displaced Palestinians. There are plans out there that most Israelis and Palestinians would support.
The problem is that debate over niceties does not encourage negotiation when one is faced with terror. It would be like our negotiating with OBL after 9/11. Frankly,it's been Arafat who has made negotiations impossible, refusing to give any of his chosen PM's any authority.
As for Iraq, it's a different story, just a term that is general "occupation." We don't want to occupy Iraq and, as many democrats are saying, we may wind out getting out too quickly. However, we do need to get the international community in there and I do agree that this adminstration just doesn't know how to handle PR. I believe that they should just tell the UN that they are handing over administration and will let them take over. Unfortunately, the reality is that the UN will do nothing but talk.
The UN will not provide troops and funds needed. So the US will be in the same position. However, I think they should go through with this high stakes poker game just to show that the international community is all talk. They all wanted Saddam out (except for France and Russia due to economic ties) but they will do nothing to salvage Iraqi freedom. |
