Foreign Policy Discussion Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6777)	4/20/2004 1:56:46 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) of 15987

You know the risk that the Israelis are taking. It's obvious - that the withdrawal from Gaza will be read the same as the withdrawal from Lebanon, an Israeli defeat proving the efficacy of Hizbullah/Hamas tactics. So.. And that risk gets minimized by maintaining indefensible Israeli settlements smack dab in the middle of the proposed Palestinian state?? Your logic confounds me... Especially since you seem unwilling to think it's a good idea for international intercession aimed at butting their heads together, AS WELL as removing the militant Hamas threat. Do you really think that balkanizing the West Bank equates to "withdrawal"? another Bekaa Valley 2 miles from your population centers, full of terrorists trying to kill thousands of your people. If it was 2 miles from you, wouldn't you be concerned? The analogy is only appropriate if Israel decided to pay Israelis to move to the Bekaa Valley (or directly adjacent to it). Get the hell away from them. Put up your wall, and live apart separately until some future generations decide to get along. Come on Nadine.. look at the map of the settlements.. They are all over the West Bank, not just close to the Israeli border. An "adjustment" is one thing, but Bush just signed us on to an Israeli annexation plan right in the heart of the proposed state of Palestine. Gush Etzion is just south of Jerusalem. It was Jewish owned before 48, the Jordanians killed/drove out the inhabitants in 48, the Israelis took it back in 67. It's just beside the Green Line. Then I would consider that an acceptable "adjustment" due to its proximity of the Israeli border. Sharon's plan will wind up keeping about 10% of the West Bank. The map you were looking at is not even very accurate for current settlements, much less for illustrating the proposed withdrawal. Do you have a linkable map of Sharon's proposed boundaries? I find it hard to understand exactly how he can justify holding on to Hebron or Ariel, or the most controversial, Maaleh Adumim. How can anyone logically expect any Palestinians to sit still for having their country bisected right in the middle by an Israeli settlement? Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next