Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carolyn who wrote (924)	3/25/2001 11:48:37 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

Here's how your thread header comes out when translated into Italian, then back again. <VBG> Yes, it has been always with we because, in order to paraphrase Voltaire, crews always it is repeated. The causes of the war have been observed generally like economic, even if cloaked in principii high-minded which the religion, the nationalism, the righteousness, even ear of the man. This thread is rather for the argument on the limit of the War. To it, wars previous to the war of one hundred years (1337-1453) will not be discussed here. Recognizing that a sure argument can be heated, the moderator maintains the right to prohibit some manifestos, even if hopes that it does not have need of.

To: Carolyn who wrote (924)	3/26/2001 11:35:53 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

One more thing regarding the so-called Byzantine Alliance.... chicagotribune.com And here's an excerpt worth analyzing: Bush's style different Bush's posture toward Mideast diplomacy differs markedly from President Bill Clinton's. Where Clinton was deeply involved in the details of negotiations and played the role of persuader and cajoler in intensive, sometimes around-the-clock talks, *Bush has made clear that he will wait until the parties want to return to the table.* Bush has refrained from inviting Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to the White House, a contrast from Clinton who welcomed Arafat frequently, even after the collapse of last summer's Camp David peace talks. U.S. frustration with Arafat's continued refusal to publicly renounce anti-Israel violence is a key ingredient in Bush's decision to keep Arafat at a distance, administration officials said. Sharon privately urged Bush not to meet with Arafat. "I would never tell the Americans what to do, but that the international community has to be very careful to not send a message that would seem to say that terrorism and violence pay off," Sharon said after leaving the White House. [...] Despite the differences between the United States and Israel aired in two days of meetings between Sharon and top Bush administration officials, Palestinians watching from outside came away with the impression of a definite U.S. tilt toward Israel. "I'm worried about this emerging love fest, as though the United States is suffering collective amnesia about Sharon's previous crimes," said Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian spokeswoman. Palestinians regard Sharon as an enemy for his role in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, when Christian militia, operating in an area surrounded by Israeli forces commanded by Sharon, massacred 700 unarmed Palestinian civilians at two refugee camps. [...] ____________ Bush's aloofness from the Middle East quagmire is very smart tactics because it'll create a diplomatic vacuum in the region. Indeed, no one could seriously expect that Israelis and Palestinians can, ON THEIR OWN, work out a new bargaining process. So, if the US wants to play a bystander role from now on, both parties --especially the Palestinians-- will look for some other "honest broker".... And, yes, you've guessed it: the European Union and Russia are already scrambling for the job. Therefore, the US disengagement will drag both Russia and Europe closer to Israel -- and G.W. Bush knows it....