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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Steve's Channelling Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gancho who wrote (16123)	5/19/2001 4:37:18 PM
From: Amots	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30051

gancho. The F16 attack was on military target, the bomber attack, was on women and children (see the death list). Regards.

To: gancho who wrote (16123)	5/19/2001 4:45:09 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 30051

Gancho, let me try and attempt explaining something about "realpolitiks" to you. Arafat, for whatever reasons, decided not to accept the offer made by Barak (under very heavy pressure from Clinton) late last year. That closed the door on the then current negotiations and he decided to start that new "intifada", hoping that this course of action will bring results talks could not. Now he is demanding some concessions from Sharon in return for reigning in the violence. That is exactly what Sharon cannot do. Not that the Israelis did not try, mind you. Few weeks back Peres declared that the general Palestinian population should not suffer the economic calamities this violence is bringing about and relaxed some of the movement restrictions, so Palestinians could earn some salaries to feed their families. The response was, a new wave of violence. If Sharon responds by any concession, that will be a signal to the Palestinians in future negotiations that if they do not like what is offered, they can always send few martyrs into the main cities, or get few snipers on top of school building and shoot into Israeli towns. In short, capitulation. We, in the US, have a clear policy of not negotiating with terrorists, or for that matter under any "durress". Why should the Israeli? The US is operating its military operations under the Colin Powell doctrine, namely, "we will assemble massive forces, we will go after the enemy (Sadam), we will hit it hard and we will kill it" (from memory, I am sure someone has the exact text somewhere). What is a good enough policy for the US surely should be a good enough policy for Israel. I have stated here before, Arafat made a mistake of immense proportions by not accepting Barak's offer last year, and now, he cannot even dream of getting a small portion of what he could have gotten then. Barak's offer is absolutely dead and any result of new negotiations will be less than what Barak offered (and should be less as well) . There should be a principle that violence does not pay, and if you try and get your way via violent means, your result will always be less that what you could have gotten by fair discussions. As for a full scale war in the ME, who will fight? Egypt and Jordan have peace treaties, if they open hostilities this time and lose the next conflict, they have no chance of once more finishing this fight with the same results as their prior aggressions (both ended up "whole" with Israel returning all territories for Peace). You should understand that under international law, when a country initiates an aggressive war act against its neighbor, it does take a risk of losing some of its own territory (otherwise, they'll try again and again, see the loss of territories by Germany and Japan post WWII). Syria, by itself, does not have the wherewithal to mount an effective offensive, and Iraq, as I have said before, they would gladly fight until the last drop of Palestinian blood, not their own. No, don't expect Palestinian's friend to come and help them, strangely enough, the best friends the Palestinians do have are the Israelis, not the Arabs. If Arafat, Hamas and Ishbala do not wise up to the writing on the wall, they will bring on the Palestinians another calamity, even greater than those created by the 1948 and the 1967 conflicts. I hope they wise up. Zeev

To: gancho who wrote (16123)	5/19/2001 4:47:19 PM
From: JSB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30051

Gancho, the palestinian boy gave his life to kill women and children, hardly a military target. The F16 hammered a purely military target, a very huge difference.