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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (122124)	9/15/2001 12:23:44 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

haim, america belongs to americans. however, americans forcefully STOLE it from the native americans a while back. the same way the israel nation STOLE what is currently israel from those already in the area. i'm not saying that either nation should pick up and walk away. i am saying that one can understand that hostility is a natural reaction. i can't understand acting out in this manner the same way i can't understand the US bombing pharmaceudical plants - the differences in such actions aren't that much... i am not a nationalist - hitler's germany is the logical extension of nationalism. i'm an independent thinker who attempts to gather information and reach logical conclusions. let's be honest here. let's not rewrite history to make ourselves better than we really our in our own eyes. intellectual honesty is something i try and value - even when it doesn't align w/ my own personal self interest. wrt borders, FORCE defines borders - pure and simple. just ask kuwait. right and wrong do not define borders...

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (122124)	9/15/2001 11:31:32 PM
From: Moominoid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

I'm not sure what I said to prompt that response from you. Lots of borders in the Middle East are arbitrary sure. But there are well defined cultures in say Iraq or in Syria-Lebanon-Palestine. There were always local differences within such a region even if small. Look at the huge differences in dialect in side a country of small size like Germany. The time which has gone by in this century can't be completely ignored or turned back in its effects on forging national identities. There are seven long-term choices then vis a vis Israel-Palestine: 1. The interim solution for the last 30 years where certain areas are territories where some of the population doesn't have democratic rights and a state where all citizens have democratic rights. 2. A single democratic state 3. A two state solution 4. Removal of the Arab population somewhere else. 5. Removal of the Jewish population somewhere else. 6. Transfer the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt as between 1948-67 7. A single authoritarian state or Apartheid state. To me it seems that 1. doesn't have long-term viability and 4. and 5. just won't happen. 2. sounds attractive but from the Israeli perspective could result in the country becoming just another Arab country over time. So they were working on 3. which might not be a real solution either as long as the Arab side aren't serious about it. 6 also seems attractive from an Israeli persepctive but can't work unless those governments agree which they don't. I don't think we want to consider 7 even if it could be viable which it isn't. I don't know, what do you think? Not for one minute do I doubt Jewish rights to a state in Israel and our historic connection to the land. But I don't feel our cause is furthered by inaccurate propaganda. I saw that kind of stuff in the 1980s and thought that even the right wing in Israel (which I would see myself aligned with) now saw that it was counterproductive. But the Jewish lobby in the US sometimes still seems to pursue it (I know that you Haim are from Israel originally or at least lived there for a while?). David