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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (2198)	10/2/2001 9:38:09 AM
From: Carolyn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I have always had a problem with continuing those settlements. They are thumbing their noses at the Palestinians by doing that. Why not stop?

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (2198)	10/2/2001 11:47:32 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"rocks which have a certain ability to kill, were responded to, regularly, not with tear gas but with bullets which were proven to be more effective killing weapons than rocks. The mass killing responses from the Arab side to such measures, surely should not have come as surprises. Your remarks sound as if there was a one sided escalation." With remarkable regularity, the rocks have been mixed with bullets in this intifada, rendering tear gas ineffective as a response. Your remarks sound as if the intifada were a spontaneous event, not under political control; I disagree. While there have been Israeli escalations in the violence, the basic political impetus for this intifada has been entirely from the Palestinians side. It's basically a low grade guerilla war, conducted by shooting and bombing IDF checkpoints, firing mortars into the settlements, sniping at cars on the roads, and random terror. And besides all that, conducted in the media with pictures of dead kids as the weapon of choice. Just ask yourself, which side would benefit from an actual cease-fire (assuming no new negotiations)? It would be a win for the Israelis and a loss for the Palestinians. In fact, this intifada saved Arafat's butt. His weakness and corruption was causing even Fatah members to turn on him. Hamas was moving to replace him. He jumped on the violence to "escape by running ahead", in Professor Sayigh's words. (Prof. Sayigh, a prof. at Bir Zeit and consultant to the Camp David negotiations, wrote an interesting piece in Survival called "Arafat and the Anatomy of a Revolt", where he said in essence, that the intifada was an opportunistic survival tactic on Arafat's part; there was no overall strategy)

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (2198)	10/2/2001 10:24:27 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Malcolm... What more sad is that Palestinians are encouraged to "martyr" their children, rather than sending them to school to become so educated that they have a real economic future (either on the West Bank, or elsewhere)... And in exchange for every martyrdom, they receive a reported $15,000 in compensation from the PA.... Wouldn't it be nice if they received that $15,000 BEFORE they were martyred so it could be spent on an education?? Remember this event??: geocities.com masada2000.org I think the evidence is pretty compelling that this boy was killed by Palestinians bent upon making him a martyr, and not the Israeli soldiers over 110 meters away... One doesn't need to be a ballistics expert to understand the significance of the evidence in those photos. Hawk