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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (2526)	10/3/2001 11:18:22 PM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

First, sorry about the tone of my previous post. >Then, they said they were very close to agreement on borders; it was the refugee issue that scuttled the talks. At Taba, Barak offered to dismantle 80% of the settlements. Well, not exactly. If the Palestinians were to be be left with 20% of the settlements as you claim (which leaves lots of holes in that rotten cheese), they thought that they would at least be given something elsewhere (therefore, the refugees, etc.). But Barak wanted to force the Palestinians with a non viable state (by keeping some/most of the settlements and all the movement restrictions in place) AND not budge an inch on the refugees/Jerusalem issue. In other words, the Palestinians would be allowed to exist in economic misery and not at least get a "win" anywhere else...sorry, no go. >Barak, whatever else you might say about him, really wanted to do a deal. He tried. Clinton tried. Okay, now let me tell you what most people in the Middle East believe (which happens to be my belief, surprise!). Our government can solve this problem in a second. It will require balls and a political cost but it can bring peace. Instead, we keep "trying hard to get the two sides" (a bunch of BS) to talk blah blah blah. But, then again, who ever said it was about a just peace? >Arafat's behavior convinced the Israelis, and Pres. Clinton, that Arafat could not live with any negotiated settlement that left Israel existing as a Jewish state. I Oh puuleeease Nadine. >I simply cannot believe that the negotiations failed because Barak wasn't nice enough to Arafat. The negotiations failed because Barak tried to force down Arafat's throats something that a sane leader could not accept and our politicians allowed it because the power of the Jewish lobby is too strong (and $ here talks). >Rather, they failed because accepting a deal -- any deal, in my opinion -- would have been Arafat's death sentence. Actually, you do have a point there, that would have been his death sentence. Well, you know got him in power and his people living in shit, like always...and the shit goes on...(to the tune of...and the beat goes on....)