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: Raymond Duray who wrote (7713)	10/26/2001 10:46:22 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

You misunderstand my long term concern about the policies of Ariel Sharon Sharon is symptomatic of Arafat's intransigence. Peres and Barak offered him MORE than any previous Israeli administration and because he avoided seizing the opportunity out of fear that the extremists he granted so much power to would oust him. Arafat has also put forth the the position that a Palestinian state has to be "born in blood" for it to possess a sense of unity (at the expense of a peaceful co-existence with Israel). So it's not unexpected that Sharon would come to power since the Israeli people were sick of Arafat double dealing and indecision. It's Arafat's own fault that the moderates in Israel have subverted their willingness to great Palestinian autonomy, to their interest in self-preservation and security. Arafat had the largest majority of these Palestinians extremists locked up in jail in accordance with the Wye River accords, yet when Israel would not bow to his additional demands, outside of the previous accords, he released them and enable them to continue their mayhem. And now they grown so powerful that he's not in a position to put the "djinni back in the bottle".. As for Sharon visting the Temple Mount, why is it a provocation for him to visit, but Arafat can continue to claim that the Temple of Solomon never existed at that location? Why is it permissable for Palestinians to deface Jewish and Christian holy sites? Arafat has been inciting violence for years now. And I'm all for making additional research funds available for alternative energy. But I'm realistic enough to realize that we need a multi-angled approach, including additional domestic drilling. And you know that I'm all for expanded nuclear power using modern techniques, and using off-peak power to produce hydrogen. I think that would be a great idea. But it will require up to 10 years to properly implement. As for the JSF, it's like combining an F-16 with a Stealth fighter and Harrier V/STOL aircraft. It's the first time since the F-4 Phantom that all services will use the same aircraft design, and it should reduce maintenance and production costs. fas.org I've had my qualms about it being produced, but given that most of our wars seem to require the ability to project aerial operations, it seems to be a program that is needed over the long-term in order to maintain quality over quantity force multipliers. And by the time it enters production and fully replaces the F-18, Harrier, and F-16, it will be 2015-2025, with initial production version entering service in 2008. Hawk

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (7713)	10/27/2001 10:32:06 PM
From: SirRealist	Respond to of 281500

Ray; in response to some points: our often blind allegiance to Israel no matter what course it chooses to take is not a sensible one. I'm glad you conditioned that with the word 'often'. Enemy propagandists don't, claiming we are 100% supportive of Israel, though it has not been uncommon, particularly in the past 24 years, for us to be the ones moderating Israel's hardliner choices. OTOH, I'm not sure it is unsensible to be allied with the strongest military power, the most democratic state, the best military intelligence, and the most technologically advanced and innovative government in the region. Strong support, but with the capacity to push moderation is a difficult tightrope walk, but I've yet to see a more practical proposal advanced. I agree that Sharon is no statesman. He'd be a good pal in a dark alley though. Still, his visit to the shrine was a deliberate provocation. As was his statement about US appeasement. Such hawkishness is an essential counterbalance within its political framework but Israel deserves a better leader at such a time as this. Smart hawks bully useful concessions, but Sharon lately just bullies and gains nothing. OT: Oregon? Where? PM me? As to alt energy, I agree. Nuclear power was heavily subsidized precisely as a propaganda tool. Finding 'peaceful' uses for nuclear power made its military development more palatable to the public. Unfortunately, in the mining of radioactive materials as well as disposal of it, the result is tragic. Which no amount of cost/benefit analysis can undo, till such matters are resolved. Thus, alt energy development lacks the government backing given to such misguided things things as synfuels because of oil industry campaign cash. Consider the deals currently struck between international oil and Saudi Arabia even in the past year, and it can easily be prophesied which way the wind blows (and it ain't toward wind farms). The trouble is, corporate bottom lines weigh monetary costs vs. profits. Human blood, especially non-Western blood, is a cheaper commodity that never appears on quarterly reports. But I'm with you.... wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, hydrogen.... all should be developed for humane and environmentally sound reasons, not corporate ones.