SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Ilaine who wrote (17504)1/29/2002 11:52:40 AM
From: SirRealist  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Again that's an oversimplification, but presented very well counselor. Sharon may be Likud and Likud may be Sharon but Israel is not Likud. Most Israelis were willing to concede the settlements. Their votes and polling show that.

I also don't view the 9-11 attacks as an assault by any country, Arab or not. Bin Laden was angry because we were welcomed to SA and he was banned. And he has a few self-glorifying religious views that don't sound so holy when he's caught at ease on video. We can never know the motives of each hijacker but it's safe to say that Al Qaida never joined in the pro-PLO chorus till it was clear it would sell to the street.



To: Ilaine who wrote (17504)1/30/2002 2:45:52 AM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Part of the unfinished business of UN 242 is Arab recognition of the State of Israel in ANY borders. When it was passed, the Arabs all refused it because it called for secure borders for ALL states in the region.

The Arabs were offered all the territories back in 67, 70, 74. They refused because they wouldn't make peace. It's now 30 years later. Do you think it's realistic to expect that nothing has changed in the meantime?