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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (11507)	2/13/2002 12:40:40 PM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 23908

More on Sharon's blitz trip to Washington.... Give Us the Truth, Bush Yoel Marcus Ha'aretz February 12, 2002 iht.com Excerpt: The results of the visit left us a mite confused. The meeting in the White House lasted only 45 minutes. In the whole history of our relations, that is the shortest meeting ever held between an American president and an Israeli prime minister. Usually such meetings go on for longer than the time scheduled for them. But with Sharon length doesn't matter. Twenty years ago, Sharon, who was then defense minister, held a short conversation with the secretary of state, General Haig, from which Sharon "understood" that Haig gave him a green light to invade Lebanon. In December 1982, he "understood" from Amin Gemayel that he had the draft of a peace treaty with Lebanon and he went so far as to declare solemnly that as a result, "Lebanon will be the second country to make peace with Israel." The Begin government, to its embarrassment, approved the draft agreement, which burst as quickly as a soap bubble, and we remained stuck in Lebanon for the next 18 years. Sharon's problem was, and remains to be, that he takes in what he wants to hear. [snip] ____________________ Well, about 10 hours to fly over to WA... 10 hours on his way back to Tel Aviv... Jeez, such a long trip for a 45 min chat with Prez Bush?! Don't you think that, from now on, US-Israeli face-to-face meetings could be advantageously replaced with videoconferences?? <g> Gus