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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (143413)	3/21/2002 3:31:59 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583588

I agree with you about Bush, but I'm not sure where in the article it said that he was giving concessions just to give concessions. Besides, if Arab terrorists continue their jihad after the creation of such a state, Bush will then have a mandate to come down hard on Palestine. And so will the rest of the world. Do you think we would pull an Afghanistan on them in this situation (or let the Israelis do the work for us)? What do you think the Arab reaction would be to B-52s letting loose over the west bank? Tim

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (143413)	3/21/2002 3:47:25 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583588

I think he's supporting such a state because he really believes Palestine should have its own independent state. Ten, The problem is we don't need to be presenting the appearance of caving under the pressure applied by these suicide bombings. Bush needs to be making it clear that, while he supports a Palestinian state, under no circumstances can it come to pass until terrorist attacks have long-since ceased. I don't feel we're being clear enough on this issue, i.e., under no circumstances can the world community respond to these terrorist attacks.