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 : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (3427)	3/26/2002 11:55:07 AM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

What troubles me is that the Bush Administration's first option of choice is guns/bombs/bullets instead of diplomacy. My question is this: Assuming we could force Saddam Hussein out of Iraq, then what?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (3427)	3/26/2002 3:57:24 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

Israel could learn from the French Uri Dromi Tuesday, March 26, 2002 iht.com JERUSALEM Forty years ago at Evian, French and Algerian representatives signed the peace accords that put an end to eight years of bloody war in Algeria. President Charles de Gaulle, who had come back to power in 1958 under the slogan of "Algerie Française," soon realized that in the second half of the 20th century, when so many nations had already fought for - and won - their independence, there was no way a democracy could rule other people against their will. De Gaulle pulled out of Algeria in one swift move, opening for France an era of unprecedented prosperity, carving for her a prominent role in Europe and restoring for her the respect she had lost in the world during that savage war. Israelis should look carefully at the French experience in Algeria, and draw lessons for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They should be asking themselves why something that had worked for the French, namely a pullout from a quagmire, shouldn't be working for them as well. Needless to say, there are huge differences: Although the French had inhabited Algeria since 1830, it was still a colony, while the territories held by Israel were promised to Abraham by God, and served as the site of the ancient kingdoms of Israel. Leaving them to others involves a much greater sacrifice. France and Algeria are separated by the Mediterranean Sea, while Judea, Samaria and Gaza are Israel's back yard. It is much more difficult for Israelis to pull out and "go home," the way the French did. Even if they do so, ongoing proximity to the Palestinians might spell further trouble. All the Algerians wanted was an independent Algerian state. They didn't have any claims over France proper. The Palestinians, on the other hand, keep pushing for the right of return of refugees to Israel, which means the destruction of the Jewish state. If Israel withdraws unilaterally, without this claim rescinded once and for all, the Palestinians might redouble their efforts, believing that Israel has mellowed, and that more pressure would yield more results. Yet with all these serious reservations in mind, I would still choose to adopt the French example and pull out of the territories held by Israel. The reason lies in simple, painful facts. According to a recent survey by the distinguished demographer Sergio della Pergola, within a generation less than a third of the population between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea will be Jewish. If Israel clings to the territories, it will soon have to chose between being a democracy and losing its Jewish character, or keeping its Jewish nature but ceasing to be a democracy. Since both options are unacceptable, the only logical solution is to pull out and remain a Jewish, democratic state. Such a move should preferably be carried out through an agreement with the Palestinians, but unfortunately their recent conduct raises doubts about their ability to become true partners to something like the Evian Accords in our region. However, Israelis shouldn't be taken hostage by this Palestinian obstinacy; they should rather free themselves from the trap, much like the French did. Yet unlike the French, Israelis will have to create a border and defend themselves from future Palestinian aggression. In a poll conducted in France last week, on the 40th anniversary of the Evian Accords, 71 percent of the French answered that the Algerian war was a mistake, because the Algerians would have gained their independence anyway. Israelis shouldn't be waiting decades only to admit past mistakes. They should rather act now. For that, however, they need an Israeli Charles de Gaulle. The writer, director of publications at the Israel Democracy Institute, contributed this comment to the International Herald Tribune.