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: BigBull who wrote (22714)	3/30/2002 6:12:16 PM
From: axial	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"I humbly submit that the negotiations you recommend have been ongoing for at least 50 years." Point taken. Yet, were the point valid, there would never have been an agreement between Israel and Egypt. If Saudi Arabia, the United States, and the world want a dialogue, there can be one. "The enmity has existed for thousands of years." Well, not that long. Tolerance of Jews by Islam, as "people of the book" is a historical fact. Nevertheless, I appreciate your point. It has been exacerbated by the adoption of Nazi beliefs in Arabic circles in post WWII. "Frankly, I see none coming from the Palestinians." I suggest that the question of "goodwill" has been violated so many times, by BOTH sides, that it is a meaningless construct: it has no truth. Again, another point at which the "discussion" devolves into endless nit-picking specifics. History guides us to both sets of beliefs: yours and mine. Your assertion of enmity is true; my assertion of historical precedent for peaceful agreement is also true. As Churchill said: "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war."