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: axial who wrote (22752)	3/30/2002 10:52:39 PM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So, I'll state my case (not what people "think" I am saying) for the third time: In the absence of a political settlement guaranteeing Israel's existence, the future is predictable. You have provided excellent commentary today. I for one, believe you've made several telling points. Thank you for your thoughtful contributions to FADG. --ken/.fl

To: axial who wrote (22752)	3/31/2002 5:30:15 AM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>>I have been somewhat surprised by the opposition. I just intended to make a fairly simple observation.<< >>In the absence of a political settlement guaranteeing Israel's existence, the future is predictable. << Jim, I got that last one the first two times. But were you really surprised to draw a response when your simple observation is adorned with comments about the 'bloodlust on this thread" or in this threepeat, where you state "I won't even bother to respond to those who are suggesting some sort of disguised sympathy for what happened", since I don't recall anyone suggesting this at all? You also stated "For those of you who question my sincerity, please note that I make my comments without the artifice or the protection of a pseudonym." yet again I believe folks have questioned where you're coming from or what you mean, but I don't recall a suggestion about you being insincere. Intentionally or unintentionally, such statements provoke responses, and when they express disagreement, or demonstrate confusion about your meaning, I don't believe any slight is intended. Certainly, there are, on this thread, a few hawkish pro-Israel and a few hawkish pro-Palestine folks who believe in military force or armed resistance as a way out of the morass. They might be incorrect, but it's very rare to see someone here lusting for blood or vengeance, imho. The whole point of the thread is to discuss foreign policy options which can include assertions meriting review. More than once, I have altered my thinking about solutions based on someone's added research or well-informed and well-reasoned arguments. Foreign policy, to be effective, must have the fluidity to consider fresh options and to have one's mind changed based on the superior expertise of others who present a compelling case. I see much more of that than rock solid "just kill 'em all" opinions. I think most here seek effective answers that will yield peace to Israel, Palestine, the Middle East, Europe, here, and elsewhere in the world. I know intimately that most who have experienced war firsthand will always seek options short of war, because of the cruelties and insanities that come with war. And I respect that. While I agree with your central point about the future being predictable, I remain entirely uncertain that a political settlement is achievable in the near future. True, the Saudi initiative reflects a step forward. But as it emanated from the 'committee' of half the Arab states, it was markedly reduced from its original and came with added comments that it was an 'all-or-nothing' deal, effectively limiting any possibility of further negotiation. From the first moment Thomas Friedman mentioned it, I had hopes for the Saudi initiative. But the end result dashed those hopes, for the time being. At best, I anticipate an Israeli military response will provide a little extra nearterm security for Israel. I don't view it as a panacea, nor even terrorist-proof. But just as myths arose about our willingness to fight after we pulled out of Lebanon and Sudan, there exist similar myths about Israel's backbone, as well as the belief that the attacks on Israeli citizens will demoralize them and compel them to quit. Effective military action by Israel might plant seeds of doubt about such myths, at least. After all, the vast majority of Palestinians weren't even alive during the Six-day War, so what do they have to go on? I don't make these points in any disagreement about your central point. I wrote to clarify some lesser points of contention and to be clear on the point that I -and others, I believe- am neither disregarding you nor minimalizing the importance of your words or opinion. Further, should serious negotiations begin anew, you'll find few happier about that event than I would be. --Kevin Hayden