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 (22762)	3/30/2002 11:27:43 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

But if the substance of your responses is that Israel is permanently safer now, as a result of military actions, than it was at its inception then I would respectfully disagree. The substance of my response was, Israel exists now, as opposed to the likely outcome of the alternative courses. Certainly Israel would be safer with a political solution -- that is why they took, and lost, such a big gamble for peace in the 90s. But to pursue a political solution, there has to be somebody to talk to on the other side, a 'partner for peace', to use the hackneyed phrase. That isn't an option right now.

To: axial who wrote (22762)	3/31/2002 12:16:30 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

The only hope for the citizens of Israel lies in a political settlement Yes, but not yet. We made our "Political Settlement" with Japan on the Deck of the Missouri. Israel will never get to that point, but they are a long, long, way off from the time when they can settle with the Arabs. The Arabs will never settle as long at they think they have a chance to run the Jews into the sea.

To: axial who wrote (22762)	3/31/2002 1:32:34 AM
From: LLLefty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

......notwithstanding its failings, the recent Saudi proposal at least offers a starting point. Its strength lies in the fact that it comes from a major funding source for Arab extremism...... If the Saudi proposal is to have legs, it is incumbent upon the Crown Prince to underscore it as a serious move by putting pressure upon the one party over which Saudi Arabia has considerable influence. In other words, if it anything more than a charm offensive to mollify the US, The Saudis should follow up with pressure on Arafat to significantly lower the level of violence. In 1993, Arafat was forced to the table at Oslo because the Saudis, irate over Arafat's support for Iraq in the Gulf War, had cut off funding for the PLO. It was broke. If the Saudis leave their proposal hanging, as they have done at prior Arab League meetings, then it will soon vanish into the sands, one more missed opportunity--if ever it really was one. As I see it, Sharon is ready to take a two-track approach--negotiate while at the same time responding ever more forcefully to violence. If, indeed, the Saudis are prepared to take action beyond a speech and bear hugs all around in Beirut, now is their opportunity. If Arafat could win a Nobel Peace prize, just think of Prince Abdullah sharing a platform with Arik Sharon in 2004. Perhaps they should first get the Norwegians to start things rolling again. They had the moxie and the cover to carry out negotiations in secret that brought about the Oslo Accords. It was a nice try until Arafat decided to scuttle them. In any event, the Saudis created for themselves an opportunity to break free from their narrow world of pre-modernism under new leadership. It's a longshot.