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: Ilaine who wrote (25455)	4/15/2002 11:09:07 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

And then they say things like "we offered 95% of what they asked," conveniently ignoring the fact that what they are offering will be non-contiguous, and still require checkpoints by armed IDF. Reservations. So the Palestinians now say. Dennis Ross flatly denies it. Depends who you believe. A good deal of the problem is that Palestinian nationalism seems to have no raison d'etre but destroying Israel. A prize of war -- too bad they won it in the wrong century for prizes of war. For small states, anyway. Russia still has Kaliningrad (and about 200 miles of former Poland) and China has Tibet. I have never dickered with an Israeli nor a Palestinian but apparently they drive hard bargains. They are willing to lose their own children to make a point. The Israelis took a big gamble for peace with Oslo, and lost, bigtime. Giving away physical security (and land you're deeply attached to) for mere potential political security is a hard choice, particularly when the only guys on the other side of the table are dictators. What have the Palestinians done? As Golda Meir said, we will have peace when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us.