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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mani1 who wrote (146637)	4/29/2002 11:06:31 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1571443

I agree that some, perhaps many of Israel's actions contribute to the hopelessness and sense of injustice felt by some or many Palestinians. I don't think fighting back against the organizations that train, equip and let loose these killers increases the number of suicide bombers. Even if the perceived injustice is completely real (and at least some of it is in my opinion) and the sense oh hopelessness is partially or even largely created by Israel's policies, that doesn't make the attempt to eliminate the planners of these attacks immoral, and IMO it doesn't make it counterproductive. Tim

To: Mani1 who wrote (146637)	4/29/2002 11:43:10 AM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1571443

Sharon knows what he is doing. He would be bored if there was no war. It seems disingenuous to suggest that Sharon is doing what he is doing out of anything other than self-defense. We're seeing the latest battle in a years-old war. There is little doubt that Sharon is acting in RESPONSE to unmitigated attacks against his civilian population, and that Arafat had an opportunity to at least pursue a reasonable, peaceful resolution and walked away from it. If these people continue to rehash ancient history, there can be no end to the fighting. A compromised solution is no solution (since in compromise, someone doesn't get what they want, which only result in more fighting down the road -- this is where Clinton went so wrong in his attempt). There are only two ways for this to end: Israel crushes the Palestinians (not good for a variety of reasons) or there is a negotiated settlement which is acceptable to both parties. The problem is, of course, you can't negotiate with Arafat because (a) he is a liar, and (b) he has subrogated the interests of the Palestinian people to his own interests, whatever they may be. Ultimately, the Palestinians need to get rid of Arafat in favor of someone who has credibility, as Arafat has none. So, my point is, Sharon isn't the problem here. Sharon would not be doing what he is doing had Arafat not pursued the terror war against Israel. Arafat had every opportunity to pursue peace, and he walked away. So it is ALL on him -- the needless deaths of Palestinians as well as those of Jews. It was a concious (sp?) decision taken by Arafat to do this at this particular time. Simplistic? Yes, it is. But if anyone tries to craft a solution based on the intricate history of the region, it seems destined to fail. They need to put the history behind them and move forward. As far as I can see, it is Arafat who refused to do this. If I were Sharon, at this point, I would refuse to talk with Arafat at all. You can't negotiate with a liar. My goal is not to offend, but to explain what makes sense to me.