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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richnorth who wrote (85494)	5/18/2002 10:02:51 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116836

The question one always has to ask in all conflict is what is fair use of conflict and will conflict stop if reasonable demands are met? Other questions may be, are the demands fair? Are they coherent? Is the opposition cohesive and do they have the representative integrity and control of the populace to voice their demands? On the Israeli side, they can be seen to be fair if they ask for the people to speak with one voice. The only way they can deal with that is they legitimize it as a cohesive state. If they deal in a divisive way with the opposition, they cannot complain if they get factions that act independently. If the Israelis will meet with no demands that enfranchise the Palestinians then they can expect more protest from them ad infinitum. So far the Israelis will not allow the Palestinians a state or any kind of self determination. Regardless of their security fears, which may be based on an exaggerated view of any future Palestinian power, I cannot see the justification for this. How long do they see themselves patrolling Palestinian gehttos? 100 years? A 1000? Asking the Palestinians to renounce violence is asking them to become sheep. I note that the Israelis will not renounce it either. Or continuing to settle the West Bank. Where is the justification for this? Or the further deconstruction of Arabic Jerusalem. So the Arabs complain about stealing land, so you justify that they would complain about you anyway, so you steal more. Makes sense. Countries have had to deal with potentially hostile border nations for generations. Nobody said it was any sinecure. Do the Israelis seriously think that a Palestinians state on their border is more harm than suicide bombers every week? If they are to prevent this any other way, do they have a good plan? If I were Israeli I would be demanding a solution that made sense. It can't be more of the same only tougher. How much do people have to be policed? Are they all that bad of that race? Worse say, than an Irish Catholic? Tough to say. I cannot say that the Palestinians will always be good neighbours. But the Arabs are right. Time Magazine, Hollywood, Hearst Publication and many others present a pro-Israel voice that comes from the might of America. Americans are brainwashed and co-opted and fear mongered. Israel can do no wrong, the Arabs no right. Look at 9-11. So they do wrong. We can see that. We do no wrong? Somewhere in between the truth lies. I will never accept that enemies are justifed above us, but I will never accept that because we do it or have done it, it is right. EC<:-}