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: tekboy who wrote (32797)	6/20/2002 4:02:29 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

It really turns on your opinion of whether Arab concerns are rational and assuagable by reasonable US policy changes, or are a paranoid exercise in scape-goating, where yielding to one demand will only buy you contempt and more demands. I find Gerecht's and Lewis' arguments persuasive on this point. Certainly, we have pursued many pro-Egyptian and pro-Saudi and -Kuwaiti policies in the last twenty years; where did they get us?

To: tekboy who wrote (32797)	6/20/2002 11:32:18 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Found a great quote today from a pro-Zionist British officer. Written many years ago but reads like today: “For many years the West has made the error of thinking Arab friendship can be gained by political appeasement with economic and military gifts and loans. This glaring fallacy has been exposed on many occasions but the policy persists... No amount of appeasement will make any Arab State love us; they hate us; but worse, they despise us. We should not mind hatred, but we can make them respect us”. Meinertzhagen, Richard. Middle East Diaries. London: Cresset Press, 1959 citcun.blogspot.com

To: tekboy who wrote (32797)	6/21/2002 9:52:08 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I found the State Department's definition of Terrorism while browsing an article about it, called, THE ECONOMICS AND THE EDUCATION OF SUICIDE BOMBERS. Does Poverty Cause Terrorism? by Alan B. Krueger & Jitka Maleckova It is too long to post here, and a little dry. Here is the URL and the definition. Suffice to say that, according to the article, the terrorists we are worried about are not recruited from the "ragheads" in Gaza. >>>The State Department, which acknowledges that no single definition of terrorism has gained universal acceptance, seems to have captured what is considered terrorism by many governments and international organizations. Since 1983, it has employed this definition for statistical and analytical purposes: "The term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. The term 'international terrorism' means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country." The State Department also specifies that "the term noncombatant is interpreted to include, in addition to civilians, military personnel who at the time of the incident are unarmed and/or not on duty....We also consider as acts of terrorism attacks on military installations or on armed military personnel when a state of military hostilities does not exist at the site, such as bombings against U.S. bases in the Persian Gulf, Europe, or elsewhere." The rub, of course, is that the definitions of "subnational" and "military hostilities" leaves much latitude for disagreement.<<< Rest is at: thenewrepublic.com