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 : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (33)	7/1/2002 9:35:46 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3959

Is this significant? One can find a handful of Palestinian statements of moderation also - but that isn't significant enough to change the underlying conflict.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (33)	7/1/2002 9:49:31 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3959

Brumar89, this is a fine example of what US foreign policy success if they mediate between warring parties in a neutral manner. It is when they start taking sides as in the ISraeli-Palestenian situation , thet they run into failures. Chinu, you are not taking the very different behavior of the parties into account. Musharraf has cooperated with the US since September 11th. The Indians may be grousing that he's playing a double game, but he has some time and credibility left to show the world whether his efforts are sincere. Arafat, aside from a few publicity stunts, has been solidly on the side of al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. His time and credit have run out. It is no more helpful to remain neutral no matter what the behavior of the parties, than to enter the mediation with no neutrality.