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: D. Long who wrote (41867)	9/4/2002 2:47:42 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Found this amusing description by one of the main Kurdish politicians in the WSJ, The Kurdish experience, says Mr. Barham, "shows that Iraq need not be ruled by a totalitarian dictatorship." He adds that "if we can do it, then the rest of Iraq can do it." He notes that the Kurds have done it despite their "tough neighborhood." He suggests comparing the Kurdish success with "the corruption and the tyranny of Arafat" over the Palestinians. It's an intriguing comparison. The Kurds have long had their own frustrated aspirations of statehood. When the British drew the map outlining today's Iraq, they carved up the Kurdish population among four neighboring countries. Today, there are some 12 million Kurds in Turkey, six million in Iran, one million in Syria and another million living overseas, as well as the four million in Iraq. For the Kurds, unlike the Palestinians, no one is promising statehood. Turkey, especially, fiercely opposes any move that direction, afraid that an independent Kurdish state would link up with Turkey's own Kurdish separatists. And unlike the Palestinians, who face the relative restraint of democratic Israel, the Iraqi Kurds face Saddam, who offers no mercy. An American scholar of the region, Michael Rubin, wrote an article last December for the Jerusalem Report in which he quoted a Kurdish professor in northern Iraq, who commented on Palestinian support for Saddam: "If the Palestinians love Saddam so much, why don't they try living under him; we'd be glad to move to Israel." opinionjournal.com The Israelis would approve that swap in a cold minute, LOL!

To: D. Long who wrote (41867)	9/4/2002 8:49:33 AM
From: Dennis O'Bell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Speaking of China... As a meeting nears, China pulls plug on Google By Associated Press, 9/4/2002 BEIJING - China has blocked access to the popular US Internet search engine Google, amid government calls to tighten media controls before a major Communist Party congress. Attempts to look at the site through Chinese Internet services yesterday were rejected with a notice saying it couldn't be found. Users and consultants who monitor the Chinese Internet said the site has been blocked for several days. boston.com The usual signs of pathetic weakness imho. Only a western democracy like ours is strong enough to withstand the plurality of opinion we allow.

To: D. Long who wrote (41867)	9/4/2002 10:37:34 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Blaming the victim? Not very liberal of you John! You completely ignore two important facts: why Israel occupied and continues to occupy the territories, and Arafat is a terrorist. You obviously believe that, given the "proper conditions", Arafat would be a regular Thomas Jefferson. He's had 10 years to be a Thomas Jefferson and he gave the world this nightmare called the Intifidah. No more excuses, John. Move on. Staying up late left you a bit angry? Calm down. You are using the old debate tactic of sharp extremes. I gather the Bush dichotomy disease has slid on down to Houston. It's apparent you and I are not going to get anywhere debating the turning points in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, given that you picture my position that way and think that the way to carry on a conversation is with one line put downs. My position is that there were two turning points, after the 67 war and the Oslo agreement in which the terrain of Palestinian-Israeli conflicts could have been altered by ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Had it done so, that, most likely, would have reduce the support for confrontation and would either have constrained Arafat into playing the game of power differently or brought different leadership to the front. The horrific consequences of failing to take that turn are certainly in front of us right now, once again. As for the last paragraph, you've seen my solution and misportray it. Someone posted, sometime back, a multipronged strategy suggestion, which made good sense to me, one prong of which was work on the human rights issue. As for the parallel with China, one could do a great deal worse than a strategy which simultaneously criticizes their human rights record and tries to envelop them in international trade and encourage economic development. I hope you got a good night's sleep.