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: JohnM who wrote (48560)	10/1/2002 9:09:36 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

That is it would increase Arafat's popularity (a mistake from Sharon's point of view if he wished that to decline--I've read/heard some more cynical arguments that Sharon wished to increase Arafat's popularity). But I had not thought of its implications within the Israeli government. Read and learn ...but know enough not to trust your source overmuch. As usual, the NYTimes quotes from the Israeli left (you can't get much farther left than Aluf Benn), who are speaking more of wishes than considered expectations. Sharon miscalculated, and he had to pull back. Nothing important about the general situation has changed. Sharon's government will not be challenged, nor will any further Israeli concessions be demanded by President Bush. As for "increasing Arafat's popularity," we have definitely seen this movie before -- how did it end the last time? The NYTime's coverage of Israel echoes Ha'aretz', but is, if possible, even more to the left. BTW, I heard an interesting remark about Ha'aretz from cousins of mine who live in Tel Aviv. They said that Ha'aretz' unreconstructed leftism has become so unpopular among Israelis that they are almost embarrassed to be seen subscribing to the paper. They, like most Israelis, are Likud supporters now, and only still get Ha'aretz from habit and because it has good features.