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: zonder who wrote (50428)	10/9/2002 7:03:42 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The current administration of Israel has unconditional support of the US behind them, and they know it. That is true. But it did not happen overnight. An argument can be made that the Arabs forced us to it. I have said, before you started posting here, that 9/11 did for Sharon what 12/7 did for Churchill. It brought the USA totally in on their side. It is natural for us to be on their side. They are an island of "Westernism" in a sea of "Mid-Easternism." This is also, as Steve pointed out in a recent post, the basic reason for the conflict. We would have had an much easier time in the Mid-East the last 60 years if Israel has never come into being. (If that had been the way it was, we would just be backing up the Tanker and saying "Fill it Up!" without caring about what was going on there.) However, that choice was not available, and we have to play the cards that have been dealt.

To: zonder who wrote (50428)	10/9/2002 1:08:04 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

- America's unwavering support for Israel in everything Now come Zonder... Even you have to admit that has not been case. At most, the US has unwavering support for the EXISTENCE of Israel, not all of its policies.. I have unwavering support for the existence of Israel, if only because its a democracy. But I do not support the policies of the more reactionary Jews within Israel, namely annexation of the West Bank (though a case could have been made back in 1967 for such a move on a "spoils of war" argument). It has gone too far now though and Palestinians have been promised a "homeland". But the Israelis STILL have the right to ensure their own security and for that reason I support the demilitarization of the West Bank.. And the US provided SUPPORT for such a policy, to the extent that we were providing financial aid and training to the PA government in exchange for guarantees that Arafat would also acknowledge the right of Israel to exist in peace and security. Of course, Arafat was willing to politically speak those words in order to gain US support at restraining Israel, but he permitted Hamas, the PFLP, and many other groups to continue pursuing their goal of destroying Israel. And as further evidence that the US is restraining Israel, and not providing "unwavering support" in the face of terrorist attacks, one must recognize that Bush has warned Sharon against taking the kinds of actions that the US has felt perfectly legitimate in taking in Afghanistan and elsewhere. One can only imagine the repercussions were the US to obtain documents that directly implicated Iran in formenting terrorist attacks against the US as the Israelis found several months ago. One can only imagine if the US intercepted two tons of plastic explosive for use by suicide bombers, in addition to rockets, missiles, mortars, and other ordnance, all provided by Iran to be used against US civilians. No... unwavering support would be permitting Sharon to deal with Arafat, Hamas, and the PFLP as he saw fit. And it certainly would not inhibit Sharon from destroying Hezbollah RIGHT NOW. But the US does restrain Israel, even in the face of such public and deliberate threats against them by Arab and muslims states in the region. Hawk