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.

Pastimes : BS Bar & Grill - Open 24 Hours A Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (1537)	10/31/2002 1:40:34 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6901

And one thing that Netayahu is good at is conveying why Israel can not succumb to terrorism.. It would be interesting to see how differently he would have dealt with the issues Sharon has faced. If there is a conservative streak in me, it's dealing with terrorism.. Sometimes I think that someone like Netanyahu, even with his ultra-nationalist agenda and desire to annex the West Bank, would be the kind of leader that would make Arafat and his militant cohorts think twice. I know others would be offended by that, but Israel and the Palestinians have essentially passed the point of negotiation. They're both in a brawl and someone has to emerge with enough power to dominate the other and bring stability to the region. Of course, the losing side (likely the Palestinians) would lose considerable leverage in determining the ultimate fate of their state, but that really was destined to occur when Arafat foolishly launched into the more recent "intifada".. I don't necessarily hate the Palestinians, but they have foolishly hitched their fate to Arafat and the militants. And until these groups are destroyed and "pacified" (likely by force), there will be no moderates emerging in the Palestinian leadership. That said, the international community will not permit Israel to annex the territories. But an Israeli defeat of the Palestinian Authority and militants would place the onus on the Israelis to deal in a magnaminuous manner towards the Palestinian people, granting them a state, but with borders and a security status that Israelis are willing to tolerate. History will likely show that Arafat and his thugs were the primary impediment to Palestinian statehood on their terms. Had they taken a pacifist and passive resistance strategy (Ghandi style), the Israelis would have had all of their arguments and qualms about granting the entire territory to the PA quashed in the arena of international public opinion. Hawk