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: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (58191)	11/22/2002 12:04:48 AM
From: bacchus_ii	Respond to of 281500

Very great post KC. The best I've read in the past couple of weeks. Gottfried_II

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (58191)	11/22/2002 1:15:55 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Although the example is an isolated one, I'm sure there were other situations around the world where breakdowns occurred for various reasons. The example was picked out of many I could have used. The TIPH monitors in Hebron produce the same result. The multinational monitoring contingent I am referring to would be truly multinational and of a scale not seen before And how would that help? This is a big hand-wave. There is no substitute for a real peace between two non-terrorist states who both have a chain of command. Which is why I find it odd that every time there is an attack in Israel,the PA is automatically blamed,even when Hamas or I-Jehad takes blame for it.So now,after the fracturing has taken place, and the hard-liners are moving towards Hamas or I-Jehad,you are concerned there is no partner for peace If we can just cast our memories back to Oslo, you may remember that the theory was that the PA would take charge, turn itself into a legitimate government and provide law and order. That meant, assert a monopoly of the use of force and prevent "fracturing". Arafat chose not to do that and to let the terror keep up through various organizations such as Hamas and PFLP. When the intifada started, he invented the Tanzim (an offshoot of Fatah) and Al Aqsa as new terrorist organiations. Now you can't have it both ways. Either Arafat is in charge and he is running the terror, or everything is fractured, in which case it is clearly a total waste of time to talk to Arafat as he cannot deliver anything. In neither case is there a partner for peace. One side cannot make peace unilaterally; only war. Bibi or Arik will find a way to make thinks right and put an end to the third uprising. The previous two uprisings ended in exhaustion after three years. This looks very possible in this case too. Insurgencies are like other wars; they can be won, they can be lost, they can wind down in some in-between state that gets resolved by negotiations. Palestinian political purposes have been particularly muddled in this uprising -- tell me, what are they fighting for? what message do they send by killing children inside Israel, besides "Death to Israel"? Worse, they started the war after Israel had come damn close to the very best offer it would ever voluntarily make to a Palestinian side it trusted. So, normal courses of negotiations, such as some intermediate compromise, are not apparent. The Palestinians are currently so politically dysfunctional that they cannot even produce a short-term cease-fire. Worse, the Eurocrats and the other Arabs enable their political idiocy by making them think that concessions will be squeezed out of the Israelis without their having to make any in turn. So the situation is in stalemate until something external changes, or one side becomes war-weary. From close reading, I think the Palestinians will go first. (If the Israelis were ready to crack, you would see Mitzna win the election. Polls say otherwise) The Palestinians' economic situation is much rougher, and they know (despite various hysterical spokesmen suggesting otherwise) that they are not in an existential struggle. They will not be ethnically cleansed off the land. But the Israelis are in a struggle where they will be cleansed off any land they give up, and most of their enemies will be satisfied with nothing less than the destruction of Israel. They say so daily.

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (58191)	11/22/2002 3:03:03 AM
From: Nukeit	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

<<OH!And the latest Poll in the US says I am in a strong majority of those concerned with what’s happening, and I am neither Arab nor Jewish.I guess you don’t need to be when it comes to making peace,eh? Take Care. KC@GivePeaceAChance.com>> How about the givepeaceachance members quit talking B.S. and back up their Ideas with action. Protesting and congratulating each other on T.V. does not solve the situation. Why don't they get on every bus in Israel to show the world that they believe in what they are doing. This way we can find out who really wants peace and they can save time by protesting one side. Yes, I figured that they don't trust the palestinians either.

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (58191)	11/22/2002 5:40:56 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Very true. It is a relief to see that America is not just Nadine, CB, and LB.

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (58191)	11/23/2002 1:16:22 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

Which is why I find it odd that every time there is an attack in Israel,the PA is automatically blamed,even when Hamas or I-Jehad takes blame for it. Why should you find it odd?? If a government, especially one with such a proportionally large "police" force as the PA, refuses to contain militant activities against a neighboring state, that government should bear the blame. We don't see the PA working with the Israelis to prevent such attacks. In fact, Arafat let over 2,000 militants go free several years back... The PA attempted to import 50 tonnes of explosives to be used by those militants.... No KC... A government IS responsible for maintaining security and "pacifying" armed groups operating within their boundaries. Arafat has a responsibility to prevent attacks against Israel, just as the US has an obligation not to permit groups seeking the destruction of Canada or Mexico from operating here. The territory of the PA has already been defined, with additional territory to be granted to them upon completion of a peace treaty with Israel. Thus, any attacks originating from the territory of the PA can reasonably be considered to have been sanctioned by the PA. Unless you're trying to convince us that 50,000 police (1 cop for every 60 people in the PA), as well as Arafat's COMPLETE control over the finances of the territories, don't afford the PA the ability to control these militant factions. I would suggest that this is a foolish, and intellectually dishonest stance to present. Hawk@occam'srazor.org