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: jcky who wrote (60268)	12/6/2002 10:27:48 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Then there's the one about the pattern of settlements determining the future boundaries of the state, just as they allegedly did before 1948 "allegedly" because the borders then were really determined by the outcome on the battlefield; large parts of post-1948 Israel initially contained no Jewish settlements, while many pre-1948 settlements had to be abandoned. In any case, this myth has had no impact either on the Arabs or on the international matrix that frames the boundary question, a matrix that has persisted ever since it was defined by US secretary of state William Rogers, in the late 1960s, as the 1949 armistice lines, with "minor rectifications." Just as the current battle will wind up determining a new armistice line, probably not so different from what was proposed at Taba. As I said, the Palestinians are slow learners. Did you hear that Voice of Palestine just announced a new Palestinian chapter of Al Qaeda? Just as in 1948, when the attitude toward Zionism was "Just say no and kill the Jews", so now, they behave as if they would rather have a bombed out cellar by force than a country by compromise.

To: jcky who wrote (60268)	12/7/2002 1:40:46 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi jcky; Re: "Nevertheless, the issue has again pushed itself onto the agenda, almost certainly because one of the candidates in the upcoming election, Labor leader Amram Mitzna, has signaled his intention to carry out a unilateral withdrawal and evacuate some settlements if renewed negotiations with the Palestinians fail to produce an agreement. ... So why bother treating this outburst any differently? The answer is that Mitzna's proposal might actually be implemented, at least in part, even if he is not elected." I wonder how many people would have thought it possible that after nearly two years of Sharon as Prime Minister, not only would the Intifada be still in full operation, but that the 2nd largest political party in Israel would be calling for the abandonment of the settlements, whether the Palestinians agree to talks or not. No wonder the Palestinians are fighting on. They can probably see the "light at the end of the tunnel". -- Carl