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: tekboy who wrote (65251)	1/10/2003 11:19:20 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

re Doran, here are some comments on it that I just received from a player I respect hugely. Thanks, tek. The comments make sense, though they are the kinds of factual assertions which someone working the field can make. However, it does go to the framing issue. One part of that is that Doran framed it too starkly in my view. A kind of either/or. Generally there are options in between. Back to other things. Doran work is for tonight.

To: tekboy who wrote (65251)	1/10/2003 12:42:37 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

tek, there are a couple of questions I have about certain assertions in your friend's piece, which I would like to find out more about, precisely because he is a respected source. The real alternative was an effort to help both sides out of the death embrace by on-the-ground engagement to get them to take the steps that would help end the violence and terrorism and put them back on the path towards a negotiated solution. That was doable in the first year of the Bush administration, especially after 9/11 and even more so in December 2001 when Arafat was under huge pressure and started to act against the terrorists. Arafat "started to act against the terrorists"? How? Remember, in early December 2001 there was a huge spate of suicide bombings, Arafat came under pressure, and made a speech in Arabic where he edged closer to really saying, "call off the violence" without the usual number of nudges and winks. Then there was a slight lull for a couple of weeks as I recall. (By January the Fatah and Al Aqsa attacks were going again) BUT I don't remember ANY action. Did he jail any terrorists? Did he move against Hamas? Did he try to assert PA control? This is action? Were the Israelis supposed to say, thanks for the speech, we'll just ignore the attacks? (They had tried that in June 2001, remember, and it didn't do much then) Diplomacy around Arafat always reminds of family dynamics around a drunk. unlike their efforts to stop funding Al Qaeda, they actually did cut funds to Hamas in an effort to get them to talk about a ceasefire (which is happening in Cairo at the moment). This is the first I've heard about a cutoff of Saudi funds to Hamas for even a moment, but I'll take his word for it. BUT I would like the remind everybody that the "cease-fire" under discussion in Cairo pertains to Israel inside the Green Line only. Now lots of diplomats are perfectly happy to call this progress and help Fatah and Hamas declare 'open season on settlers' (which includes Gilo and other Jerusalem neighborhoods, as well as all the settlements), but it is not reasonable to expect the Israelis to regard selective murder of Israeli citizens as progress.