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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. T. who wrote (3228)	2/3/2003 9:19:32 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15993

If you are being terrorized by a people that are led by despot who promotes antisemtism, does not allow for freedoom of speech or a free press or open dissent and foregoes negotiatons to pursue his ends via terrorism you have to fight back and forget about talking,imo. Assuming for a moment that this is a 100% correct description of the situation, could you define who you would "fight"? A definition of the target, that is.... I'm sympathetic to the PA cause, but Arafat chose to leave the negotiating table and pursue, whatever it is he wants, by way of violence. Perhaps he thought something better would come along, who knows? So what to do? Should Israel continue to build more settlements, oppress and humiliate Palestinians, not to mention, kill indiscriminately? All I am saying is that the answer to the above question is "No" - not only because of humanitarian reasons, but because it is counterproductive to the goal of security and happiness. If I were in charge of Israel's government, I would come up with a peace plan, open it for negotiations, call on all Arab nations to get Arafat to agree, draw a line in the sand, leave the Palestinians to their own country (possibly to starve with their non-existent economy, I think) and not cross that line for a decade. No more suicide bombings, since I would not let them cross the boundary, either. or a free press or open dissent This reminds me - Do you have any idea why Sharon refuses impartial UN observers in occupied territories? I remember something of the sort and never really understood why...

To: E. T. who wrote (3228)	2/3/2003 9:25:31 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 15993

"Hey don't get me wrong, I'm sympathetic to the PA cause, but Arafat chose to leave the negotiating table and pursue, whatever it is he wants, by way of violence. " ET, I too am sympathetic. Palestinians have been screwed by their fellow arabs and their leaders all along. There was a strong majority in place to accept the Peace agreement. Whether to fend of cries of sellout by the more radical, or because of a deep seeded belief in eliminating israel althogether, Arafat chose to reject peace and thus betrayed his people once again and condemned them to this horrific state of affairs they now reside in. When iraq is over with, Bush will return to the israel/palestine issue and the Palestinians will get one final chance for peace and a homeland imo. I think Sharon knows this and will accept a fair conclusion as long as the new state takes every measure to control the terrorists. From all of this we get to a better mideast and a better world for all folks. Mike