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: JohnM who wrote (71337)	2/4/2003 12:19:46 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Care to explain why, in your view, only the Palestinians are at fault?" Because they responded to the peace plan with Infitada 2. And when they did that, they indeed declared war on peace. It strikes me as real simple John. This in no way releases Israel for her actions before or after I2. Why do we have to take something so simple as responding to a peace plan with terror bombings as something complex with so many shades of gray to review? Mike

To: JohnM who wrote (71337)	2/4/2003 12:47:39 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

John, you yourself said that Arafat was not "able" to take the deal. It is very hard to see, logically, how pushing the Israelis to negotiate (which means offering even more than had been offered at Taba) was going to make Arafat be "able" to take a deal. Remember, the talks fell apart over the "right of return", not borders, or Jerusalem, or anything else. If one side is not "able" to make a peace, what use is it to talk? And, given the tone of your questions, let me pop one back at you. Care to explain why, in your view, only the Palestinians are at fault? They are not the only ones with faults, they are just the side that left the table and decided to throw their lot on the chances of a war. It takes two sides to make a peace. One side is enough to make a war.