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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (98213)	5/14/2003 1:25:01 AM
From: kumar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

In 1948... Its 2003. dont u believe its time for both sides to have a rethink on successes and failures over the last 50+ years ? In a different context - the 3rd war between India & Pakistan was 1971. Then both became nuke capable. Now both show a desire for peace.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (98213)	5/14/2003 5:21:58 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Just a few historical notes: Unlike every other "colonizer" on the planet, the Zionists a) were colonizing their own homeland, not foreign land b) came in with checkbooks, not armies and bought the land. If the Creek tried to buy back their ancient homelands in Georgia, would you call them "aggressive colonizers"? In 1948 a) the Arab countries launched the war and invaded Palestine b) the Arab war goal was to drive the Jews into the sea. The Jewish war goal was to avoid being driven into the sea. c) the Arab High Committee advised Arabs in Jewish populated areas to get out of the way. That, and general panic (the educated left before the start of the war) meant that at least two thirds of the those who fled never saw a Jewish solder. Aside from that, you're right, everything was equivalent. I think those "historical notes" deserve to be taken away and deposited in some dark and quiet place. I'm not saying I won those ancient arguments, but I think anybody who read them came away with the conclusion at least that legitimate points were made on both sides, and that any attempt on either side to present these issues as a simple black/white proposition is ill-advised, to say the least. How many times am I supposed to type thousand-word posts in the interest of reminding people, most of whom already know it, that it wasn't quite that damned simple? I'm not going to start it again. Been there, done that doesn't begin to say it. Anybody who wants to know what I'm talking about can roll back about 25,000 posts. sr@badlydisappointed.com