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: Noel de Leon who wrote (99793)	6/1/2003 5:32:18 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;" Has Israel accepted this? If so, when? The Resolution speaks of "negotiated borders" clearly implying that the withdrawal need not be 100%. Also the author of the resolution points out the phrasing "territories occupied" as opposed to "the territories occupied". The US and the USSR had a big fight over that phrasing and the US won. This was one of the reasons the Arabs rejected it. The Israelis say that by accepting the framework of "land for peace" negotiations, such as Oslo, they are accepting Resolution 242. Also, note that Resolution 242 has nothing at all to say about the creation of any new states, such as Palestine.