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 (99956)	6/3/2003 11:50:46 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

If this is correct then Bush is walking into a dead end. Camp David was the high point for the Pals, NL. They went back to war and lost a lot since then, and they know it. They will never get the deal they could have had then. Plus, we have moved into the ME now, and are dealing with them from a new deck. I don't think a deal can be struck, but it will be interesting to see what does happen. In any case, we are now in a much stronger position now.When you have an Army controlling the area, people tend to listen.

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (99956)	6/4/2003 1:58:07 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"In essence, Dayan said, what Sharon is prepared to offer in terms of territorial concessions is far less than the Palestinians already rejected at Camp David talks in July 2000." Why should he offer more? Strange way of negotiating. Israelis make an offer. Palestinians reject without offering a counter proposal, and start Intifidah II. Palestinians lose Intifidah II. Palestinians demand more territorial concessions for the privelege of talking before asking for yet more. Derek