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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (104966)	7/12/2003 5:08:48 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

This is standard practice for colonialist adventures: divide and conquer. Get the Natives to murder each other, Obviously you have a comprehension disorder Jacob.. Civil war is a clash of cultures/ideologies, all vying for control over the future direction of a nation and/or people. And given the economic and demographic realities of the region, it's inevitable. Would you voice the same opinion had we been discussing Pre-Nazi Germany and I had advocated a German Civil War aimed at opposing Nazim?? After all, Hitler and his Nazis led the German people to their national defeat, committing unspeakable horrors and killing millions in the process. What would have been the human cost of such a civil war as compared to the human and economic price the world was forced to pay a mere 10 years later?? So if the world is going to be thrust into turmoil due to the rise of militant Islam, all I'm stating is that I would rather Arabs fight this battle out amongst themselves so that no one can say Westerners imposed the value system after a huge WWII style confrontation. And it's not a new phoenomena for Arabs to fight Arabs. They've been doing it for centuries now. But I guess you prefer that Islamic Militantcy succeed in the Middle East, and drag us into a potential conflagration that could rival WWII, if not larger?? It's coming Jacob... Islamic Militantcy is inevitable unless a viable alternative is provided to the Arab people of the region. Hawk

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (104966)	7/12/2003 5:14:51 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 281500

Pretty crazy, Jacob, comparing the desire to have the Palestinian Authority pursue terrorists with an attempt to "divide and conquer". I guess objecting to suicide bombing in the first place is just a matter of neo-colonialist snobbery, huh? If we were really sympathetic to "the wretched of the earth", we would send more bombs, and encourage more Palestinian children to blow themselves up with the hope of taking out Israeli children.......

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (104966)	7/12/2003 8:11:43 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Oh what bullshit. If Israel offers Abu Mazen a deal, it's Israel's fault becuase it's "fomenting a Palestinian civil war". The only way Israel could satisfy Hamas is to commit national suicide - is that your recommended course of action? Listen, the standard textbook for nationalist movements (the successful ones) is that they fight to bring their opponents to the table, then they cut a deal, then the moderates fight it out with the hard-liners to accept the deal. Look at Michael Collins and the Irish civil war. Look at how Ben Gurion brought Begin and the Irgun to heel. The Palestinian have never fought this fight because their terrorist leader didn't care about actually forming a state, he just wanted to continue the "armed struggle" forever, and agreed with the hard-liners' goals, i.e. destroy Israel and take all of Palestine. That's why Palestinianism is a failed nationalist movement.