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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (176625)	10/20/2003 4:59:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571690

I don't think you understand my point. It is not the Israel should get more because they are stronger but that in any final settlement they will get more because they are stronger. If they become weaker they will get less, maybe nothing. the Israelis have always been stronger, first with the help of Europeans who felt guilty over the atrocities committed by Hitler, and then with the help of the US. The Arabs also had help from Europe and then the USSR. In terms of number they have always been superior and even in terms of quality of equipment they have not always been behind Israel. In most of Israel's wars Israel was stronger because of their own skill and the relative openness of their society more then they where superior because of foreign aid. In any case it doesn't matter to my argument if Israel's superiority of power was mostly due to help from outsides sources. The point is it exists, and while the more powerful party doesn't always get more of what it wants then the weaker party, that's the way to bet. That's like starving the hell out of one dog and feeding the other regularly in order to prove the point that the first dog is too weak to live. You make your point with overt intervention. In your example I would only be saying that in any dispute between the dogs that the stronger one would be more likely to have its way. If I made one of the dogs stronger and the other weaker it wouldn't effect my point. Your comment would be relevant only if I was arguing that the stronger party deserves to get more of what it wants because it is stronger. Tim