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 : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (2649)	2/6/2004 7:14:12 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7936

Astonishing? It was their land to begin with.......the Zionists finagled their way in. Yes astonishing. It doesn't matter who controlled it first, its astonishing when someone is willing to give up such a large fraction of the land they control when they are not forced to do so. Huh? Who gave it up willingly? The Arabs fought tooth and nail: english.aljazeera.net balkanunity.org I don't imagine that if they asked for it or if they committed terrorism to try and get it that the US would be willing to give almost half of the US to the "Native Americans" or to give up most of the South West to Mexico. What would you do if someone took your land? Is it fair that every time their are peace negotiations the Israelis reduce the amount of Palestinian land they allow the Palestinians to have? It might not be fair but it also isn't true. You make little sense. They want Israel gone, period. End of discussion. Nothing less. They will continue to commit terrorist acts until Israel is totally gone. So what? The religious right in this country wants gays banished from this country. 1 - Only a very small fraction of the religious right would want that. Only the Palestinian extremist want Israel gone just like the religious right in this country are extremists. 2 - If the religious right in the US does want that how is it a defense for the Palestinian terrorists? Extremist are always radical in their demands. That's the analogy. Israel has accepted the principle of two nations, that the Palestinians should have their own nation, but that it must respect Israel's right to exist. Has it? You need to read the history of the conflict, starting from the late 19th century thru the 20th century. If the Palestinians don't accept the principle of two nations then their is nothing to negotiate about and the history is irrelevant. If they want a negotiated peace they have to accept Israel's right to exist. The reason for the breakdown in peace talks has not been over whether the Palestinians recognize Israel or not. So I don't understand why you keep bringing it up. Then why has Israel been building settlements in the West Bank and Gaza since the 1980s?... ...Does this sound like a nation that has accepted the notion of two separate states? I don't think so! They accept the idea of two states. But they obviously have a big disagreement about where the border of those two states will be. LOL! There are some on the Israeli side that don't accept two states, but those who do accept the two state idea have the ability and apparent willingness to impose such a solution. In the Palestinian case it seems no one has the desire and perhaps no one has the ability to impose a negotiated solution on the extremists. In light of what's transpired during the peace talks, the above statement makes little sense. ted