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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (6674)	4/3/2004 9:23:15 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15987

My point being that political leaders in both Israel and Palestine would find it quite politically detrimental to have their right to individual freedom of action impeded by outside international forces.. Hawk, haven't you noticed that the Palestinians routinely beg and demand internationalization of the conflict? There is nothing they would love better than to have more UN troops or NATO troops, or whatever. Their experience with such "peacekeepers" has been very positive; they know that any "impeding" would fall on the Israelis, not themselves. First, the UN guys side with them to begin with. Second, the presence of such "peacekeepers" does little to slow down a bunch of terrorists, as opposed to a regular army with a chain of command. Terrorists are much less visible than tanks and APCs, so they generally don't get observed. Even if they do get observed, for example using the "peacekeepers" as human shields, what are the UN troops going to do about it? Who do they complain to? Terrorists don't have a chain of command. Arafat's use of deniable groups whose actions he "deplores" is legendary. If the terrorists should decide they don't like the UN presence, they can kill some UN guys, or threaten to, knowing that the UN will only pull out. Any downside whatsoever would strictly come from their own bosses. Everybody knows the UN does not shoot back. Whereas no matter how mad an Israel captain gets, he knows that the consequences of shooting a UN guy would be very severe for himself and for Israel generally, politically and diplomatically. This gives the terrorists a definite edge in intimidation. In Lebanon, the UNFIL troops didn't complain even when Hezbullah set up rocket launchers on their doorstep. But they did see no evil when Hezbullah "borrowed" some UN uniforms to kidnap and kill some IDF soldiers. The UN guys even shot a video of the aftermath of the kidnapping, then kept it from the Israelis until it was too late to be of use.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (6674)	4/9/2004 6:32:42 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

One side or the other might figure its in their interest to have "the cops" limit the other sides freedom of action. The "one side" most likely to think this way is the Palestinians because 1 - They are less powerful and so they have more chance of getting something if a third party forces the issue, 2 - In the past the UN and other non-local forces (other countries or international parties) have more of a record of restraining Israel (or trying to) then of restraining the Palestinian terrorists. 3 - Its easier to restrain Israel. The Palestinians have many factions if you get one to agree another one will not and will continue with the terrorism. If Israel really wanted to resist whatever the cost then Israel has more strength to resist but I think Israel would be more deterred by a high cost and the Israeli government has more ability to restrain the IAF or probably even individual armed Israelis then the PLO/PLA has of restraining Palestinian terrorists. 4 - The Palestinians might figure that if the outside military forces become too bothersome that they can sooner or later be pushed out by an Intifada against the outside army. The US is busy in Iraq, and many European armies would be unlikely to put up with slowly bleeding over the years. Basically the Palestinians care more about their agenda then the outside armies are likely to care about theirs. 5 - Would outside armies really be that detrimental to the Palestinian terrorists freedom of action? Would then be any less free then they are now when the IAF can go after them? The outside armies might well restrain Israel's freedom of action but I'm not sure that it would work both ways even assuming that the outside army is not sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Tim