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: GST who wrote (129109)	4/13/2004 2:14:44 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Meet with the Arab states in the middle east and agree to do something about the dreadful situation in Israel while getting the Arab states to sign on to do something helpful in Iraq You mean like Egypt, who is running the guns into Gaza? Or Syria and Iran, who are funding al Sadr and sending him fedayeen as well? Or Saudi Arabia, that is funding the Hamas and the Wahabbi terrorists in Iraq and also sending fedayeen? The Arabs governments are part of the problem, not part of any solution. If they had wanted an Israeli/Pal settlement, there would have been one thirty years ago or more. They don't. Now nothing terrifies them more than the thought of a democracy in Iraq.

To: GST who wrote (129109)	4/13/2004 2:24:59 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Meet with Russia, France, Germany, China and Great Britain and create the foundation for an effective, unified American-European position on Iraq. I thought we were talking about how to deal with Iraq, not how to solve all of the world's and the ME's problems. I'll therefore ignore the aspects of your post that I don't think fit within the context of the present conversation. Because of its international scope, your language I quoted resembles in many respects the UN option Kerry advocates. But I doubt seriously that Bush's chestnuts will be pulled out of the fire by China, Russia, Germany, and France, so your idea is IMO unlikely to occur. In fact, it has zero chances of succeeding, even if anyone in a position of influence advocates it, something that isn't happening. I suppose the reason you ignore the UN option is because you already dissed it. But that's cool, so long as you recognize that it is a viable, reasonable option. Even if you hate to agree with my suggestion that Bush adopt it and seal his re-election, you probably agree with the plan. And don't get so concerned, perhaps Bush won't do it. He'll face a tougher race as a result.