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 (6760)	4/19/2004 8:31:09 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

Oh? That must have been back in the '40s and '50s. It sure hasn't been since UN resolution 242, and it wasn't the policy that Bush's father followed with regard to declaring that settlements were illegal... No, Hawk, you haven't been following carefully. Res. 242 uses careful ambiguity on the issue of borders, saying Israel must withdraw from "territories", not "the territories" and deserves "secure and recognized borders" to be "settled by negotiation". This language was put in by the US over Soviet objections, who wanted total withdrawal. So the US was never committed to total withdrawal, not at all. Negotiations yes, but not withdrawal. Nor, to my knowledge, did Bush I declare settlements "illegal". The US formulation was always "unhelpful", "obstacle to peace", etc, not illegal. The Israeli position on the territories was that they are occupying stateless, disputed territories taken in a defensive war, so they can build if they like. The US never backed this view but never came out foursquare against it either. Doesn't that now almost obligate us to cater just as much to the Palestine's "dovish" politicians to win support for a peace treaty? How do you cater to the non-existent? Catering to the right on one side generally as the effect of causing the right on the other side to win greater support. Again, no marginal risk visible. The Pals danced in the street on 9/11, remember? They routinely burn American flags in the street. They looooved their great patron, Saddam. What more can they do? As for boosting Hamas' popularity, of course it will, short-term. The question is the long term effects. You get street cred in Gaza by killing Jews. If Hamas can't keep up, they'll lose it.