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 (6771)	4/20/2004 12:22:33 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 15987

Not at all.. and my comments were an academic exercise, not a personal attack. I didn't take them as a personal attack. I took them as an attack on some argument I made which wouldn't be personal. I didn't take the comments in a negative way but I still took them to be something different then what you meant by them so I can see how I didn't understand what you meant at first. All I was stating is that there are infinite ways for someone to criticize another's views. They can be logical, or illogical, pertinent, or irrelevant. I agree. but an actual peace reconciliation that leads to greater stability in the region, then that peace process must be managed to insure the results are within the desired parameters. Mainly I'm skeptical of the ability for anyone to manage it absent either a pre-existing agreement from both sides or the ability and willingness to put down any opposition (if necessary brutally) combined with the staying power to stay until things are settled (which would take at least years and perhaps generations) and a general understanding by everyone involved that the outside force imposing a solution was both strong enough, brutal enough, and had enough staying power to see off any opposition. I don't see either possibility as being that likely. I'm not sure there is anyone who really has the ability to make an agreement for the Palestinians, and even if there was their positions would probably be fare from those of the Israelis (in this sense we agree that things are at an impasse). But I don't think there is going to be any deployment of a strong, possibly brutal but reasonable fair foreign force with lots of long term staying power in to the area. Tim

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (6771)	4/21/2004 1:58:03 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

But Nadine has asserted that, somehow, that nothing can be done to create such a peace and that we should just follow Israel's lead because they obviously have both their own, and the rest of the world's interests at heart. Please do not put words into my mouth. You apparently think Bush is incapable of making up his own mind as to American interests, and can be lead on a string by Arik Sharon. I don't think so, myself. Just because you disagree with Bush's decision doesn't mean that Bush didn't make it. And my proposal is based upon the premise that we're stuck in an impasse between Israel and Palestine, with intransigence reigning on both sides You seem to think that there is somebody on the Pal side who could deliver a deal, if only Israel weren't so 'intransigent'. Care to name him?