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 (6804)	4/21/2004 4:35:57 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

And let me guess.. you think this is a good thing, right? Makes no difference to me. The guy was a sock puppet. Maybe it will help a few people to see that Arafat is the same as Hamas. One unilateral step deserves another.. and since Bush has now "taken sides" with Sharon, why shouldn't the rest of the Arab world take sides with Arafat again?? And this is different how? I keep asking you, what additional price do you think Israel will pay, that they aren't already paying? The Arabs are siding with Arafat? check. The Pals will commit terrorism to the max of their ability? check. The Pals will refuse to reform? check. Arafat's consolidating his power again, nullifying any moderate opposition There you go again. You keep talking as if there was a moderate opposition. If there was, it should have said something in 2000, in 2001 when Israel kept trying unilateral cease-fires, in 2002 when Bush offered the Road Map. It didn't. Because it doesn't exist. If this blows up into a full-scale confrontation that further empowers the militants Full scale with who? Syria? The Pals are at max already.