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: Lou Weed who wrote (129872)	4/23/2004 12:10:52 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

And what percentage of the Arab population do you believe that profess this sentiment??? About 25% - 50%. When the Palestinian polls ask if the goal of the intifada is to destroy Israel, they always get a yes from somewhere in this percentage. but you make it sound like this is part of the Arab/Islamist culture which it certainly isn't On the contrary, it's deeply embedded in the culture, based on the religion of Islam. The Koran states clearly that it is the last revelation and it is the duty of every Muslim to spread this revelation over all the earth. For a land to become Muslim is following the word of Allah. For a Muslim land to become non-Muslim, that's contrary to the word of Allah. BTW, do you have any shred of evidence for your claim, besides wishfulness? Boy, it sure would be nice if they could just simply stop "accepting" them. If that was the case we wouldn't be bogged down in our current mess. Way too simplistic..... It would be a big step in the right direction, for it would mean that the Arabs started blaming their problems on the misrule inside their own country, not on external enemies. There is clearly something within Arab political culture that allows dictators to stay in power forever, if they take care to push the right buttons. C'mon now Nadine, you can do better than that.......Sharon's excursion at Al-Aqsa had absolutely nothing to do with it I suppose? Damn little, aside from serviing as a convenient pretext for the starting time. Arafat had aseembled and started paying the Tanzim 3 months before. Arafat was careful to assure Barak, the sucker, that Sharon's grandstand on the Temple Mount (he never went into a mosque) would not cause riots. Then when the riot started, Arafat was quick to call for "days of rage" and broadcast nothing but footage of the 1st intifada on PA TV for days. Arafat had it planned. It was his idea to keep the Pals from shooting at him, by making sure they aimed at the Israelis, and to sweeten the pot in the negotiations. Worked pretty well for the first few months too - until he elected Sharon. Arafat is as bad for his people as Sharon is for his. You'll get no argument from me as I don't condone Arafat's actions That is something. Have you noticed that, unlike Israeli PMs and US Presidents, who come and go, Arafat remains a permafeature of the landscape? Hint: might that provide a clue as to whey the situation is so intractable? Might that, in fact, qualify him as far worse than Sharon, no matter how badly you think of Sharon, because Sharon was elected and will leave when his term is up? Thank God that most of us think that peace is still an option. You think so, with Arafat and Sharon in place? You'll have to catch me up on the logic, didn't you just tell me it was impossible? There was a point to my bringing up Chamberlain, one you seem to have missed - Chamberlain was not an unreasonable guy, and his approach would have worked - if he hadn't been dealing with Adolf Hitler, a man who was hell-bent on a war of conquest. When you sit around and urge peace talks, it really, really matters what the ultimate aims of the parties are. If one of the parties (it doesn't need to be both) doesn't want a settlement, but a victory in the war, then no amount of peace talks will ever work. In fact, the guy who wants war will just use them as a convenient time to get ready for war. So tell me, do you really think Arafat wants peace? or victory in the 'armed struggle'? And if it's victory, what's the bloody use to talk peace with him?