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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132236)	5/8/2004 5:22:24 PM
From: Rascal	Respond to of 281500

The peace is delayed because "violence sprung up". Bush: Palestinian state by 2005 'may be hard' Saturday, May 8, 2004 Posted: 1757 GMT (0157 HKT) (CNN) -- President Bush said in an interview published in Egypt on Saturday that establishing a Palestinian state by 2005 "isn't as realistic as it was two years ago" when he and regional leaders pledged to make it happen. But the president told the Egyptian newspaper Al Alhram he would not make excuses and wanted "to push hard as fast as possible to get a state in place." "2005 may be hard, since 2005 is right around the corner," he said. "I readily concede the date has slipped some, primarily because violence sprung up." edition.cnn.com Rascal @OoppsHeDidItAgain-WRONG.com

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132236)	5/9/2004 7:49:17 AM
From: el_gaviero	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

“ Israel spent years trying to get them [Palestinian Authority] to uphold their part of the bargain. They never did. “ This sentence typifies the unhealthy mindset of Israel (or at least of the Likudnics), and is also an indication of the degree to which the Israelis are fooling themselves in order to justify their approach to the Palestinian problem. Destroy the P.A. Carve the West Bank into bantu-stans. THEN blame the P.A. for not doing its job. “The US has been involved in the Mideast for 50 years, due to oil.” Yes, and only once in those 50 years have Arab states refused to sell us oil --- and that was because of our one-sided support for Israel. If we took a neutral stance with respect to the Israel/Palestinian conflict, we would not have a problem. The Arab states are, as you say, “dysfunctional” but that is their problem, not ours. They need our money as much as we need their oil, and the only force strong enough to prevent an exchange of the one for the other is our dysfunctional political process which causes us to take actions not in the interest of the American people. “Osama bin Laden, by his own words, declared war on the US because we had troops on the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia ....” .... AND because of US support of Israel. Every since 9/11, I have thought that our policy should be to make our best effort to wipe out Al-Queda, then quietly comply with its demands, i.e., get out of Saudia Arabia and become an honest broker to the Israel/Palestinian fight. “That is why no serious person considers isolationism seriously, much less your racist remarks about "anglo celtic" people.” I’d be interested in hearing your definition of the word “racist.”