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: cnyndwllr who wrote (135637)	6/4/2004 4:44:06 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

There is some good news coming out of the Mideast. Israelis will pull out of gaza and ultimately parts of the WB beyond the fence. It seems Egypt will play a role in securing Gaza and Jordan may be doing some of he same in the WB. That should give the PA a chance to play a role in these areas. And without a functioning hamas, the chances of success for the PA will markedly improve. When i really put on my rose colored glasses and look way down the road, i can see a free trade zone including Israel, WB and Gaza. I can see a regional govt organization in jerusalem making decisions on areas of common concern. I will take the glasses off now and hope for the best. Mike

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (135637)	6/4/2004 4:53:51 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

First I don't think the choice is to to choose to kill Hamas leaders along with innocents OR to let Israeli children die instead. The reason I say that is because after the Hamas leaders and others have been driven further underground, they'll still be killing Israeli children Empirically untrue. When they are driven further underground, they can't plan as many attacks because they are too busy running and hiding. When the experienced officers are killed, their inexperienced replacements are less effective, esp. if they decide to keep their heads safe in Damascus. We kept hearing about how killing the Hamas leaders "would make it worse". Well, the Israelis did kill them, and judging by the number of attacks and Israeli casualty figures, they made it better, not worse. Hamas has been ineffective in the West Bank since Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, and now it seems quite ineffective in Gaza too - they have not managed to mount revenge attacks for Yassin or Rantisi, which must have been top priority for them. You are arguing in denial of the facts on the ground. The choice is as I laid it out - allow the terrorists a fool proof shield rather than risk innocents (the Israelis do try quite hard to kill children, and forgo many chances they could otherwise take), and watch Israelis die, or go in for the kill trying to minimize the death of innocents, but knowing there will be some. That is reality. Second, what I'd do is adopt rules of engagement that were indisputably fair What is "indisputably fair"? No checkpoints, no fences, no Israeli raids or attacks at all - because after all, it is only "indiputably fair" to attack pure military targets, and if your enemy declines to present any, it must not be "indisputably fair" to attack anything at all. Sounds to me like this "indisputably fair" approach hands victory to any terrorist army on a silver platter. I guess that if the Israelis tried to house their entire society in bunkers and behind walls, that would be "indisputably fair". Oh wait, the Palestinians also complain about Israeli fences ("apartheid walls") and loss of Israeli jobs, so even fences and bunkers aren't "indisputably fair". Can you name one single measure that the Israelis have taken in their own defense - just one - that hasn't been protested, that is regarded as "indisputably fair"? and I'd acknowledge the merits of many Palestinian grievances The Israelis do. They are just unwilling to be blown up to redress any of them. Remember, this so-called intifada didn't start because the Israelis refused to talk - it was started to avoid a deal that was unsatisfactory because it left Israel standing. I'd stop allowing the religious radicals to set policy. Have you noticed that Sharon's current policy involves evacuation of the Gaza settlements? Do you think the religious radicals favor that policy? Sharon just fired two religious Zionist ministers to try to get his cabinet vote. Once again, your arguments do not reflect facts on the ground.