SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tsigprofit who wrote (18666)8/9/2005 10:22:43 AM
From: Sun Tzu  Respond to of 20773
 
Did you read Khatami's points on what he sees as the problem in the region? I tend to agree with him. I think most groups would settle for a best 2 out of 3 kind of deal. So anger at Israel would not be redirected at US if America was to act less like an Israeli colony and more even handedly...case in point, and this whole passage is from a different thread:


Participating in the seminar, organized by the Middle East Institute, were all four of the top U.S. officials who played a part in the peace process during the Clinton administration – Ross, Miller, Martin Indyk and Rob Malley. The four presented opposing views regarding the reasons for the failure of the talks, but all four agreed that now was the time for increased U.S. involvement in the process with the objective of strengthening the regime of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

That's the problem. The US needs to become LESS involved. The US is actively blocking the peace movement, and it has been doing so for 35 years by vetoing UN action. The UN needs to be allowed to enforce Resolution 242 by militarily expelling the Israelis from the West Bank and Gaza, or at least imposing sanctions against Israel as they did to Iraq.

It is interesting to note that the team of four negotiators was comprised of three Jews and no Palestinians, Arabs, or even Muslims . One of the Jews (Indyk) was even caught performing espionage for Israel.



To: tsigprofit who wrote (18666)8/9/2005 12:16:30 PM
From: bentway  Respond to of 20773
 
"He is threatening us here, even US civilians openly, as he holds us accountable for our leaders and US military."

I'd say the last election supports him, by 51%. Too bad the 49% of us who don't have to pay too.