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: Sam who wrote (189420)	6/15/2006 2:02:35 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

After agreeing to establish the State of Israel, they should have stood by that agreement and ended the refugee camps one way or another long long ago. That as much as anything else gives the conflict its character of having no long term solution. The Brits negotiated the resettlement of refugees and the exchange of populations (Jews of Arab lands for Arabs of Palestine) as part of the Armistice of 1949. The Arabs chucked out the Jews, then reneged on the other half of the deal. Instead they got the UN to create UNWRA and pay for the refugees in perpetuity, without resettlement.