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 (190954)	7/5/2006 1:57:15 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I don't mean that the US should announce that it's a matter of complete indifference if Tehran nukes Tel Aviv - that's the end point of the non-interference you propose, since the Arabs and Iran don't mean 'stop interfering so we can work out a deal'; they mean 'stop interfering and help us destroy Israel.' Of course the US is going to oppose ANY country nuking ANY country. That's US policy regardless of the particulars of the Israel-Pal situation. But you agree the US should withdraw financial support for Israel and Palestine, disengage from the inter-country battles in that region, and let the involved parties (which are not American) solve things themselves? Me too. I agree US support for Palestinians just props up a miserable self destructing populace in their no chance for victory efforts, and US support for Israel is counter to American values since Israel is an ethnic state which discriminates against some of the indigenous population based on religion. The war between the two is not America's battle, and there is no side which matches America's value system, so we should not be involved.