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: Elroy who wrote (191562)	7/13/2006 10:13:11 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

No one advocated the above. The policy recommendation, if you will recall, was to disengage the United States from the Israel-Pal-Arab conflict, not to support one side over the other. If they want to fight each other until kingdom come, let them. It's not our fight. How do you define support? We sell weapons and give money to various countries in the region. We pay BOTH the Israelis and the Egyptians billiions of dollars in financial assistance each year. We have a free trade agreement with Jordan, Morocco, and Israel with Bahrain, UAE, and Oman agreements in the works. I do not believe US support for Israeli self-defense from aggression equates to US support for settlement activity or the manner in which they have handled their occupation of the West Bank. I certainly do not believe that US support of Israel supports "one side over the other" unless you're suggesting we should be supporting self-defined Jihadist factions that are bent upon the destruction of Israel. The views from BOTH SIDES of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict have DEMANDED US participation, knowing that US intermediation is likely the only manner in which they will finally be able to obtain military and economic security guarantees.. Like it or not, we're the "Father-Figure" being asked by squabbling younger brothers to bear judgement on their sibling rivalry and tell them which one is right.. And if we're not involved, they will continue to fight until one of them is beaten to a pulp (or dead).. Thus, our options are limited to the extent by which both sides want to make peace. But when they are ready, we HAVE TO BE INVOLVED in order to ensure that the rivalry is resolved fairly. A recommendation to solve the Israel-Pal conflict that I've made in previous posts is to transform Israel and the occupied territories into one nation, call it Pasrael, grant citizenship to the appropriate Pal refugees, and encourage the Pasraels (which would be something like 40% Jewish, 10% Arab Christian and 50% Arab Muslim) to live together in equality and harmony with all citizens and religions given equal rights under the law. I wouldn't have any problems with it. But the Israelis and Palestinians might.. One of the things you should think about is that such a nation would require equal access to property (land) and economic activity. Yet, since the founding of Israel, it has been a capitol offense to sell land to a Jew. This is a policy that STILL EXISTS. Now tell me if a Jew would be executed for selling land to an Arab? That's going to be a major impediment to your Utopian dream of Israli-Palestinian "brotherhood".. Hawk