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: neolib who wrote (194220)	8/1/2006 1:30:33 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

You might note the Kurds are now getting their land back thanks to the USA, despite the imported Arabs having held sway for a few decades. They might be receiving more autonomy, but they aren't getting their own homeland. And Kurds are historically located in Turkey and Iran as well. I really think the USA lacks the stature of a fair player in the eyes of the Arabs, hence, many things are non-starters. BWDIK! As if Arabs are playing fair. Hell, the first thing they did when Israel turned the Jewish partition into Israel was that every surrounding Arab country declared war upon them, even though none of them had any historial claim to that territory. Jews have a history in Palestine that they can trace back thousands of years. It is the birthplace of their religion, their culture, and their raison d'etre. (btw, I'm not Jewish). Now if the Jews were trying to settle in Mecca or Medina, then I could this kind of total Arab response. But to deny that many Jews have been exiled for all of that time and try to create the belief that Jews are "invaders", when in fact it was the Arabs who invaded the region are are foreigners to Palestine, is just ridiculous. Jews should have the same right to settle in Palestine as Arabs. And if they desired to turn their little piece of purchased land into a state (the remainder of the partition that was granted to them by the UN was relatively uninhabited and desolate), that should be their right. And if the Palestinians had wanted to create their own state out of the Palestinian partition (which as I stated earlier, the Hashemites certainly did not desire), then they should have be able to do so. But their leaders, at the time, chose to agree to annexation and Jordanian citizenship. They made their decision and Jordan abandoned them in 1988 when it was clear that Arafat would have been just rebellious should Jordan regain control over the West Bank. So now the Palestinans are political "orphans", and are now expecting the world to have sympathy upon them for the choices that their ancestors made vis-a-vis Jordan, and then their decision to pursue independence essentially putting them in rebellion against Jordan's rule, leading King Hussein to abandon claim to the West Bank and putting the Palestinians in a very politically, and legally, awkward position. The Palestinian Partition was created in 1947 by the UN. But too much water has passed under the bridge for those borders to be restored in any future Palestinian state. But given the fact that Palestine is essentially in "limbo" and the fact that the UN bears the responsibility of orginaing creating the circumstances under which they could claim an independent state, it seems logical to assume that only the UN can actually resolve the issue (and probably not to the satisfaction of either side). But it's going to require a Chapter VII resolution, and tens of thousands of heavily armed soldiers/police to create some semblance of a rule of law, and secure the ability to proceed with "nation-building". But first, the Palestinians have to signal that they are ready to put their trust in the hands of the UN, and not in their own. Hawk

To: neolib who wrote (194220)	8/1/2006 1:56:08 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

My point exactly: Arabs and Jews used to coexist better, the creation of Israel badly damaged Jewish/Arab relations. Why? How do you know it used to be better? all you know is that the Jews used to be there; but then, the Arabs had no place to throw them out TO. Why don't you find some Mizrahi Jews and ask THEM how it used to be and what happened? Well, that is somewhat understated. I note that for some odd reason, the right hand map states only it is what Clinton offered and Arafat refused, so they don't actually stick their neck out and claim it was what Israel offered. May or may not be anything in that observation. Both Clinton and Barak state that Barak agreed - provisionally of course, since he would have had to sell it to the Knesset. However, Arafat refused and went home and boasted that "he had turned over the table on Clinton." Tibet I would guess will eventually get free of China Hardly likely. The Sioux aren't getting the Dakotas back either. I use the parallel advisedly. There will still be Tibetans in Tibet, but they will be a minority.