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 (195135)	8/5/2006 1:27:00 AM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Here's my take and then I'm off to bed. Clinton's last ditch effort at Taba was weak and probably motivated by a desire to enhance his place in history. Arafat was way out of his league as a negotiator and thought he had time to up the ante.....but only months later Barak was gone. Arafat knew he had no peace partner in Sharon as subsequent events proved. There never was a complete offer, as you imply. Important elements remained to be negotiated after Clinton left office...one being water rights and usage regarding the aquifer under the West Bank...another the Balkanization of the west bank by the settlements. Of course Arafat would ask for the 'right of return' issue to be addressed. You act so indignant and call this a deal breaker. The original refugees were forced off their land, it wasn't 'empty space'...lol. I know actual return was a non-starter, but a generous offer of reparations would have been a starting point. There just wasn't enough time before Clinton left office and Barak was defeated.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (195135)	8/5/2006 7:54:06 AM
From: el_gaviero	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, you are without question the most ethno-centric person I have ever seen. The fact of the matter is that the "pals" and the "Izzys" had a working relationship, with thousands of Pals working for the Izzys in Israel. With time and wisdom, something between the two peoples might have been worked out. But the Israelis had the power to start occupying territory not theirs in the West Bank, and did. With no kind of accord of any sort, just a unilateral and immoral act of power, they moved in and took over, in the process making an attempt to turn the Pals (as you contemptuously call them) into helots. This act of occupation, grounded in might-makes-right, has been the open sore that has kept the region in turmoil for a generation, has destroyed the Israelis as a people capable of sustaining any kind of moral ideal, turning israel into one of the most corrupt and brutal democracies on the planet, and in time will lead to the destruction of Israel as a physical entity.