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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (327007)	2/22/2007 1:23:36 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577147

IMO you're never going to get Muslims to agree that non-Muslims should have authority over multi-religious, multi-cultural Jerusalem. The issue of Jerusalem isn't 100% connected with the existence of the state of Israel. Its a hard issue to deal with, but it doesn't require the elimination of Israel as currently constituted, at most it would be an adjustment of its borders. It isn't simple, and for now may not be possible to resolve the situation, but its simpler and probably more possible than to get either the Israelis or the Palestinians to accept and then continue to follow your vision of Pasreal. As for Pakistan and India and Bangladesh, the specifics are very different, but the background idea of different communities not wanting to live together and thus having two (and then eventually three) countries is the same. In both cases there was hardship and violence and war during and after the split. A good argument can be made for the split having been the rich choice anyway, esp. with the Palestinians and Israelis who where even less likely to accept a common government than the Hindus and Muslims of pre-split India.