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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (200002)	3/21/2007 6:49:10 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 793809

Extremely good post, Nadine. Absolutely on the mark. Oslo was self-defeating because the hallmark of Palestinian thinking is use of the mirror. Their cultural reality is that compromise and accommodation=weakness. They, and most Arabs, believe that if the Israelis become conciliatory, it is because they are weak. And it is best to strike when the enemy is weak. If the opponent is uncompromising and can deliver damage, he is not weak but strong, and submission is appropriate. Interestingly, and don't ask me why, they apply the same standards to others who absolutely don't see things as they do. This what I call the Palestinian/Arab mirror, to judge everyone in exactly the same way they judge each other when they are in conflict. Sadat was able to make peace because he bamboozled the Egyptians into thinking that crossing into Sinai was a big victory. He was therefore negotiating from "strength". Brilliant guy. We need someone with enough creativity and imagination to manufacture a similar illusion. Oslo was a catastrophe because the Israelis showed "weakness"; it lead straight to the intifada. I am afraid that the recent pullback from Lebanon will be seen in the same way. What a disaster, the only way to peace is through ruthlessness. But that is the way it is.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (200002)	3/22/2007 2:13:17 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793809

The refusal to recognize Israel and deal with reality is Hamas' choice, and it is the basic driver of the conflict, and has been since all the Arab states refused to recognize Israel in 1948. That's a silly point to start with as the driver of the conflict. The creation of the state of Israel is the driver of the conflict. The Pals refusal to give up the war is what perpetuates the conflict, but it certainly didn't start it - Israel's decision that certain land (where loads of non-Jews lived) is now a Jewish homeland is the start of the conflict. The Pals ongoing resistance is a reaction to that, not a beginning of something.