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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kumar who wrote (1669)	6/12/2007 4:36:38 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

What hawk means is that israel would need to give egypt tacit approval to move forces into territory adjacent to israels border. Same with jordan and west bank. I am sure israel would be thrilled given the collapse of law and order in gaza and the threat by fatah that this will spread to WB when they go after Hamas there.

To: kumar who wrote (1669)	6/12/2007 6:03:09 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 4152

So, who has right to give permission to someone else is rather moot. Well, my opinion was based upon the fact that Egypt previously governed Gaza pre-1967 and actually had soldiers stationed in the area. It's well-known that Jordan previously governed the West Bank. What I'm trying to anticipate is the seeming reality that a Palestinian civil war between Hamas and Fatah is going to be particularly bloody and will likely require some form of international intervention. I really don't see such an intervention originating from Israeli supply bases given the inflammatory rhetoric that will be involved (intervening on behalf of the Zionists.. etc). So the only two options are the other Arab countries that border the Palestinian authority, Jordan and Egypt. And were I Israeli, I might even WELCOME such an intervention in order to hand off the Palestinian problem to those Arab governments and return to pre-1967 quid pro quo, but hopefully more peaceful. Hawk