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: bentway who wrote (246750)	10/26/2007 11:30:51 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

What are you talking about? The debate was about whether the Palestinean camps have been preserved intentionally or not. Then Chris said, surely it wasn't intentional, it would be too much to expect 3 or 4 Arab countries to accept all those refugees. I was just pointing out that far more refugees than that (it was about 700,000 or so) have been resettled in numerous places in the past. And you say, "See! Israel is not as bad as ( the Nazis, Stalin, the Turks, etc.... fill in the historical atrocity )". I never mentioned any of the groups you specify. I never said anything about "Israel is not as bad as..." You just have a knee jerk reaction to Israel. If you seemed to care about even a few of other refugee situations as much as you seem to "care" about the Palestinean issue, it might have a less obsessive cast to it. But you--and, to be "fair" about it, not just you, many others as well--seem to believe that this is the one refugee problem in the problem that must be resolved by having the refugees return to the place they formerly lived in--whatever the situation that caused the problem in the first place, whatever the world as represented by the UN was trying to accomplish back in '48, whatever the cost, whatever intervening events have occurred--no, there is only one explanation for the problem (theft) and one solution (repatriation). Chris, Michael is right--you and I agree on a lot of things. But on this particular issue, I find your perspective shallow and simple.