Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wewereright
But guess what....the Pals were willing to continue negotiating even after the boy president's desperate attempt to secure a legacy and then Sharon was elected and the talks were broken off...the rest is history.

My point exactly. Whatever one thinks about Sharon, or Clinton or Barak either for that matter, the fact remains that Clinton was twisting arms to get that legacy. That was the moment to strike the deal, and they let the moment pass by. I doubt they will get another one, as when Sharon passes from the scene, Netanyahu is standing in the wings, and I doubt they will get a better deal from him. And as the article suggests, that is the basis for this string, if general war breaks out, the West Bank Palestinians may not survive it intact.

But, to take a step back toward first principles, a principled State Dept would never have proposed or allowed the Arafat solution in the first place. Peace on the West Bank was doomed from the moment Arafat was allowed to cross the border, as was all hope for a West-Bank-Palestine.

There will never be peace, and there will never be a "Palestine" on the West Bank, as long as Arafat is in the picture.

35 posted on 04/27/2002 6:33:24 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: marron
"There will never be peace, and there will never be a "Palestine" on the West Bank, as long as Arafat is in the picture."

I don't disagree but I feel the same way about Sharon. Let's be honest - there are more and more illegal settlements all the time. How can peace follow that?

37 posted on 04/27/2002 6:41:29 PM PDT by wewereright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson