President Obama has despatched George Mitchell to the Middle East to "engage vigorously and consistently in order for us to achieve genuine progress". Meanwhile the EU has said that Javier Solana will visit the region to help cement a permanent ceasefire. Blair, whose tenure as 'Peace Envoy' has coincided with war and suffering has been sidelined.
Solana got off to a bad start by claiming that Hamas bore "overwhelming responsibiltiy" for the destruction of Gaza which showed both bias and a lack of historical perspective but it is important to emphasise that he speaks only for himself as an individual. Senator Mitchell on the other hand has impeccable credentials having brokered peace in Northern Ireland with even-handed unconditional talks involving all parties.
Anything that'll keep Blair's smug grin out of the limelights will do fine.
Yeah, as Gerry Adams points out <--- in today's Guardian in his critique of Mitchell's success in Northern Ireland, peace is achievable only by men, not boys, and whilst Hamas haters are not going to like it he makes clear that Israel has no choice but to accept the organisation as equal partners in the process.
Moreover, if any renewed effort in the Middle East to reach an agreement is reduced by either side to a tactical game of winners and losers, in which the object is to use the negotiation process to inflict defeats, then it will not work. It will simply be a repeat of past mistakes and lost opportunities.
As I mentioned before they cannot bring in that Historical who is at wrong and drop the dumb arse 181 that nobody wanted even the Arabs . Do not force shiit down people throats this means you UN .
2nd Mens -vs- Boys Well Hamas broke the cease fire twice so far .
As I mentioned, it was 181 that created the Jewish State so it's here to stay, in my opinion. Although there are many who feel that such a State was a mistake the US will never allow it to be abandoned. Actually, I thought you had previously endorsed that stance by accepting 181 boundaries as the fall back position in the absence of some new agreement.
I thought you had previously endorsed that stance by accepting 181 boundaries as the fall back position in the absence of some new agreement.
Yes I did as a last ditched effort , to be used as a threat if they could not come to a new agreement on their own . IMO the Arab rejection of the original 181 lead Israel to declare its Independence from a State within a State which lead to another Arab invasion.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.