Joshua Mitnick, a Times reporter, writes from Tel Aviv,
Israel is mulling the reopening of peace negotiations with Syria -- frozen for seven years -- after a monthlong war with Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon, according to newspaper reports.Mitnick quotes Israeli parliament member Avshalom Vilan as saying,
After years of ignoring the possibility of talks with Syria because of the U.S. effort to isolate President Bashar Assad, a growing number of voices is calling on the Israeli government to consider talks with Damascus, which could help sever the central link between Hezbollah and its main weapons sponsor, Iran.
In the short run, the mission has to be the separation of Syria from Hezbollah and Iranand
Arab-Israeli wars often have been followed by successful peace talks. The best example is the landmark treaty between Israel and Egypt, which was concluded six years after the countries fought to a draw in the 1973 Yom Kippur War.Mitnick even claims that Peretz is "speaking of investigating the potential for negotiations with Syria." However, he then goes on to say, that Olmert is opposed to the idea because he wouldn't want to "help end the Syrian isolation imposed by the United States."
Personally, I don't know what to make of this story, and the fact that it was written by a Washington Times reporter based in Tel Aviv. It definitely contradicts all apparent developments on the regional and international levels.
What can I say? As goes with all viewers, sitting and watching from the sidelines, we'll have to watch and wait for developments to transpire.
46 comments:
Raja,
Hmm...Well, then I guess it is not "Israel" that is "mulling" opening negociations with Syria. It is just some unnamed persons jaw-boning to a reporter (if that).
BTW...Here's a good Boston Herald column on France's dropping the ball in the international force to Lebanon:
"In recent weeks, France stepped forward to act as a broker of peace in Lebanon. 'Act' is the key verb in that last sentence, as it now would seem that the only other verifiable part of the sentence is 'in recent weeks'.
"To correctly parse that sentence, one must understand that when France suggested it wanted to broker peace in Lebanon, it did not necessarily mean 'broker' or 'peace' or 'Lebanon' in the way we might understand those words. The same is true when France further suggested it wanted to 'lead' 'strong' 'multinational' 'force' there.
"I don’t speak French, so I have no idea what the actual French words are for those concepts or what possible nuances there may be. I’ve been relying on news reports in English, which now inform me that the French do not intend to send any significant number of troops to what is supposed to be a force of 15,000 in Lebanon, like everyone thought they said they would.
[...]
Ernest Hemingway, who had a soft spot for them, used to like to say, “Always do sober what you said you’d do drunk.” But Hemingway, unlike the French, had a sense of honor."
both peretz and livni have suggested that talks with syria might have some merit ...
I second Dimitry. Peretz, who considered himself "a man of peace", has lost a large part of his constituency, and is trying - IMHO to no avail - to regain the votes.
Add to this fact, that this kind of talk helps Israel to isolate Iran - and you can solve you confusion.
Almost no one in Israel is thinking seriously about a peace with Syria, certainly when the price is giving away the Golan Hights.
Yeah I heard about this too. I don't remember the source but I remember reading that Israel had appointed a lead negotiator to handle the Syrian question.
Basically what I think this boils down to is the shaken confidence the Israelis had in the IDF or at least in its value as a deterrent against its neighbours due to this war.
This might be a play by the Olmert's government to gain something from a failed campaign, something tangible that would lead to prolonged peace in Israel.
In Lebanon we can only hope for peace because (as we've just witness) any unrest in the region ultimately takes its toll on us...whether we like it or not!
This whole question has been frustrating me for a while...Lebanon first? Will our neighbours ever let us be?
http://blacksmithsoflebanon.blogspot.com/2006/08/tough-questions-without-answers.html
i dont think peace is only about the golan changing hands..
i think peace with syria can mean many other things..
it is one thing to talk about peace and it is quite another to doom it to failure from the outset and avoid the topic altogether..
israel and its neighbours all need peace.. we all know this.. not sure why we are all shying away from the topic so vehemently..
its retarded.. its time we all grew up and addressed our issues as adults..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
there´s a future to be had.. lets enjoy it (for a change)
if you ask me.. israel has had enough war - but is very resilient.. heavily export oriented and supported handsomely by its stakeholders - we are buoyant..
however.. lebanon and the arab world cannot afford this damage to their sensitive tissue of society politics and international clout.. the arab world must stand begind lebanon and defend it from being saturated by iranian and fundamentalist money.. it is so important that HA and the baddies be sidelined..
this is their chance to genuinely and completely denounce any meaningful connection with all the gaping scars that the west has suffered over the past decade or so and send a clear message that the pain mutually inflicted should and can end..
hoping for peace amongst us all
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
at least WE continue to talk amongst us..
i wont mention my political preferences because i think that is irrelevant..
but i will say that you should never give up on peace.. it is the only justice and the only appropriate solution to our problems..
we live in a tough area.. a region that bleeds a lot.. where peace and war are not just theories but realities that we test everyday..
it is our duty - to ourselves and our neighbours to always maintain our focus on peace and always aim to achieve and enhance it..
dunes.. you know i generally disagree with many of your views.. we have sparred on many topics before.. but please - if you personally seek peace - dont give up on your own hope.. at least for your own sake..
sleep well..
wishing peace to us all..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
we deserve it
Raja, the main report was by Akiva Eldar in Haaretz. First of all, Eldar is completely untrustworthy, and simply makes stuff up. But on this specific report of Livni appointing an envoy for exploring talks with Syria, I can tell you that it is false.
Olmert dispelled any such notions when he said that no talks with Syria are on the table until they cut their ties to terror groups. Given how this has been the demand of the US for years and years and years, don't hold your breath. This is not happening.
I agree, this story is dead on arrival. Many more imminent developments lay ahead before talks between Israel and Syria can happen.
Caveman,
I agree. Syria ain't gonna happen.
However, I think there is room for a Lebanon-Israel deal in the near future, if positive steps continue to be taken.
I see the current talk of peace initiatives making the rounds already. The prince of Qatar is out and about in the region. There is talk of the 2002 arab peace plan. Both Siniora and Olmert have made interesting mentions of peace between Lebanon and Israel.
I think if the moderate arab states get tired of waiting for Bashar (and signs are increasing that they are), they might move on something like this without Syria.
You're correct Chas. Syria is mostly irrelevant at this stage.
They're only card was the ability to irritate Israel through Hezbollah. The idea, right now, is to remove that card once and for all.
After that, Syria is nothing.
Israeli intelligence and political officials keep harking that the Syrian-Lebanese border continues to be violated, and arms keep coming through...peace talks with Syria? The talk now is anything but peaceful....
wouldnt be surprised to learn that talks go on all the time anyway.. and its more about when and how and if these talks are disclosed.. i remember in 1993-4 when oslo was signed.. it arrived a bit like a letter that wasnt addressed correctly.. a bit of s "what the?" but a good one.. or so we thought..
wishing peace..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
with or without kisses from syria
yeah things have become weird..
peace talks have now evolved to be considered a prize.. this is an evolution of our perception that in the past talks and action would contradict eachother.. we put our diplomatic wheels in reverse and the problem is now altering this custom..
seems a bit paradoxical though.. almost like saying "no peace talks if we dont have peace" - well if we had peace why would we need to talk about it..
nevertheless you also need to consider our side.. the fear is risking concessions and changing pubilc mindsets before the political landscape is ripe and weakening the national stamina with regards to the ultimate goal of a fair and balanced peace deal.. whatever that may mean..
wishing peace to us all in any event
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
we need to break the cycle.. somwhere
regardless of whether or not these talks are serious, the noises are everywhere in Israel.
Syria is desperately trying to have peace and some Israelis are responding. If you're interested I wrote about it.
the fact that there are voices in israel speaking of peace with syria is very heartening , for the past months i've never heard except harsh rhetoric against syria, and this should be reciprocated from the syrian side as positively as possible
interesting..
we have suffered a great deal of loss and damage here as well.. one of my closest friends now has a quadroplegic brother.. as a result of the violence..
and yet we are focussing very heavily on rehabilitation rather than drowning in sorrow and anguish..
"help us report your story" - i hope your efforts are headed in this direction.. because it sounds like you are encouraging chinese whispers rather than documentation..
anyway.. wishing peace a speedy recovery to lebanon and israel - may we soon see more peaceful times..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
need to channel our efforts to our common good
hey fearless
thank you for sharing..
encouraging stuff..
forever hoping for peace
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
lirun,
i belive that the prospects of peace between syria and israel are considrable ,i know an orgnization in israel called PEACE NOW they contributed to the peace between Egypt and Israel ,is it possible that peace-oriented individuals in israel(like you)can pressure their government to work towards peace?
it is possible..
you are right - peace now contributed huge efforts to progress peace with egypt..
i think the difference now is a little like when you build a puzzle - sometimes the last few pieces are the most difficult to place.. because your previous steps dictate your flexibility going forward..
i do however agree with you that we must relentlessly express our desire for peace as did the peace now group..
i think the currently elected government was also chosen on the grounds of its prospects to promote peace.. as a result of the public's voice and pressure..
we can only hope mate
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
but we do need to voice it
i understand your angle but its not just about the papers.. its also about the message..
there is such a rift in the trust framework that i believe that the message of peace carries a lot of relevance in its own sense..
i think these papers are priceless at a time when everyone talks in riddles..
but more is needed.. i believe our communication here is more than just a signed document
Mustapha, you misread both Israel and Syria. The "noise" in Israel is just the usual type of open deliberation in a democratic society. It's almost folklore. Doesn't mean what you think it means.
As for Syria, Syria is not at all desperate to have peace. First of all, Bashar cannot cut a deal on the Golan unless it's maximalist (not an inch less than what his father wanted), and that's not going to happen. Second, Bashar is really not interested in the fruition of a deal (in fact, it would be detrimental to the security regime). Bashar is interested in the PROCESS. That's all. The process buys him legitimacy, aid, breaks his isolation, and resets his foot in Lebanon, the real prize that he's after. Everything else is fluff.
In other words, you're misreading both actors, and leaving out a tiny little actor called the US.
anton efendi;omer(israeli),
can anyone of you give us an alternative to peace talks? is it war to subdue opponents like in lebanon ,which did not achieved anything but disaster for the region
Yaser, regardless of whether you think this last war in Lebanon spelled regional disaster or not, there are several fundamental flaws in your argument:
1- You seem to think that somehow peace talks preclude terrorism. Not true. In fact, in Syria's case, they were simultaneous at all times all throughout the 90s, during the peak of the peace talks. The current Syrian position is to stay on this same path, as evident from Assad's statement that for him, "peace and resistance (i.e. sponsoring terrorist groups) are inseparable." This is the modus operandi of his father as well. It's called eliminationist peace. You can also call it terrorist blackmail. I "talk" peace to yo while I have my proxies bleed you.
2- You seem to think that "talking" will yield a solution. Nonsense. In fact, in some cases talking can be detrimental to your interests. In this case, talking will signal a green light for Syrian return to Lebanon. It will signal that terrorist blackmail yields results. It will signal -- as was evident in Bashar's speech -- that only when your enemy is hurt that it will come to the negotiating table, further encouraging the policy of bleeding through proxy. It would breka Syrian isolation without giving you a certain end product. In other words, you lose leverage but you get nothing in return. This is not to mention that Syria sabotaged Abdullah's peace plan by lobbying hard to eliminate the term "normalization" from the plan. To paraphrase a recent statement by Henry Kissinger, substituting substance with process is actually very dangerous. Meanwhile, all Assad wants is process (and Lebanon, not the Golan). Furthermore, he wants to impose his own conditions (in fact he needs to, and that is tied to the point about his father that I made earlier). Assad is basing that on his alliance with Iran (another reason why the notion that you can split him from Iran is ludicrous), and on the perception, which he seems to believe, that Israel is now in a weaker position. All this and more means that the proposal is dead on arrival, as Caveman put it.
3- You're assuming that the other side really wants "peace" in the sense that you conceive. The two previous points indicate that that's not the case. You don't stop for one second to think about the internal dynamics of the minority Alawite Assad regime and the edifice on which it's built, and the repercussion of losing the Golan card as a populist whip, and losing the card of the Israeli "enemy" and its repercussions, etc. Assad's legitimacy is based on that belligerence.
4- You leave out the role of Iran, of which Syria is but a mere client now. Where would Iran stand on such a proposal, esp. after having signed a defense pact with Syria? Etc. etc.
I could go on, but in the end, your statement is based on a false choice and a faulty understanding.
anton efendi,
i'm syrian,
while i'm critical of my regime's approach to dealing with israel (in that it is viewed to be supporting terroism)
i disagree that peace negotiation will NECESSARLY signal that terrorist blackmail yields results,
yaser, it will to terrorists
today turkish foreign minister abdullah gul visited damascus and there was very positive comments about the prospects of a comprehensive peace in the region.
i am optimistic
Optimistic about what exactly?!
Successful peace talks and treaties only occur after a clear win by one side.
NO negotiation that takes place at this time will do any good. Blood will trickle until one side goes for the gold. Then the world community will once again interfere and prevent the situation from getting solved, again.
mr smartypants
how did you decide this strange assertion of facts..
i think successful peace talks occur when people want them to happen.. i am unaware of any specific military objective that needs tobe achieved.. thats so strange.. like saying a healthy diet only occurs after you obliterate your body with fats.. mate.. no offence but its freaky..
there is no alternative to peace talks.. however.. we need to examine what this term means today..
our leaders have proven themselves to be ineffective.. yaser.. you and i are here and now conducting peace talks as far as i am concerned.. these need to multiply.. we need more people engaging in meaningful peaceful discussion..
one of my best buddies is a muslim syrian living in london.. we would always join me to israel chamber of commerce functions when i worked overseas.. his discussions were peace talks..
we dont need to sit on our humous pumped butts and wait for the messiah.. we can individually seek out our goal..
i reject the approach of lets ignore the situation and it will magically heal itself..
wishing peace to us all
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
more needs to be done.. get off your asses and stop whining
chas
interesting point..
in any effective dispute resolution process - venting the pain - is a vital step.. the mere opportunity to be heard and acknowledged will often be valued above other highly valuable claims.. simply because it is so vital to the healing of a relationship..
i think you are right.. the regional summit spectaculars we see are little more than international relations reality tv.. but there is room for some more creative and grass roots activity that may be able to quake the region into new thought patterns..
let's hope this turns out to be one of them..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
less war more peace..
lirun,
"i think successful peace talks occur when people want them to happen.. "
what you think, what you hope, they don't matter to anyone but you. Your insistance on it is immature. You even miss the fact that your point can be wrapped up in mine, pease happens when people want it to happen. Well, when one nation whips the other nations ass, and they are tired of it, and when the other nation has it's ass whipped, and want's to at least survive, then you have peace.
Why do you think there was a treaty with jordan and egypt? Because Israel whipped their asses.
Same with WWII. Those treaties worked.
Now look at all the failed treaties and cease fires, Oslo, Camp David, N.Korea, Sudan......
SO learn from history, despite what nice thoughts you have when you smoke dope and contemplate your fear of war.
All that touchy feely crap, you think you can have a "relationship" when one side is trying to kill the other out of sheer racism and religious supremacy?
i dont smoke dope.. i also dont live in a country where an election can fail while one brother slides in the votes of another and not even 0.03% get off their seats to demonstrate at the demolition of their democracy yet they have the hide to dictate to the world how democracy should run..
my education is sound mr anonymous.. and so are my thoughts.. greater and more remote things have happened for those who believed in them.. this is not touchy feely.. and i think if you examin your words you may orwell yourself out a bit about who is the supremacit in your equation..
your words do not subsume mine.. the contradict me.. we may well purport to be batting for similar teams.. but our games are totally different.. im facsinated by the liberty you have taken to judge my maturity levels and thr level of solidarity with my thoughts.. i have proof that you are wrong.. so i think in this instance i will refer you to your own words and say that i mirror the sentiment..
in any event.. you clearly are in no mood to listen to anyone or partake in meaningful discussion.. so how about i help you.. i am pleased to inform you that
(a) everything you say has been said before
(b) your words truly will not lead to any change so your comments are a waste of your time and ours
(c) i think you misunderstand yourself.. you wouldnt be engaging in this inane dialog if you werent keen for a change
(d) i believe that you.. as lebnese liona.. and other before you have done.. will ultimately lighten up and understand that the middle east is not some board game to be played over beers with your pals.. and that people's lives are involved here..
in any event.. i always love to hear the bravery of those living abroad at the expense of the people of the region..
take care mr anonymous..
i shall refrain from further banter with you.. but dont kid yourself that you can run circles around everyone else with your razor sharp wit.. just think iraq..
vadim
i think your basic point is excellent..
we do in fact have all the skills necessary to resolve conflict.. we do it on a daily basis.. and yes our leaders avoid dispute resolution perhaps due partly to the very pesonality flaws that necessarily elevate them to elected victories..
it may well be that what we have is a responsibility gap..
you know those situations where the common citizen just blames the government for every shortcoming of their life.. maybe this is yet another area where people have to get up and take more of a role.. rather than waiting for that statistically improbably moment when every piece of the puzzle simply falls into place.. governments - like people - cant do everything..
wishing peace to us all
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
if we all waited for a lottery instead of earning a living - we'd die..
i think the point is to suggest a well thought-out model and to publicise the underlying drive for peace behind it
sherri
i am typing this with great hesitation.. but i think i might actually agree with you this time..
dont push your luck ;)
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
stranger things have happened..
Sherry, you haver read reports of 200,000 civilian casualties? Maybe Al Queda press releases. If you think life in Iraq is worse than it was before the invasion, you need to wake up. Saddam was a murdering animal.
As far as you guys rosy scenarios of the "humanity" of terrorists, just listen to what they say, read what they write. Their humanity is twisted, they are psychotic, and they WILL NOT NEGOTIATE.
lirun,
HB will not negotiate, they have nothing to gain by it. You may wish them too, you may have delusions of their humanity, but all you have to do is listen to THEM. Therefore they must have their asses handed to them before there will be peace. This is obvious.
Peace is not achieved through weakness. Conquest, occupation, subjugation, even Dhimmitude are achieved through weakness.
War is not good, duh. But let's not act like special education students here. War is when you have something worth fighting for. If you have no scenario where you would fight a war, then you are either mentally ill or a coward.
i am not talking about dialog with Hizballa..
for this we have a nation that sees these people as their own.. whether or not they are acting as rogue militants - many lebanese deem them compatriots.. i would like to believe that lebanon is now clear on the idea that israel cannot tolerate a lazy lebanese approach to its rogues' breaching international law..
i have no guarantees for anything..
however.. i am concerned about us entering into a phase whereby the means for peace are quarantined for the peaceful alone..
while it may be viewed as naive given that peace talks and peaceful action have often been quite divorced and while i understand that crediting a seemingly hostile nation as a peace partner can hurt.. i still think we need not to indulge in too much hubris.. if there is an opportunity for discussion - let's not be the ones to waste it..
even nations that have long standing peaceful relations hurt eachother.. the UK killed around 10,000 australians through nuclear tests of the coast of western australia and this did not spark a war.. nor did the french tests at moraroa attol in the pacific..i am not for a minute suggesting that this is acceptable.. but worse things have happened and people still talk..
i dont want to negotiate with the HA.. they are outside of my country's jurisdiction and should be dealt with by another country - but i also dont want to exclude myself from the ways of the world with impulsive combat and excessive recklessness that kills my and other people just to prove that we still have a sizeable defence budget to a bunch of killers..
its not all black and white..
its so easy to launch sweeping statements but its meaningless..
on my way to work i see posters of regev.. the kidnapped soldier every day.. and i think about how the impact of his kidnapping is diminishing by the day.. i think of how much he is suffering if he is still alive and how his family have been sent to hell.. i think of my friends who have lost loved ones and of my good friend's baby brother whose body was crushed in a tank..
i cant accept that the arrogance in the bombastic statements that i hear from people about how human life can be spent indefinitely and how diplomacy has no space.. not when i watch wonderful people pay the price around me everyday..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
it does not have to be so shitty
ok lets not call them terrorists anymore..
let's call them peace lovers who blow up women and children and kidnap people and declare their desire to destroy states but other than that are just really loving individuals with big fat hearts and huge softies on the inside.. and thoughtful..
Sherri, you are using an age old tactic. You are bringing the argument into the relm of stupidity and then beating us with experience.
What you "wonder" has no bearing on history and fact.
Put your hopes in the same pipe and smoke it. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and you exemplify wishful, but very stupid thinking. Or is it even thinking when you base your words on the first thing you "feel".
sherri
your sweeping definitions of terrorism are simply wrong..
war is terrifying but it is not necessarily terrorism..
its unfortunate and aweful and the greatest of horrors but it is legal..
your words cloud the issues and are the furthest thing from constructive..
these groups of lovely individuals that you hold in the highest esteem have been asked again and again to alter their manifesto.. and they have refused.. i wonder what purpose that serves..
its so nice of you to request that we alter our mindframes at the expense of our children..
i think your answers lie in your comment to dimitry..
(a) you dont know enough..
(b) your posts focus only on your beliefs.. and i dont think they are so relevant.. just because your husband is a US based middle eastern man does not make you a regional expert.. just like marrying a GP would never make you a neuro surgeon..
genuinely seeking peace but struggling to through wreathes of flowers at those who state that their aim is my death.. call me crazy..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
peace yes but madness no..
"I continue to believe that labelling of individuals or groups or countries as terrorists generates fear and hate, is counterproductive to peace, and should be avoided."
no sherri.. calling people names does almost nothing.. blowing up buses and kids in nightclubs and families at their passover dinner and showering rockets on neighbourhoods.. this is what generates hate..
labelling people as terrorists actually allows you to separate them from the vast majority of people who do not condone these actions or support them..
based on your approach these people - T E R R O R I S T S ! ! ! - should be treated as regular civillians who are merely in pain..
to do so would be an insult to all of the suffering people whose lives are a mess - in part as a result of the terrorists' actions - and accuse them of conspiring with those people.. which is blatantly not true..
my palestinian and lebanese friends have nothing to do with terror.. the acts of terror do not represent them and it is not fair for their people to be implicated into the actions of a few psychos..
i believe in dialog but international law does deal with my government's ability to interface and negotiate international issues with a subgroup of another country.. it deals wih intergovernmental obligations and municipal obligations and the matrix of the two..
under international law.. israel has a positive duty to defend its citizens..
under rules of proportionality and the need to eradicate the clear and present danger of missiles being shot at our heads.. our government has a duty to undertake actions of self-help to assure that people are entitled to enjoy their human rights in this country..
yes there are rules of war and they are extensive and complex BUT there are two sides to this equation and your insistence on ignoring the essence of the dilemmas suggest that you are not a positive contributor to the discussion.. because you preach rather than listen.. and in doing so selectively focus on issues as if there is no question about right and wrong.. and as if the two are perfectly dichotmous..
we are well aware of the suffering that the self-help actions cause.. which is why you hear opposing views as to the strategy within our very country from our own combattants.. your comments on this issue are no scoop - nor are they damning or incriminating.. because this is a regular part of israeli democracy.. opposition is heard..
it is equally tragic that the correct answer to our problems can never be verified but only in part justified in retrospect based on outcome..
nevertheless.. it is far from clear cut..
israel did not lose soldiers on the battle field due to an absence of choice.. there were many choices.. including carpet bombing lebanon and the deployment of other more devestating air tactics..
however.. only and only for the minimisation of lebanese civillian casualties did israel hit the ground.. only for this reason are we today burying 100 of our finest and rehabilitating scores of kids as they face the lives of cripples in a society that will seek only to move on from the memory and/or acknowledgment of those kids' worst nightmares..
your demonisation of my society is stupid.. because it doesnt change facts.. whether or not "sherri wife of middle eastern man" approves of our course of action and whether or not we ultimately deem it as appropriate.. we will always engage in internal debate and question and qualify our ways..
if there was a solution it would be in place by now..
i believe in the power of peace.. and i want it more than anyone who dares to theorise from afar without ever having stepped on our soil.. you can switch off when you go to the mall.. i cant.. we live this day in day out..
if you truly wish to forward peace and stop the cycle of blame then do exactly that for a change.. but your comments are generally crafted to exonerate HA - sing their praises and bask in their "purity" while telling the world how israel is the devil and blaming it for all wrongs.. do you not see how hypocritical that is?
enough please
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
there are good people everywhere - they need to be helped and not shot down..
sorry sherri..
no more energy to run around in circles with you today.. i typically tend to resist responding.. but some of it was just so off-key that i couldnt hold back..
should have just ignored your post.. my mistake..
you dont have a genuine interest in our region and therefore allow yourself to make empty baseless inflammatory statements.. cant be bothered tickling your grey matter..
i have never understood the concept of praying for someone.. kind of like outsourcing a divine appeal..
the idea that someone can have such a superior view of spirituality (deem themselves so far ahead and the other so far behind) that their spirit requires prompting through prayer to the divine subject of a religion that the other person does not believe in.. boggles my mind..
that is so presumptuous and so condescending..
sherri.. i think i might just go sin a little for you.. ; )
anyway this is interesting.. because as you continue to assert your ethic on us all.. your own government is finally waking up to the fact that they are unable to compel us to follow their "winning model" and that maybe americans do not necessarily know everything and how to run the world..
we.. the residents of the middle east.. those people directly affected by the conflict.. shall ultimately be responsible for judging ourselves..
in any event.. thank you kindly for your suggestions.. i'll be sure to afford them the appropriate respect..
wishing us all peace..
lirun
telaviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
On exactly the same subject - the current timing and an example of one day:
http://mideastoptimism.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment