> I don't think it's so cut and dried. You could be
> right or wrong. Any settlement would spawn rejectionists.
> The crummier the settlement, the more of them you get. By
> many indications, Oslo could have been pretty crummy for
> Palestinians, if better than what they are getting now.
Yes, this has been what Edward Said has said too. I think I should have added to my what if's, 'what if Oslo was designed to address the Palestinian issue in a more comprehensive manner?'.
>
> And there is no indication Tuesday was a Palestinian
> deal.
Directly certainly it wasn't. I would say that the intensification of the Palestinian conflict, its militarization, etc. has only added to the legitimacy of extremists for those desparate for a solution. To say that, obviously, doesn't endorse extremist ideologies of course.
There is some extent of Islamic chauvinism on the
> part of some Muslims and some governments that would
> spawn some terrorism. Nobody can be sure how much.
> I would venture the unprofessional opinion that Palestine
> does not explain the Taliban, the Iranian revolution, the
> Iran/Iraq war, Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the assassination
> of Sadat, the Sudanese civil war, and lots of other bad shit
> in the ME.
Again directly, of course not. Part of the same larger problem let' say, which Bush, Powell et al. have no serious intention of addressing (indeed all signs are more of the same...can't wait to see what kind of terrorism we have to look forward to now....).
>
> Which is one reason the peace position will ring hollow
> to most people.
>
I'm not so sure about that Max. I was inclined to agree withh you in more depressed moments in teh immediate aftermath, but after listening to NPR the last few days and reading letters to the editors in varius big newspapers, etc. I'm not so sure. This WTC thing has hit people and I think that there is a real nervousness among more people as days go on that the war mongering rhetoric and actions will only increase the likelihood that another WTC is in the making. Nobody has been able to refute the argument when I've heard it made that in the past retaliations ahve done no good and/or have attracted increased terrorism. Who the hell wants increased WTC's after all? I think between McVeigh's brand and whoever did this latest brand of terrorism in the US...Americans are not as confident that war is the only answer to terrorism. Especially when the war is against an unknown enemy whom we helped to create in the first place. It'll take time for that nervousness to mature into any kind of substantive concrete critique of US foreign policy/military indistrial complex...but I'd say there's room for that possiblity to develop...Of course I could be wrong, in which case, who knows, maybe next time we can look forward to a nuke plant being hit, or nose dives into Manhattan making WTC look like a walk through a tulips field...
Steve
> mbs
>
>
> Hang on here. Palestinians that blow themselves up, as I understand it,
> are a product of the breakdown of the Oslo Accords, refusal to resolve the
> issues underlying the intifadha, the military support of Israeli
> settlements,....no? Take away these factors and where is the base of
> support for Palestinians blowing up themselves?
>
> Yeah, I'm pretty sure killing the brains behind the WTC/Pent operation
> would have stopped that particular action. Others would have followed that
> wouldhave been equally or even more hideous...big deal...
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>