[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Judging the conflict sofar, I'd say it is a situation where because of the > >lack > >> of a regular well established and well armed force backed up by the > >> international community, (which would make it possible to establish an > >armed > >> 'peace') Palestinians reverted to guerilla warfare a long time ago. > > > I think this misses the point. If the Israeli's are correct than it proves that >Arafat has lied consistently to all about his goals objectives and strategies. Lied >to the world.
Absolutely valid point there. You sound a bit surprised. I think it is neither surprising nor very strange that Arafat with his public face negotiates and mediates while behind the scene follows his own agenda. As long as no one finds out or has prove of this (if it at all happened that is) it isn't really a problem for his credibillity. Maybe this is a ploy from Sharon to destroy Arafats credibility, the final strike to the heart of his opponent so to speak, maybe it's really true. Only time will tell. I don't think Sharon is all niceness and honesty either. I really don't believe Sharon told us everything he really envisiones for the future of his country. Arafat and Sharon in my opinion are both dinosaurs, adept in the (very dirty) 'game' of politics and war. And politics especially when mixed with war interests are just very dirty, to believe otherwise is a bit naive. Yes I'm a bit of a cynic. I have been disappointed in the way the world works for a long long time. :o/ Finally. Hasn't the US also employed these double tactics (say one publicly, do the other secretly) and on more than one occasion in its history as well? Sonja
