From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: Sentencing in Jordan
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:26:57 GMT

In article <4404@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.212436.21460@dazixco.ingr.com> naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com writes:
>>>In article <4353@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU>, aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
>>
>>>At least the peace talks will continue - despite how many
>>>people are silenced, imprisoned, expelled, or murdered ...
>>
>>Can I assume from this that you are really not for peace between Israel and 
>>Jordan?
>
>Naftaly, my point was merely that not everyone is in favor of the
>peace talks, and instead of continuing to impose such totalitarian 
>policies in dealing with the situation (as I stated above - by 
>silencing the voices of opposition through imprisonment, expulsion,
>and murder), it does not change the course of politics in the M.E.

Instead of which forces silencing the voices of opposition?  You seem to
be referring to Israel.  Israel does far less of this than any country
in the region, and indeed, the activities of Intifada 'death squads' in
this respect are hardly very different from those of other Arab
countries in inspiration and style of operation (The New Republic, Nov.
23, 1992).  

Israel is very, very far from totalitarian - as I think we both know.

>Is this acceptable in the eyes of Western 'democracy' or is it 
>condoned simply because it is not in the best interests of those
>involved?  Is this a just and fair way to ensure that the peace talks
>will continue by promoting this violence (in Southern Lebanon) and
>facism from the Arab governments (whom have a stake in the talks by
>fully agreeing to Israel's conditions)?

Israel is not trying to prolong the violence in Southern Lebanon.  It
may well be that it is not going about subduing the violence in the
right way.  But it is not trying to prolong it and/or make it worse.

>There will always be political unrest in the region because the majority
>of people do not adopt this and will fight until their rights and voices
>are heard.  What will the New World Policy be in view of the Middle East
>after the end of these talks?  More oppression?  More reports on torture
>and human rights violations by humanitarian groups?  And the scariest
>part of the whole thing is, who is going to protect us?
> 
>Naftaly, you should focus more on these points rather than try to
>analyze what I wrote as a means of judging me on the basis that I do
>not fall into popular support or opinion.

Unfortunately, with no government in the region - with the lone
exception of Israel - being anywhere near a democracy, it is very
difficult to take a guess at what the masses in those states want.
Further, the masses in those states have been so filled with propaganda
and lies by their governments that if democracy breaks out, it may well
not last long.  


-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman 				 <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast