America’s Role in Israel-Syria Talks

Here are excerpts from a significant position paper written by a group of academics, diplomats, and politicos, among them Robert Malley, Ambassador Edward Walker, and Thomas Dine (former executive director of AIPAC).

For nearly 60 years the United States has tried to encourage peace and reconciliation between Israel and all of its neighbors. Only recently have there emerged new policy priorities—the “global war on terrorism,” the invasion and occupation of Iraq and support for Lebanese independence—that have complicated a commitment deeply rooted in American national interests. While the Bush administration hopes to bequeath to its successor serious progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track of the peace process, it has signaled no such ambition with respect to the Israeli-Syrian track.

Indeed, the announcement of Turkish-mediated Israeli-Syrian peace talks was greeted with less than enthusiasm by the Bush administration. “That Israel has been able to open somesort of indirect conversation about these matters with the Syrian government, with thegood offices of Turkey, is a good thing,” said Assistant Secretary of State David Welch. “I mean, I’m not saying it’s not. And we hope it prospers. But where we’re making the major investment right now is on the Palestinian track.”

The Israeli-Palestinian track is indeed the “main event” of the Arab-Israeli peace process. Moreover, Syria has presented problems for Washington with respect to Iraq (both before and after the 2003 invasion) and more recently in Lebanon. Indeed, Syria and its Lebanese allies (led by Hezbollah) have thoroughly frustrated the emergence of a pro-American Lebanon; something President Bush had hailed as a dividend of regime change in Iraq. The administration sees the Syrian regime as murderous and duplicitous; as a state sponsor of terrorism, an ally of Iran, a conduit for foreign fighters to Iraq, and an enemy of Lebanese democracy and independence.

The Israeli view of the Assad regime differs little in substance from Washington’s, and President Bush was applauded in the Knesset when he declared, “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.” Still, Israel cannot afford to operate in accordance with the view that diplomacy aims for conversion and repentance.

  • Peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan have produced little in the way of warmth and nothing in the way of apologies for past behavior, but they have gone far toenhance Israel’s national security.
  • Likewise, no serious Israeli expects Palestinians to insert the phrase, “We were wrong all along” into a treaty of peace setting the terms for a sustainable two-state solution.
  • Just as the United States seeks common ground with a regime in Pyongyang easily as noxious as any on earth, so Israel is exploring the possibility of peace with a country that has, at times, been the bitterest of its enemies.

From Israel’s perspective the potential benefits of peace with Syria are great:

Syria would no longer provide support for armed action by Hamas and other militant Palestinian groups against Israel;

  • A treaty with Syria would clear the way for formal peace with Lebanon;
  • A treaty with Syria would mean the end of arms shipments to Hezbollah;
  • Comprehensive peace on all tracks would trigger normalization with the entire Arab world in accordance with the Arab Peace Initiative; and
  • Iran’s posture in the Arab-Israeli arena would be weakened and Syria’s relationship with Iran would be stripped of its anti-Israeli content.


Iran’s overt hostility toward Israel and Syria’s close relationship with Tehran makes the
current round much more than a technical discussion of how to reconcile Syria’s desire for a specific boundary with Israel’s security, water, and normalization concerns.

  • Unless Iran itself enters into a détente with the United States, Israel, and the West in general, it will not be possible for Syria to be at peace with Israelunless the Damascus-Tehran relationship undergoes a fundamental change.
  • In the 1970s Egypt’s relationship with the Soviet Union changed fundamentally. Yet while Anwar Sadat had somewhere to go—the United States—President Bashar Al Assad faces the road to Washington blocked by harsh words and economic sanctions: obstacles largely of his own making.
  • Sadat—the unchallenged ruler of a legitimate government—was himself not inclined to dive blindfolded into a potentially empty pool when he dismissedthe Soviets. Assad—who rules a markedly weaker state than Egypt—will want someplace safe to land if he has to break from the embrace of an Iran still hostile toward Israel. That someplace would be the United States.


As a practical matter, therefore, the question of what to do about Israeli-Syrian peace talks may well fall squarely on whoever occupies the Oval Office on the afternoon of January20, 2009. We think the following factors are worth considering:

  • As Iraq shows signs of gradually stabilizing, American-Syrian talks might yield agreements producing substantial benefits for the government in Baghdad while helping to relieve Syria of the enormous Iraqi refugee burden it is carrying.
  • If there is a degree of genuineness in this Turkish-Syrian-Israeli initiative, the parties can conduct their respective “due diligence” processes and tackle some technical negotiating details without American assistance between now and early 2009…
  • Contrary to the apparent beliefs of the Assad regime, a new American president—Republican or Democrat—will not automatically sign up to the proposition that the United States should dive into Israeli-Syrian talks forthwith and approach the bilateral relationship with Damascus with a blank slate. Iraq and Lebanon will be inherited issues. If Syria wants a positive relationship with
    Washington, cooperation over Iraq and an accommodation over Lebanon are essential. The new administration would do well to define what it wants, when it wants it, and what it is prepared to give in return. In short, tough-minded and disciplined diplomacy should come back into vogue—it is a tool of American power that no American commander-in-chief should be reluctant to use.
  • If Damascus proves unwilling to be helpful with Iraq and determined to restore its suzerainty over Lebanon, it will be difficult for any American administration to obtain the requisite domestic political support to play an active role in helping Syria, through facilitation and mediation, recover the lands it lost to Israel in 1967.
  • The dilemma for which Damascus holds an important key is that notwithstanding its bad relationship with Washington, a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace is essential to American national security interests. As the United States tries to rebuild its image, influence, and prestige in the Arab and Muslim worlds, the quality of its efforts to bring about a comprehensive peace between Israel and all of its neighbors will be of transcendent importance. While no American need ever apologize for the special relationship between the United States and Israel and while no one need ever doubt the depth and permanency of America’s commitment to Israel’s security, it is important that the United States be seen as striving for peace and justice in the Arab-Israeli context. Without sacrificing any legitimate national security interest, Syria—if it wants a good relationship with Washington and if it wants a vital American role in its discussions with Israel—can help make it possible for the next president (and even this one) to pursue a peace whose achievement would disappoint only Osama bin Laden, his disciples, like-minded extremists, and Iran.

Therefore, success of the Turkey mediated Israeli-Syrian talks would promote vital US interests in the region. If the current US administration is not prepared to facilitate and join them, we urge the next president to do so as soon as possible after he takes office.

– July 7, 2008

Marshall Breger, Nathan Brown, Thomas A. Dine, Frederic C. Hof, Scott Lasensky, Ambassador Samuel Lewis, Robert Malley, Ambassador Robert Pelletreau, Steven L. Spiegel, Ambassador Edward S. Walker.

Comments (97)

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

51. Qifa Nabki said:


Just to play devil’s advocate… what’s the difference between the veil and virginity?

In both cases, there is social pressure on women to behave in a certain way.

In both cases, there are punishments for transgression.

Do you see any salient differences?

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:31 pm


52. Zenobia said:

If you have some knowledge of the anatomical evolutionary history of the hymen, I would love to hear about it.

But i doubt is has to do with purity.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:33 pm


53. Zenobia said:

no I don’t think it is realistic to postpone sexuality or sexual functioning.

Also, who said anything about ‘sexual promiscuity”. I think there is a big gap between promiscuity and chastity.

but most importantly, in the famous words of Tina Turner:

I am lost with your repeated comments about love.
People are not out there scouring the landscape for love. The libido is looking for sex. Sorry but LOVE does not replace sex. It complements it and visa versa.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:37 pm


54. Karim said:

Zenobia ,are you married ,do you have children ?
What is the average number of sexual partners for a girl at not more than 20 years old in the west ?Do u find it compatible with our muslim and family values ?

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:43 pm


55. offended said:

Not really Zenobia, I read loads of articles about evolution but nothing about the hymen in particular.

But in principle, and this is a very odd (if not foolish) question to ask; what is the purpose of the hymen? as far as I know there is no organic function for it. So there must be an otherwise purpose, don’t you agree? in the religious man’s language: why God equipped females with hymen? even the evolutionists agree that there is a dynamic drive within the process itself that eliminate the superfluous and enhance the useful. So the question could be entertained to a certain extent.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:44 pm


56. Zenobia said:

no you are right. In this respect I find both at fault.
There are only a couple of differences that make me pay less attention to such a practice like veiling.

One is simply a matter of degree, in the sense that the level of harm is less to me compared with say – the virginity thing or honor killing, or any number of things.
But it is still part of the same system of control , yes, i would agree.

Second, is the reason that I gave above as an addendum, that I see the veiling thing as a more superficial manifestation of the deeper problem. And I think if the oppression of worship of purity and virginity were addressed as larger issues, then things like pressure to wear a veil would just fade away because there original purpose would have been abandoned.

I also commented above, that I feel like a lot of people don’t even make the connection consciously of the veil to purity… maybe they do, but the little girls certainly didn’t. I did query very hard, but it seemed like it had become associated with simply a generic symbol of piety for them.

I have less of a problem with symbols of piety. What I care more about are the things that perpetuate control of women and control over sexuality for both sexes. So, in so far as the use of the veil is understood as part of that system I would hope it would disappear as well. I just think that people need to get to the heart of the matter rather than simply arguing over the veil in isolation.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:44 pm


57. Zenobia said:

and what does it mean to you if I am married or not or have children or not? : )

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:45 pm


58. Karim said:

because it’s important to know ,when we discuss about such matter and how you have dealt with it , you didnt give us your solution …i tried to give one according to my philosophical beliefs .

Zenobia;Sorry but LOVE does not replace sex. It complements it and visa versa.

this is true ,but sexuality is the completion and it must happen after the marriage according to Islam.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:55 pm


59. Zenobia said:

I have not ever investigated this question. I have a guess though. Not speaking of religion.
Just as a initial thought though, there are parts of the body that serve no purpose at this time in our evolutionary development (vestigial organs: what about an appendix?
and what about the fact that men have nipples? what the heck are these for??????

so maybe we needed it, and now we don’t.

but my guess is this:

the hymen protects the vagina during developing years of the female. It is needed as a baby and pre-adolescent for protection of the interior. However, during adolescences, hormones start providing a climate that does the same job.

most people can’t show what the purpose is though, it seems to have very little – except as something formed during development of the female fetus’s sex organ.


Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:56 pm


60. Alex said:

Hmm … this is a very different Syria comment.

: )

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 6:59 pm


61. Qifa Nabki said:


I was gonna say…

Can someone tell Nasrallah to launch a few missiles over the border, already?

It’s getting a little weird around here with no politics to discuss. Lebanon is chilled out, Syria is making peace with Israel, Hamas is negotiating a truce.


Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:01 pm


62. Zenobia said:

Karim, I don’t think it is important to know what my personal life is, to judge my ideas. I have many ideas that have nothing to do with my own decisions, although my experiences inform my beliefs like anybody else.
All I will say … is that I am one of those girls who rode a lot of horses between the age of ten and sixteen.. and I would have failed the test later. I shudder to think that there are places where I might be stoned to death as a result. : ) pleasant thought.

Mostly, I got a lot of ideas because I spend a lot of time asking people about their sex lives and sexual beliefs. I think it is terrifically interesting.

I don’t have the “solution” of how to integrate islamic beliefs with modern constraints and demands. You are right that todays world presents Islam with some difficult problems.
I am not qualified to say much about it, but I am glad there are people out there like Eltahawy who are saying that this adaptation of religion can in fact be made… that Islam and modernity can live together.
God help us otherwise.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:03 pm


63. offended said:


Thanks for the link re: vestigial organs. I thought about the appendix the moment I hit the ‘post’ bottom. You are right, other than being a pain in the …bowels and providing some business for mediocre surgeons, it’s not thought to have any function at all.

So the earlier folks thought of a better use for the hymen. It’s quite sexist on the part of God/Evolution to equip females with an organ which reveals quite an important bit about her/their history!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:05 pm


64. offended said:

Alex, with all due respect, the subject matter is much more hotter than your Levantine politics!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:07 pm


65. Zenobia said:

: )
sorry. But actually….. SYRIANS in Syria need to talk about SEX and these issues in an open honest way – a lot more….

just my personal opinion.

I have to leave anyhow for a the afternoon, but I would add a surprising view …of mine.
I actually don’t have so much criticism of the practice of polygamy. The man with two wives etc.

If this seems contradictory, well…I will have to explain later. But I will just say, somethings do or did have a very practical purpose in the religion. In this respect, having a few more wives around to divide their ‘responsibility’ may be revealed to have increased the freedom of the women involved.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:09 pm


66. Zenobia said:

Yes, Alex, you should be thanking me… : )
AIG probably doesn’t want to talk about hymens.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:10 pm


67. offended said:

He hasn’t seen any.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:12 pm


68. Zenobia said:


but on second thought….hmmm. maybe ‘democracy’ will bring …liberation for the hymen… etc and so forth…

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:14 pm


69. offended said:

This is why I am vehemntly against it!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:18 pm


70. Alex said:

Z and O

No making fun of AIG please. It is not fair. He is being “moderated” these two weeks.

But by all means .. go ahead with your interesting discussion : )

I hope that by next year (or two) we won’t have to discuss Hizbollah missiles and we’ll discuss instead Zenobia’s proposals for dealing with the Garbage problem in Syria.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:21 pm


71. Qifa Nabki said:

I hope that by next year (or two) we won’t have to discuss Hizbollah missiles and we’ll discuss instead Zenobia’s proposals for dealing with the Garbage problem in Syria.

Alex, haven’t you heard? The resistance will continue even if Shebaa is returned. Don’t try to strip the resistance of its weapons, ya Alex!

If Hizbullah wants us to talk about missiles, goddamit that’s what we’re going to talk about.


Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:34 pm


72. Zenobia said:

Ok, alex, i will lay off AIG.

I got to take off for a number of hours anyway. but TBC… with OTW..later

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:34 pm


73. Seeking the Truth said:

AnotherIsraeliGuy said:
By and large the Arabs in Palestine wanted ONE thing. Economic development.

Then why can’t you now solve your problem with the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza by simply improving their standard of living to a high enough level?

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:41 pm


74. wizart said:

“Piety comes from within, and a respectable woman needs no visual proof. It’s time that women step up to their role in ALL societies and be considered true equals.”

From Facebook’s ban the veil group with special thanks to its Egyptian creator for his shoking photo of a veiled little kid!

Kids often jump on the veil bandwagon due to peer and family pressure regardless of what littlereligious understanding they may have acquired. It’s now a child abuse issue not only a gender one.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 7:59 pm


75. AnotherIsraeliGuy said:

Because then Fatah and Hamas would be out of business. And they would not like that would they? But your suggestion has worked quite well inside Israel, and that is why most Israeli Arabs are “Zionists”, they vote for Zionist parties, because they care more about economic development that they care about other issues.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:11 pm


76. norman said:

The policy between men and women should be ( Don’t ask don’t tell)

Look for other things to worry about , having a virgin wife does make her a faithful one and having a non virgin wife does not make a slut ,look for the future not the past of your partners .

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:14 pm


77. AnotherIsraeliGuy said:


Hymen discussions are quite 19th century.

But as usual, you miss the big picture by focusing on some symptom. The elephant in the room is that about 30% of women in Syria are illiterate. Not one or two, 30%. In the modern world, this means that these women can do very little that is useful. It means that they can’t even help their kids with homework or ever connect to the internet. This is a huge source of Syria’s problems. Once women are eductated and thus respected, once woman can stand on their own feet economically because they are educated, all the hymen and virginity nonsense will become very marginalized, just like it happened in the US and Europe. But at the basis of all these and similar changes is women education.

But hey, one or two more visits by Bashar to Paris, and women illiteracy in Syria will go away. Look how beautiful Asma is (and very chic)! That is enough, Syria does not need to teach 30% of women to read.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:27 pm


78. AnotherIsraeliGuy said:

Let me put it bluntly for those with reading comprehension issues:
Should Mrs. Bashar be judged on how she dresses or does her hair or, by what she did for women education in Syria in the last 8 years?

From reading this blog, the consensus seems to be the former. Go figure.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:33 pm


79. Karim said:

Zenobia ,Islam is not an hamburger ,we can not change the essence of the quranic message ,the prohibition of pre marital sex will remain the benchmark,now humans are weak ,and nobody is perfect and when a muslim person commits such sin like pre marital sex,be it a man or a girl,it’s not the end of the world ,because Allah is the most merciful but the danger is when pre marital sex is banalised and this trivialization must not happen in the Islamic world.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:42 pm


80. Akbar Palace said:


Well, at least she doesn’t wear a burka! Isn’t that progress?;)

Le’at, le’at …

Anyway, time for a cold shower…

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 8:50 pm


81. Karim said:

AIG,I disagree with you on this nexus between education ,modernity and promiscuity but we can not deny the pitiful condition of the Islamic world in the fields of human rights,education,women conditions,radicalism,extremism,sectarianism……It’s clear that the culprit are these dictatorial regimes that have exhausted their people.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 9:21 pm


82. Alex said:


Enough for today. Four comments.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 9:22 pm


83. offended said:

AIG, you ignoramus! Mrs. Assad not Mrs. Bashar.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 9:30 pm


84. Karim said:

Alex i don’t understand the reason of this ostracism toward AIG in this blog.He often has pertinent comments …my only problem with him is his zionist background.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 9:48 pm


85. Alex said:


We will not discuss it here. I had enough of this topic. Please read the rules of the blog and you’ll understand. Or write me an email.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 9:51 pm


86. ugarit said:


What’s your opinion about the pre-Islamic practice of one woman marrying more than one man at the same time?

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 10:59 pm


87. Akbar Palace said:

…my only problem with him is his zionist background.

Karim –

Get used to it. Peace is in the air Habib!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 15th, 2008, 10:59 pm


88. trustquest said:

Your search for an answer to hejab rising popularity is not going to find an answer if you do not look at it through the Syrian political history. First I should agree with you than even the hejabi girls in Syria, are moderate and kind of liberal comparing with other countries. I came from liberal Syrian middle class and did not see hejab in my circle back in the 60s. The increase started showing noticeably by the end of the 70s and with the Rafat Assad effort to force removing hejab (from the heads of young and old women in the street as a way forcing civilization in1975, Ataturk way) by his terrorist group the hejab took a boost and increased from marginal to a cultural identity in face of the regime oppression. The negative and silence rejection was seen by most of the Sunnis in the cities (even Sunni Baathis and their family) was a land mark everywhere. My wife, who was a liberal dressed modern during our engagement, came back after one visit to Damascus with the hejab. Which make me say that most hejabs are not family pressure and peer pressure since my daughter lives here in the State and has adopted hejab. If you go to creative Syria or Syrian history site and look at the 50s and 60s of the last century you will see a liberal, open society and all families who lived that era went through covering in the 80s as a reaction to totalitarian rule. If you pay attention to the Gobsi ladies and how they dress, and imagine that someone would dare to violate them in the street, and if you could imagine the type of reaction they will leave on the society in that case, you may understand the state of mind Syrian girls. This type of dress is a protection against the rude and barbaric power and they think that can protect purity and wake populace conscious in case of harassment.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 1:05 am


89. Zenobia said:


very interesting. some of the historical trend and movement over the last fifty years, I am aware of. I think that the tendency toward more outward show of piety and wearing of the hajab is very much reactionary. I hadn’t thought about it in relation to reacting to totalitarianism or the gov’t. I had thought it a reaction to the increase of exposure to the west and the pressure of modernity even increasing.
I also feel people become more focused on religion when there suffering is not answered by the state. (clinging to religion as Obama suggested) However, those who are religious take offense to such suggestions. AIG was not all wrong at all when he contended that social elevation of women through education leading to economic independence has led to sexual independence – at least in the west. I presume this would be true anywhere. This is fairly obvious if we interpret control of sexuality as a function of general patriarchy and as that overall inequality between the sexes lessens with economic independence of women ( a result of education) – then women also assert control over their own bodies.

yes, sure I am all for equal rights to polygamy if that works. Why not. If a woman can keep many men, well, go for it. : )

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 1:27 am


90. Alex said:

وأوضح الرئيس الأسد إلى أنه دعا الرئيس ساركوزي وزوجته كارلا بروني إلى زيارة دمشق ، وقال:”حصلنا على ألبومها، وقلت لها هذا الكلام على العشاء ولكن لم أسمع الألبوم بعد وسأسمعه لدى عودتنا إلى سورية”.

President Assad got Carla’s new album.. she gate it to him over dinner in Paris.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 1:37 am


91. trustquest said:

“I had thought it a reaction to the increase of exposure to the west and the pressure of modernity even increasing.”
I noticed that your conclusions are correlated to your observation of current trends in your last visit to Syria. But for me who lived the 60s and the 70s in Syria, the west pressure was not there and actually forbidden in all parts of life, Universities, TV ( no dish at that time), Clothing, Music, Plays and even Movie theater. Three government newspapers, one TV station and big pictures of the dictator larger than the buildings are all you can get. I think the current trends is brining openness even with the tradition of existing hejab since you noticed a lot of girls wearing Jeans with hejab which was not available back in the 70s.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 2:27 pm


92. Alex said:


I fully agree that many women and girls decide to wear the hijab on their own, without pressure from their fathers/husbands. But … Please let me try to blame it (only partially) on the Saudis 😉

The Saudis, through their split-personality, are pushing the two extremes in the Middle East … their popular media assets (LBC, MBC …) always display semi-naked sexy female stars, while their many other ways of spreading Wahabi culture in the Middle East promote the other extreme.

One is repulsively liberal (by Middle Eastern standards) that it makes girls hate to be part of the “liberal” group… and the best way to declare one’s departure from that group is to wear the best recognized symbol of respectability .. the hijab.

The other (Wahabi) is there to tell them that they are doing the right thing by rejecting the lifestyle of the prostitutes (Haifa and others)

You want an example of how this works?

Read the comments please … like comment #20 for example

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 3:13 pm


93. trustquest said:

I disagree big time, I will never blame my problems on others. If it is my problem, I should look inward. Believe me I have a personal bad experience regarding this till I learnt this.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 6:33 pm


94. Alex said:


That’s an excellent general rule.

Please note that I said “only partially” … and in this case “others” are our Arab Muslim neighbors … so they are in a way “us” … us Arabs and us Muslims

I did not blame it on Israel or on Japan, or on bad luck.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 16th, 2008, 7:16 pm


95. trustquest said:

That is great Alex, you doing fine; you are not blaming the foreigners, the enemy, the USA, the Demons or bad luck. But you still can not get rid of the habit completely; you are still blaming your neighbors.
Alex, government are not like you or me individuals, they have responsibility to make the good things not to find excuses. People expect from them if there is a problem to find a way in solving it. They have the power to negotiate and sign treaty to prevent harm on their people. Last thing should be expected from them to attack neighbors or to find excuses in the neighbors bad behaviors. I said before, Syria has 3 millions persons working in the KSA, they should play it very nice since those people are providing good income to the regime to run the state affair. They should not slab the hand which feed them.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 17th, 2008, 1:31 am


96. norman said:


I think the KSA should throw out the Syrians , so the Syrians will know once what kind of Arabs are the Saudis .

Just for you ,In KSA a friend of mine a Nephrologist( Kidney specialist) Syrian born Syrian and American educated board certified in his specialty who has a green card in the US was offered less income as a salary in comparison to an American citizen equally educated , He told them to go to hell .

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 17th, 2008, 1:42 am


97. trustquest said:

What you saying is provocative and not good. I would not work in KSA if they offer me billions of dollars. My dad worked there in the fifties, brought big some of money and worked in Syria where he was discriminated and robbed by the Social Baathist Regime, in the name of fighting bourgeois. On the other hand, even if do not like them, I would not dare to wish bad for 3 millions Syrians find their source of income from there, because Syria can not find work to its own citizens. Beside that, let them handle their problems and let us handles ours.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

July 17th, 2008, 3:42 am


Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

Post a comment