On another message board where I participate, there is an extremely active debate right now regarding whether Carter is negotiating in good faith, or whether he is favoring the Palestinian side. I can't decide whether I should care; at least he's trying, which is more than one can say for a lot of people. Much of the time, The Onion's coverage makes at least as much sense to me as reality. It's enough to make even a pacifist want to bust some heads. But I'm interested in everyone else's thoughts on the subject.

Although I aim to refrain from this issue, I think that the idea of being a mediator and pushing aspects of one side or another is not inherently contradictory, it's a mediator's job to an extent to push where one side's benefit will lead to overall settlement. Of course, given that many even of the relative peaceniks in this dispute are zero-sum spearchuckers at heart (one for them is one down for us) especially when this or that tribal-totem corn is trodden upon, it may be missed by many of the interlocutors you are reading.

(Which situation can erupt at any time, but probably won't as long as mutual prosperity keeps rearing its ugly head.)

For that matter, one of my bosses (who has been doing some public speaking on the subject on a local radio program, in synagogues, and in mosques) says he is convinced that there would be peace in That General Neck of the Woods if every Palestinian household had an income of $60k. Any further thoughts on that? I have hard time believing that it's as simple as "it's the economy, stupid!"

You may not have a strong opinion about how to feel about Hamas but the fact is Hamas is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people; they are the people the Palestinians have strongly and unequivocally mandated to talk in their name... that's all I need to know. Apart from that it's all rubish!

You may not have a strong opinion about how to feel about Hamas but the fact is Hamas is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people; they are the people the Palestinians have strongly and unequivocally mandated to talk in their name... that's all I need to know. Apart from that it's all rubish!

... and George W. Bush is the legitimate representative of the American people

Whether Hamas is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, and whether anyone should care whether Carter is favoring the Palestinian side in negotiations, are two entirely different issues. If you would like to argue otherwise, go right ahead.

(And jeez, this is the quietest thread I think I've ever seen on the I/P issue.)

Dear all,

Unless Matthew condescends to engage commenters I don't see a point to comment.

--MSK*

MSK - whatever your beef with Matthew, what about the rest of us who would like to discuss the issue (particularly since as far as I understand, Matthew basically posted the thread as a result of my request)?

No condescension today or this thread, sorry. Am tied up with abuse and acrimony all day.