2006-08-26 13:45:17 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Sure, it allows terrorist to restock there caches, it makes it look like the UN is doing something, and it keeps reporters employed. See? All kinds of good things come out of them.
2006-08-26 14:24:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
In most cases, peace treaties are only as good as the governments that sign the treaties. If a society teaches that one race is superior to another as a matter of culture or religion, no peace treaty is worth the paper it is written on. Germany in World War 2 signed several treaties before going to War. Their government and society believed in "Aryan supremacy." As long as cultural/religious values teach hatred of others who are deemed inferior, there can be no peace.
Islam teaches that "America is the great Satan" and that Israel must be destroyed. These beliefs, until changed, will invalidate any peace treaty that the Islamic states sign.
2006-08-26 20:54:55 · answer #2 · answered by Don H 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. Since the 1979 Camp David Accords, which brokered a peace deal between Israel and Egypt, we haven't seen any major cross-border wars (real wars, not that piddily BS in lebanon) involving Israel. And Israel and Jordan have a treaty as well now, so no wars there either.
People seem to forget that we're not dealing with heavily armed frontiers anymore like we were before 1980, with the exception of Northern Israel, were there is no peace with Syria. "Wars" like the recent one in Southern Lebanon aren't nearly the existential threat that real wars were before 1980.
2006-08-26 20:49:29 · answer #3 · answered by Charles D 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Emergency TP?
2006-08-26 20:48:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, to allow the jihadis time to recruit, regroup, and re-arm.
2006-08-26 20:50:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not that I've ever seen.
2006-08-26 20:47:34 · answer #6 · answered by MEL T 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋