SharonA: In times like these it's always easy to pick at one thing or another. Keep in mind, that just as the US has policies and has to say certain things in order to get folks on board, the parties who are closer to the bullets also have constituiencies that need to be massaged. I wouldn't ge3t to bogged down with that process.

Keep in mind that Isreal has always had as it's number 1 goal, a decree of it's neighbors that it has a right to exist as a secure nation. The SAUDI PROPOSAL offers this and goes a step beyond in offering a means by which Isreal and all of its neigbors have "normalized" relations. Now, I for one, think this is a big step forward. Afterall, who is going to be caught with egg on their face if the Arab countries default? Not Isreal, for certain. It seems to me to put a lot of responsibility on Isreal's neigbors. Given the circumstances, Isreal has very little to loose. Sure, some will argue that this just gives the Palestinians an opportunity to reload, but in essence, all peace treaties have that inherent risk.

Any thinking person knows that eventually, unless this war spreads out of control into neigboring countries, that something similar to the Saudi (or Mitchell proposal, for that matter) is the only basic framework for coexistance. Both peoples need a secure place to call home.

I will continue to support the Oslo, Mitchell or Saudi plans, which all represent a first step toward the resolution of conflict, and hope and pray that the US, which is the last and only MAJOR WORLD POWER, will get behind one of these plans for resolution.

Peace

Bobert

p.s. Oh yeah, I will not respond to anyone on either side of the conflict with "yeah, but" rebuttals. This is unacceptable behavior on both sides.