Libya and Israel hint at new ties

[ConcernedCanuk]

.
.

Libya and Israel hint at new ties

Wednesday, 7 January, 2004, 08:25 GMT

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi could open ties with Israel, an Israeli MP who has met Mr Gaddafi's son has said.

"Gaddafi has made a strategic decision, and he is not a man of small steps," Labour legislator Ephraim Sneh said

/snip/

A Kuwaiti newspaper sparked the speculation about possible Libya-Israel relations on Tuesday by reporting that an Israeli delegation was due to visit Tripoli later this month for talks.

Al-Siyasa newspaper said officials from Israel's foreign and defence ministries and Mossad intelligence service would hold talks in Libya on ending hostilities between the two countries - which date from Israel's founding in 1948.




While I don't really believe these countries are developing a new-found love for each other.

I suspect they may have a common threat ? (wink, wink)


and from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=301565">DU Forum

Syria and Turkey are negotiatiing

India and Pakistan are talking

Iran and Egypt have decided to restore ties


AWFUL LOTTA "UNITING" IN THE AIR OVER THERE - -


hmmmmm

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Yes and the clock is tickign

last chance for this train not to leave the station is November of
04... the kid gets reelected, I foresee death and destruction

[0007]

3. Check out this website and tell me what you think?

http://www.algathafi.org/Index_e.htm

Is the uniter advertisement thingy gonna sell?

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. I dunno, but it does look as we have a bunchy

of not so friendly states going, the enemy of my enemy...

[robcon]

2. In addition, what about Syria and Israel?

Syria and Turkey; India and Pakistan; Iran and Egypt, but what about Syria and Israel????

"Pres Bashar al-Assad of Syria calls for United States to use its influence to revive negotiations between his country and Israel, portraying their absence as gaping hole in Bush administration's strategy for Middle East..."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50A11F73B5E0C728CDDAB0994DB404482

[mobuto]

8. Well, Bashar al-Assad

single handidly destroyed Ehud Barak and the Israeli Left by making noises about making peace with Israel. Barak agreed to talks, and put his entire credibility on the line. Al-Assad rebuffed him and Barak's government collapsed.

So thanks to al-Assad we now have Premier Sharon.

Syria is crazy.

[bemildred]

10. Why would Assad prefer Barak to Sharon?

The only reason I can see would be if Assad was
in a hurry to get a settlement, any settlement,
Like Gadhaffi seems to be.

In the long run Sharon is the weaker enemy.

I'm starting to think Assad may be underestimated,
he has done a good job of avoiding provocations and
steering a middle path between doormat and looney.
He hasn't shown any signs of panic or loss of control.
His public statements are always very subdued and
disciplined.

[Muddleoftheroad]

5. Since 9/11

Qaddafi seems to have understood the realities of what that attack meant more than any other Arab leader. He also seems to have wised up, noticing most likely the target on his back.

He has bent over backward trying to cooperate with U.S. intelligence, move beyond his pro-terror past and set aside his weapons of mass destruction.

He's not a nice guy and never has been, but even benign self interest has its benefits.

[bemildred]

6. I thought he bent over forwards.

I think you are correct, in that having oil, a bad
reputation, small population, and no noticeable military
capability he is a prime target for the next demonstration
war, even if he is not in the axis-of-evil.

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. Not just a bad reputation

But a history of terrorism.

He is making a wise choice. Let's just hope others do the same.

[GRClarkesq]

9. I always thought Khadaffy's past was more about

his ego rather than any devotion to Isalmic extremism. I think he has decided there is more profit in taking a less anti-western stance. Plus he wants the World Cup in Libya (fat chance).

If there is a list for invasion Libya is way down the list. I suppose Syria would be next, but the US does not have any forces available for this. All the talk from the neocons is just to scare Assad.