Is George Mitchell the right choice as US Envoy to the Middle east

Submitted by Isaac (United States), Jan 28, 2009 at 19:56

I find the selection of George Mitchell as the Us Envoy to the region another example of favoring the Arabs. He favored in 2001 giving parts of Judea and Samria to the Arabs. Why does Israel have to give tangible concessions to severe faulty attempt for Peaceful co existence.

The Arabs referred to by the Media and the Arabs nations as Palestinians have never had sovereignty of the West Bank or right to Jerusalem and what is going in Gaza deflates any need for an Arab State within or touching Israels borders. Until the Arabs can prove without a shadow of a doubt theycan be truthful sincere and abidding to any agreeable resolution for peaceful co existence ,no discussions are worth the words spoken and written ,there can be no dialogue. The US must look at the whole picture of who has instigated the murdering and doubletalkers and deceit for more than 60 years. Can any name other anyone name even one tangible Arab concession. Yes, I realize stopping the violence is a major priority but is it the only thing the Arab need to do and again the answer is overhelming ,No. We need to know who really from the Arab Nations runs the show it surely is not their flunkies Chizbellah or Chamas they just do the their fighting.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".