All We Are Saying Is Give Peace A Chance
The Associated Press is reporting air strikes against bridges in Gaza and armor preparing to deploy on the Israeli side of the border. The AP article describes the intent of the operation as "limited" and whose primary objective is apparently to localize and engage the forces responsible for the abduction of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. Caroline Glick in a Jerusalem Post editorial entitled Israel's Rude Awakening comments that the incident is forcing Prime Minister Olmert to go into Gaza ironically after he had vowed to leave it.
Olmert and his colleagues are big proponents of replacing defensive strategies with slogans and one of their favorite ones is "We'll be here and they will be there." Israel will build a fence and we'll never have to deal with the Palestinians again.
Unfortunately recent attacks over the fence and the inevitable Israeli ripostes may make it necessary to change this slogan to "We'll be here and we'll be there", which was what the fence was intended to avert in the first place. Former Israeli General Meir Eindor put it more directly when he wondered whether it was ever possible to escape from confrontation. Oslo and the peace plan looked like a way out, but it proved a road which led only deeper. Then the fence promised to provide a physical disengagement when a political one could not be contrived. Is that too a broken reed? He says about Oslo:
The more we progressed towards this new middle east and plans for "peace" with "yesterday's" terrorists only caused our security position to worsen. There were 160 deaths by terrorism in the 12 years prior to the Olso Accords; since then, the number stands at 1,350 victims and counting.
The architects of Oslo have recently tried to whitewash the degree of the security catastrophe they caused us. A reminder: If before Olso they had a few dozen guns, now they've got tens of thousands.
Add on the money we've gotten for them, the basic and advanced military training (could it be that one of Sunday's attackers participated in such training?) – and you've got the equation that led to the dramatic rise in terror attacks. And we've said nothing of the propaganda and communications equipment we've given them, that have become anti-Israel incitement tools.
Then Eindor says about the Gaza disengagement:
The evacuated area has been filled with dozens of sub-groups of terror organizations, and hundreds of armed cells receive weapons, some from "official" sources, some (mostly anti-tank weapons) which move freely across the Philadelphi Route – an additional Israeli mistake which was given over to Palestinian and Egyptian supervision.
Hillel Halkin at the New York Sun pointed out that in a perverse way the capture of Gilad Shalit was not an act of terrorism. It was a military on military attack. Can Israel declare war now?
It was in fact anything but that. If terror consists of randomly killing and maiming non-combatant civilians for the purpose of sowing fear and insecurity, Sunday's raid, carried out by the military wing of Hamas, was the antithesis: A well-planned and well-executed attack on a strictly military target that was chosen long in advance and reached through the laborious digging of an underground tunnel half-a-mile long. ...
Indeed one might say, with one's tongue only partially in one's cheek, that attacks like Sunday's, if the alternative to them is suicide bombs, should be encouraged by Israel. Since its inception, the greatest blot on the generally unsavory record of the Palestinian "liberation movement" has been its clear preference for terror over military action. For every Palestinian attack on Israeli soldiers in the four decades since the 1967 war, there have been many dozens of attacks on Israeli civilians, even though in many cases it would have been just as easy to target soldiers. ...
Israel should therefore say to this government: "The charade is over. While we are willing to negotiate through neutral parties a prisoner exchange involving Gilad Shalit, we are also declaring war on you. From now on we will treat you as any country treats another country it is at war with. We will close all our borders with you, cease providing you with all services, and consider any branch of your government, any of its members, and anyone on your side contributing to your military effort, legitimate war targets. We will do our very best to avoid harming civilians, and we will expect you to do the same, but anyone else, from Prime Minister Ismail Heniya down, is from now until further notice a legitimate target. And when you're ready to sue for peace-and-quiet, let us know."
Who wants to bet this isn't going to happen?
Update. The bets are off. Kesher Talk says PM Olmert has limited the goals of the operation to rescuing Shalit and provides intriguing hints that the Palestinian Authority may have helped identify the captive's location in Khan Yunis.
"Our efforts are not intended to punish the Palestinian people, but to bring Shalit home. We don't want to harm innocent people, but we won't let the Palestinians harm us."A senior IDF intelligence officer told the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Shalit was being held in the southern Gaza Strip.
He said that the soldier was in the hands of the military wing of Hamas, that was receiving orders from Hamas leader in exile Khaled Mashaal.
The intelligence officer also said that Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniya did not know of Shalit's exact location but that he was acquainted with the people who kidnapped him. He added that Haniyeh and PA Foreign Minister Mahmoud a-Zahar were acting to solve the situation and that the IDF was operating in order to prevent the soldier from being moved out of Gaza and into Sinai.
In further developments Israel Matzav is reporting that Egyptian border guards are securing the Philadelphi corridor to block any efforts by Shalit's kidnappers to take him out thataway.
Commentary
It's fascinating to watch this process unfold, which is neither war, which Halkin understands, nor "peace" as pacifists would understand it. So perhaps the "fence" isn't the national border as we would like to imagine it as either, but a kind of village palisade. Maybe the best end state we can hope for is a kind of chronic, but fairly low level violence of the sort that tribes which sporadically raided each other once understood.
posted by wretchardthecat at 6/27/2006 04:56:00 PM
64 Comments:
Some are reporting that the only ones who really wanted this to happen are the Hamas branch in Syria, which is more extreme than the rest. In fact Hamas and Fatah are near some kind of deal between themselves and recognition of Israel.
But at this point it seems like a downward cycle where everyone is "forced" to escalate:
Israel is now apparently invading with tanks and attempting to rescue their soldier. They HAD to do this instead of negotiating a hostage swap because otherwise it encourages the taking of more prisoners.
Palestine probably will feel that they HAVE to kill the hostage before the Israelis get them, otherwise any time a hostage is taken Israel will invade to get him back, damaging Palestine along the way.
Because of the Israeli raid, collateral damage which both side incidentally did while attempting other things, deaths including probably the death of the hostage, everything will escalate.
It's amazing that it was right on the edge of peace, or at least a step forward towards it, but that's the way the middle east is. All it takes is a provocateur lighting a single match and everything goes up in flames, instant war again.
It's interesting to note a comparision with Iraq in the prior thread. One story posted said that even though some groups accepted the Baghdad / Maliki deal, others were deliberately increasing mayhem in Baghdad to make the security move fail.
My son just sent this to me and I found it too precious not to share:
"One prominent neoconservative, Francis Fukuyama, asserts in a new book that the administration embraced democracy as a cornerstone of its policy only after the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq. The issue was seized upon to justify the war in retrospect, and then expanded for other countries, he says.
Mr. Fukuyama, who opposed the war in Iraq, said in an interview that it was naïve and contrary to the tenets of conservatism for the United States to think that it could act as midwife or cheerleader for democracy in societies it knows little about.
Indeed, as he points out, in the 2000 election campaign, both Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice, then his foreign policy adviser, criticized the Clinton administration's interventions to promote democracy in Somalia, Haiti and the Balkans as misplaced idealism.
"It's this weird situation, where you have a really conservative Republican president using all this Clintonesque rhetoric about rights and ideals," Mr. Fukuyama said."
By slow degrees the West has accepted the terms of the non-European mode of warfare. Traditional definitions of the battlefield, what constitutes a civilian, and the meaning of peace and even war are now different. We talk and fight continuously at the same time. Quite apart from its humanitarian provisions, the Geneva Conventions speak almost to nothing. Perhaps we ought to look at the subject afresh and ask ourselves, "what does humanitarianism mean under these circumstances"?
One clue is what is apparently happening in Gaza. The Egptians and maybe even Hamas' rivals think they have "gone too far" and are tacitly working against Hamas, though tomorrow they may just as easily work with them to attack Israel. Even our battlefield morality will eventually become derivative.
I think the final judgment of the Left will be that they ultimately betrayed the principles they once professed to believe. They hated the West so much that finally, they hated even themselves.
Wretchard, it seem to me that Hamas would be the primary beneficiary of an serious conflict in Gaza. Their victory in the recent election was primarily a result of opposition to corruption in Fatah, as compared to trust in Hamas. Now that Hamas is in a position where it must actually govern, it has realized that it is no different than Fatah in that regard. Its leaders have realized that to hold onto power, they must encourage the Israelis to re-open the Intifadah, and use the excuse of Israeli action for the problems in the Territories.
Quite unlike the Russians in 1905, the Palestinians, or at least Hamas, are not looking for a "short, victorious war."
The whole democracy initiative, the main focus of Bush's second inaugural speech, has been followed by an amazing amount of hypocrisy. First the people of Palestine elected Hamas in what even Secretary of State Rice said was a clean election. The Bush administration set out to immediately bring it down by eventual internal rebellion caused by a US-led freeze on money to Palestine. Just today one of the Hamas officials who had been a big believer in elections was quoted as saying "To hell with the government. We tried that. Now we know that [violent] resistance is the only way."
Meanwhile in Pakistan, the US says nothing as the military coup continues to rule by force over elected officials, including breaking past deals to share power.
It is not just the Bush administration though. An overwhelming majority of both houses of Congress already passed a resolution freezing money to Hamas, one even tougher than Bush.
While I can understand a technical legal case against letting money flow to Hamas, I thought the whole principle was that we were better off letting the evil come out in the open via a democracy and negotiations, than via silently delivered terrorist bombs and bin Laden videos.
When asked whether the US tax payer would fund Hamas if they were to win power, White House Press Spokesman Scott McClellan (April 13, 2005)once said:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050413-1.html
“Les, it's -- the one thing that you see when people have elections that are free and fair is that they tend to choose people who are committed to improving their livelihood, not people who are committed to terrorist acts. And I think if you look back at the previous Palestinian elections, the people that were elected, while they might have been members of Hamas, they were business professionals. They were people that ran on talking about improving the quality of life for the Palestinian people and addressing their economic needs and addressing other needs that are important to them -- not terrorists.”
Ah, yes, "business professionals" . . . "not terrorists"!! Let us pause to remember the glory days of democratic globalism. RIP. It astounds me that any conservative could continue to support a President prone to such Wilsonian fevers.
"While I can understand a technical legal case against letting money flow to Hamas, I thought the whole principle was that we were better off letting the evil come out in the open via a democracy and negotiations, than via silently delivered terrorist bombs and bin Laden videos."
That is exactly what happened. By cutting off the flow of funding, the US and others are trying to show the Palestinian people that Hamas is not the way to go. Of course, Hamas realizes it can't govern any better than Fatah, and so it going to try and get the Intifadah going again.
As for Pakistan, that country, may I remind you, has nukes. We can't afford the chance that Islamists in the mold of the Taliban or Hamas might get their hands on nuclear weapons, as we would be forced to militarily intervene to prevent that from happening.
We are sending the Islamic world one heck of a mixed message about democracy. On the one hand, in Iraq, we say "Vote even though Al Qaeda is threatening you because democracy is freedom and we support your freedom."
Yet in the other hand in Palestine we say, "You voted the wrong way in your Democratic election, so now we're going to cut off money to your police and government until you give in and choose the candidate we want".
It seems like they're making it easy for Al Qaeda to say that the West will only allow Islamic nations to elect "puppet" governments.
> By cutting off the flow of funding, the US and others are trying to show the Palestinian people that Hamas is not the way to go.
Foreign governments trying to control elections may backfire, as well as being evil.
Take an imaginary example for the US. George Bush is not very popular in Europe (to say the least). They have the right to their opinion. But imagine that the European governments in retaliation for the US reelecting Bush froze our assets, declared a total boycott, and promised to do the same to any government that didn't boycott the US until it impeached Bush and Cheney out of office.
The reality is that even Democrats would have been angry with that, foreigners trying to decide our elections.
Publius Pundit has a post describing the abandonment of Egyptian democrats. The brief summer of belief in the Arab and in general the human capacity for self-governance and liberal democracy has died under the knives not only of the realpolitik folks, who always believed the world was savage, but also from the Left who took up any line they could to oppose the Operation Iraqi Freedom.
If we hold to the vision of encouraging sane, democratic governments all around the world, then OIF was invaluable in showing how and how not to do it. America went into it with a broken intelligence system, no language capability and a Cold War army. It has emerged vastly more capable. Iraq is a victory cheapened by our own unrealistic and fantastic expectations of it. Moreoever, going back to the old days of sanctions, UN resolutions and no-fly zones is simply, in my opinion, impossible. Ultimately there is no Fence possible, only Outside the Wire.
Democracy should not be offered to anyone as a method to achieve tribute from the West. Democracy is a consequence of having tried other failed political systems and settling for the least offensive alternative. Let the Muslims choose there own government. It is there business and should come with no external reward. Let them choose to attack the West and suffer the consequences. That is our business.
wu wei implies that when a party is elected to office, it is automatically granted legitimacy by that process.
Only to a point. Hamas is legitimately the government in Palestine, because the Palestinians chose to make it so. It is also an organisation with which other governments can legitimately refuse to do business.
No-one should suggest that because the Palestinians made the 'wrong choice', the Hamas Government should be removed, or that the legitimacy of their choice is in question. Rather, it is the case that choices have consequences. Palestinians elected a party which cannot deal with the world unless it abandons its central ideology. They will have to live with that choice, or to choose otherwise at the next opportunity.
I feel there was a massive over reaction to the election of Hamas.
First of all, Arafat's hands was just as bloody as Hamas'. Arafat was the one who gave the UN speech with a pistol on his hip, and turned down the camp david peace agreement. He also approved all the terrorist bombings even though he lightly pretended otherwise.
The main reason the intifida died down was because of Israel's new focus and success in killing its leaders. The Palestinian people elected Hamas not because of a new blood thirstiness, but because of corruption in Hamas. It is the typical reaction when one party has governed for decades for voters to "throw the bums out".
During the first days after the election, before the US boycott, Hamas had talked about using its new power to fight the war legally. Indeed that is a point worth making, that if Palestine is a country, and they are in a border dispute with Israel, then although attacks on civilians are forbidden, they have the right (as acts of war) to launch rockets into Israeli soil and to attack an Israeli military base and take a POW, as they did.
The governments of Iran and Syria support terrorist as strongly as Hamas would as Palestine's government, and we allow those latter two governments to exist, even though we do boycott. Iran doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist, as we are asking Hamas to state.
I guess the bottom line is that I'm not sure that we are better off driving Hamas underground again. Because that's all we'll be doing. They won't be going away, just underground.
And I'm not convinced we're better off being hypocritical about democracy.
WW,
The money given to the Pals by the west is part of a deal. They honestly work towards a peace agreement and the west will support them financially. Once Hamas was voted in they made clear that they weren't going to work towards peace so the deal is off. In fact all they had to do was make a few public statements and the money would be turned back on. They refused.
It's easy to argue that members of armed groups shouldn't be allowed to run for office.
If Hamas's legacy is that it ruled for a few months, starving the country during that time, provoked a war with Israel, had its ministers killed, and then was thrown out or collapsed, this may be an important lesson for all concerned.
One thing not mentioned here is that the attack and kidnapping is an act of war committed not only by Hamas in Gaza but also by Syria and Iran. We'll see if Israel pursues a war with Syria and Iran. There have been a few remarks by Israeli leaders that Mashal in Syria is not immune to retaliation. It's unlikely that there will be peace until Syria and Iran either agree or lose their capability to prevent it. We'll see.
I meant to say "corruption in Fatah" above, that the Palestinian people elected Hamas because of corruption in Fatah.
> It's easy to argue that members of armed groups shouldn't be allowed to run for office.
That would have ruled out George Washington and other Founding Fathers. Most countries begin with armed conflict shifting gradually to political struggle, as is happening in Iraq. It's very common for the commander in chief of a revolutionary army to become the first president.
Also IRA, Fatah, Hamas, etc. separate into political and military wings to get around limitations like that.
> The money given to the Pals by the west is part of a deal.
The US has gone way beyond that. It is in everyone's face, including its European allies, that it doesn't want anyone's money to go through in any way, and if the money does go though, they'll be hit by US sanctions.
> If Hamas's legacy is that it ruled for a few months, starving the country during that time, provoked a war with Israel, had its ministers killed, and then was thrown out or collapsed, this may be an important lesson for all concerned.
Everyone will know that it was the US's "fault", not Hamas. What will happen is that Hamas is driven back underground and the US loses face and is seen as being hypocritical on democracy. It adds to the perception that we are totally one-side against the Arabs.
It's a good point about Egypt, but I say go ahead and let the Muslim Brotherhood win, if that's what the voters want. Let the voters decide in Pakistan, and keep their choice in Palestine. I don't think the radical choice will always win. Those countries are always on edge for a civil war anyway, and the military can and has stepped in as necessary in Egypt and Pakistan. So there are outs if something goes terribly wrong.
Even if we prop up a dictator, the majority that disagrees will still be there anyway. All we are doing is driving them underground.
I figured we would give Hamas enough rope to hang themselves, not hang them ourselves. That's my point.
Support a terrorist, you are a terrorist.
Vote for one, you're one, too.
Elections have consequences.
The policy of the US is to starve terrorist organizations of funding. If a terrorist organization aquires a pseudo State, through elections, then the electorate has chosen sides. There will be consequences to their collective decision.
They have no special claim to my wallet.
"The brief summer of belief in the Arab and in general the human capacity for self-governance and liberal democracy has died under the knives not only of the realpolitik folks, who always believed the world was savage, but also from the Left who took up any line they could to oppose the Operation Iraqi Freedom."
---
And the blame for the failures caused by the State Dept types, the left, and the eventual timidity of GWB Admin, got shoveled onto the shoulders of the "Neocons."
Rather like criticising a child's lack of developmental prowess after it has been aborted.
Well Israel has knocked out the Gaza power plant. Israel Matzav predicted it. Mama Gorgo will tear up the town looking for baby. But Hamas, I don't think, will care.
Funding Mr Arafat for all those years was an error, IMO.
To continue the process, with an even more Radical crew, would be an oximoronic method to achieve "Peace", when "Peace" is not the Goal of Hamas.
Tribute payments to both Eygpt and Palistine should be curtailed.
Yoni was reporting that in addition to the soldier, a teen who had been a classmate of his son was also kidnapped, and that a mutilated body had been found and was being identified via DNA.
The Road to Peace via "The Peace Process" is a long, winding, bloody, and seemingly endless journey.
Made for great headlines and nobel prizes back in the day, though.
...if Bill had just had more time.
Yoni's view is that since the Fence has reduced suicide bombers, they are adopting kidnapping as their new tactic.
It is a tactic that is working in Baghdad.
Survival Manual
>The money given to the Pals by the west is part of a deal.
The US has gone way beyond that.
Guess what: We're in a GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM. And you know what else? Hamas is a terrorist group.
Yes, the US administration doesn't like them, and has made efforts to pressure Hamas to change its public statements and moderate its views so that peace would be possible. The US has a very strong interest in peace in the middle east. Hamas stands in the way of that interest.
> If Hamas's legacy is that it ruled for a few months...
Everyone will know that it was the US's "fault", not Hamas.
Only an Arab would believe that.
The terrorist fake people "palestine" are in firm control, they democratically have voted to choose "death to israel", kidnap, murder, shoot rockets, throw firebombs, stab and injure any israeli (jew or arab) with any means possible. They also will execute their own men, women and child, they will use mentally retarded kids to carry bombs, they will use civilian shields, they plant bombs on beaches, they train their kids to want to die...
this is not the fiscal responsibilty of the west to pay for. They have the right to choose their own path, however Israel is not required to provide electricity, food, medicine or water to the Gaza Strip. The 1st NON-terrorist attack in who know when should be a formal declaration of war. It is time to defeat the fake dream or Palestine once and for all.
The west needs to embrace the Roman Idea of salting the earth..
the administration embraced democracy as a cornerstone of its policy only after the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq.
Reocon, with all due respect to your son, I remember Rumsfeld giving a speech before the war started telling Iraqis to stay indoors (while the assault gets underway), protect your children, and prepare to watch them grow and prosper in a new Iraq.
That tells me that they always had something else in mind other than WMD.
> In his 5:19 post Wu Wei implied that Israel and Hamas were on the "edge of peace".
Remember the Intifida? Things have certainly been a lot better lately. (At least until the kidnapping.)
Maybe I should have said "continued truce", but between Israel dismantling settlements to Hamas ready to recognize Israel's right to exist and a two state solution, things were certainly looking brighter than the Arafat Era.
The longer things got drawn out in the UN, the more we heard of WMDs until everyone got sick of hearing of them.
The Paleodiplomats scored again.
wretchard said...
"The brief summer of belief in the Arab and in general the human capacity for self-governance and liberal democracy has died under the knives not only of the realpolitik folks, who always believed the world was savage, but also from the Left who took up any line they could to oppose the Operation Iraqi Freedom."
Ah yes, I'm sure it was the out-of-the-administration realists and the impotent Left that sank the Summer of Love and not a President high on Wilsonian idealism. That's some powerful grass, let me tell ya!
Here's one of my favorite hits from that season, when the Bushies announced a new policy shift following the "democratic tide" of the Cedar Revolution. They would, in their Wilsonian faith, recognize HEZBOLLAH as a legitimate, democratic actor:
(http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10813FE3C580C738DDDAA0894DD404482)
"The new posture of the administration was described by its officials, who asked not to be identified because of longstanding American antipathy toward Hezbollah.
"Hezbollah has American blood on its hands," an administration official said, referring to such events as the truck bombing that killed more than 200 American marines in Beirut in 1983. "They are in the same category as Al Qaeda. The administration has an absolute aversion to admitting that Hezbollah has a role to play in Lebanon, but that is the path we're going down."
Got that one? In the SAME CATEGORY AS AL QAEDA, yet a legitimate negotiationg partner, a democratic actor. All that was needed to complete the farce at that point was for AQ to declare itself a democratic political party and then the War on Terror would be over. Too bad the "cynical" realists and the loonie Left fricked it up so bad for all the rest of us.
Israel army launches assault on Gaza strip:
The Israeli army has begun a ground offensive in southern Gaza to try to gain the release of an Israeli soldier.
It is unclear how many troops are being used in the operation, launched from the Kerem Shalom crossing near southern Gaza.
The Israeli forces have taken up position near the town of Rafah, shortly after passing Gaza's disused international airport.
Assault Launched
sam said...
"Reocon, with all due respect to your son, I remember Rumsfeld giving a speech before the war started telling Iraqis to stay indoors (while the assault gets underway), protect your children, and prepare to watch them grow and prosper in a new Iraq."
Take another gander at my post, Sam, and you'll see that the words are neither mine nor my son's. They belong to Francis Fukuyama, who's gotten rather interesting in his recantations and heresies.
> Support a terrorist, you are a terrorist.
Vote for one, you're one, too.
Elections have consequences.
And my point is that both parties on the Palestinian ballot were terrorist, with Hamas not less bloody than Fatah.
The other point is that NOT holding elections also has consequences. In other words, driving people underground.
Here's an article that just came out a few minutes ago about the negative consequences of not respecting the Palestinian elections.
Link
It's kind of ironic in the other threads here that people fear all the Moslems ganging up on the West. Yet by not being an honest broker, as the article says, by tilting towards Israel and against Palestinian elections, we are driving moderate Moslems to bin Laden.
I don't buy the knee jerk story of Palestinians are terrorists, Israelis are angels. They are two countries fighting over a piece of land.
stated: Maybe I should have said "continued truce", but between Israel dismantling settlements to Hamas ready to recognize Israel's right to exist and a two state solution, things were certainly looking brighter than the Arafat Era.
What utter nonsense... the ONLY reason that there was a so-called truce is that Hamas had TROUBLE getting suicide bombers across the border, the attempts to murder israelis never went down, only their success.
Hamas is NOT ready to except the state of Israel as a Jewish state, nor is it changing it charter, utter crap to think Hamas was "close to a treaty" and utter crap to think hamas ever had a real cease fire, in the "palestinian" world, groups declare cease fires under one organization and create a NEW group (same members) to start fighting again..
It's crap...
Your point about about arafat, utter crap too...
Palestinian Authority, The Popular Resistance Committees, Ahmed Abu Reish Brigade, Tanzim, Force 17, Hamas, Abu Nidal, Arafat, Hawari, Abbas, Hezbollah, The Al-Quds brigades, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) , Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, moslem brotherhood, Assad, Al Aqsa Marytrs Brigade,Fatah, Fatah Hawks, Ahmed Jibril, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC)
this is a partial group of murderers...
Hezbollah is already a big factor in Lebanon, and will still be regardless of whether or not they keep it out of the election.
Hamas was a big player before it won the election in Palestine, and will still be regardless of whether the boycott drives it out.
The Sunnis that are part of the insurgency are a large part of Iraq. Even if they and the Baathist party are banned from the elections, they will still impact Iraqi politics.
There are lots of evil groups out there. I'm not sure banning them from elections and driving them under ground helps. It certainly doesn't make them go away.
None of those parties are banned from running in US elections. The attitude has always been that outlawing a bad group makes it more popular.
more stated crap:
I don't buy the knee jerk story of Palestinians are terrorists, Israelis are angels. They are two countries fighting over a piece of land.
Ok, fine, they why are the "so-called" palestinians shooting rockets from GAZA...
Israel aint fighting over GAZA
Israel wasnt fighting over the gaza and west bank in 1966...
Try trusting your knee jerk reactions, the palestinians have proven to almost everyone in the world they do not seek a state, they seek destruction of israel
Not crap, facts. The suicide bombings have stopped, where they used to be every week with Arafat.
Israel pulled out settlements and built a wall instead of trying to take every inch of Palestine.
Both are big changes. Time will tell if they stick.
stated:
There are lots of evil groups out there. I'm not sure banning them from elections and driving them under ground helps. It certainly doesn't make them go away.
None of those parties are banned from running in US elections. The attitude has always been that outlawing a bad group makes it more popular.
Actually if a group of people advocate murder, kidnapping, shooting and general all around terror, they are violating the US Constitution, and thus would be illegal
The party of "child rape and murder" would not be legal
the party of "kill all the blacks" would not be allowed
You cannot advocate murder and be a part of democracy, unless you are in a illegal gang...
sam,
Rafah is between Khan Yunis and the Egyptian border. Of course any assets actually usable to rescue Shalit would already be deployed in and around his suspected location. But they would probably be in mufti and lightly armed, because they couldn't go around too openly.
Hence the conventional forces now arriving in force are really enablers. Once they get near enough to the suspected location, all kinds of tactical possibilities open up. Hamas must know this and their only defense is to move Shalit, assuming he is still alive. He's worth more alive to them then dead not simply as a bargaining chip for their own prisoners but because while he lives, Israel must keep looking. They probably need to shift around the body parts which I understand they are also keeping as bargaining chips.
To the folks in Gaza, now without power, everything out in the dark is now No Man's Land. The neighborhood watches are probably out, but I'll bet even they are spooked. Because if there is one thing there is plenty of in Gaza, it is old scores to settle. Between militias, factions, nations, gangs and individuals. What sort of state fabric can survive in this sausage grinder, God only knows. But this UN-Oslo stuff is going to be as battered as a snowball in hell.
stated: Not crap, facts. The suicide bombings have stopped, where they used to be every week with Arafat.
NO NOT STOPPED, JUST NOT SUCCESSFUL! NOT THE SAME THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2006/me_palestinians_04_20.html
TEL AVIV — Israel's military has reported a significant increase in attempted Palestinian suicide strikes.
The military, citing Iranian funding and incentives, said the rate of attempted Palestinian suicide bombings in 2006 was about twice the rate of that during last year. A report asserted that that more Palestinian suicide bombing suspects were arrested in the first quarter of this year than detentions conducted during most of 2005.
STATED: Israel pulled out settlements and built a wall instead of trying to take every inch of Palestine.
Actually Israel never tried to TAKE all of Palestine..
the Brits in 1922 decided to return HISTORIC PALESTINE to it's rightful owners, the JEWS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine
this land CURRENTLY is Judea, Samaria, Gaza & Jordan
Israel in 1948, when it was founded ACCEPTED a state on a much smaller land mass than it was promised.
there was NO occupation of the west bank and gaza until 1967...........................
reocon 8:23,
Sorry about that. Mis-read your earlier post.
Heh..."Give Peace a Chance"
Well, its been given chance after chance for almost 60 years. Don't see much different yet. My bet is if you take another look 60 years from now, not much will have changed then either.
Something that entrenched takes a tectonic shift in policy to change.
Stop with the bogus peace plans. Its not going to get any better the way it is.
A civil war in the territories may get the ball rolling. If moderate forces prevail, there is a chance for the recovery of a peaceful solution. If radical forces prevail, wipe then out and start over.
Wait long enough and there won't be anything left of Israel. Its only a matter of time until WMD come into play.
I dont think there is anything wrong with the US withholding aid from countries that elect governments we oppose. As a US taxpayer I find it annoying that we send money to Palestine, Egypt and Israel. We should use that money for pay raises for our troops. I think Bush and Rice should push for democracy in Egypt. If Muslim brotherhood wins, then we dont have to pretend anymore.
Ayalon: Israel will call off operation if Shalit released:
On Tuesday former Israeli ambassador to the United States Zalman Shoval said during an interview for CNN that Abbas is a terrorist masked as Snow White.
Shoval also said that the prisoners' document is Abbas' capitulation document to the Hamas despite the fact that the world sees it as a measure of moderation.
At present time world leaders and ambassadors are declaring that Israel has a right to defend itself, but Foreign Ministry officials said that should the Gaza offensive continue, the international community will alter its position and criticize the Israeli government.
Possible Call Off of Operation
What is happening here is the same process which has characterized all wars in which Western democracies (especially the US) have been involved - a ponderously slow multi-year journey towards a consensus that it is necessary and that we have sufficient justification to incinerate enough of the enemy that their will to attack us is destroyed for good.
During the American Civil War and WWII that consensus built over a number of years, ending in Sherman's march to the sea, the destruction of most German cities and mushroom clouds over Japan. In WWI and Korea we took a punt (which in both cases rebounded on us later, in WWII and North Korea today). In Vietnam a consensus was never reached, and we withdrew and abandoned our allies.
What I find compelling in the present conflict, illustrated again so clearly in Gaza today, is the continuing mindless aggressivity of many (more than enough) young male Muslims, together with the extraordinarily widespread support across the Muslim world (as revealed by the latest Pew Research poll) for bin Laden, and for murderous attacks and suicide bombings against non-Muslims. It is entirely possible that they are not going to back off.
This combined with the historic track record of Western countries waging war appears to spell certain doom for very large numbers of Muslims sooner or later. Are we ready for this now? No, it's probably still 1942 or 1943. But in some form or another 1945 is on the way. Every month, unreported in the press, more non-Muslims in the US, in Europe and elsewhere reconcile themselves to an outcome which is as violent as it needs to be, 'whatever it takes' (which was the extrardinarily broad consensus at the time of Hiroshima).
As Winston Churchill said about WWI, "When all was over, torture and cannibalism were the only two expedients that the civilized, scientific, Christian States had been able to deny themselves: and these were of doubtful utility." It's hardly fair to conceal from Muslims that this is how Western democracies, if no alternative is on offer, end wars.
The Palestinian people have chosen to be governed by terrorists. They are being amply rewarded.
May their rewards increase.
Behind the Crisis in the Middle East:
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh have closed ranks by concluding a power-sharing agreement aimed at ending months of violent Hamas-Fatah fighting and laying down principles for talks with Israel.
The Abbas-Haniyeh agreement is based on a document drafted by a coalition of jailed Palestinian militant leaders that calls for Hamas's integration into the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Because the PLO is the signatory to peace accords with Israel, the bargain is seen as a major departure for Hamas, which has opposed peace negotiations and the idea of Israeli and Palestinian states coexisting alongside one another.
The introduction says the document is "based on not recognizing the legitimacy of occupation".
Read the Key Phrases
Another Day in the Religion of Peace
Last Updated: Tuesday, 27 June 2006, 15:44 GMT 16:44 UK
Romanian Bomb Plot Suspect Held
Florin Lesch was arrested near the western city of Timisoara
Romanian police are holding a man suspected of planning a car bomb attack to protest against Romania's co-operation with US forces in Iraq.
Florin Lesch, a MUSLIM CONVERT, was stopped on Monday as he drove towards the city of Timisoara with a bomb made from gas canisters, police said.
The inevitability of having to face the facts that "Islam is the problem" slowly builds momentum.
Menchaca
NPR is exploring the theory that this was engineered from Hamas HQ in Damascus purposefully to sabotage any potential peace talks with Israel.
Sabotage
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Here the washington post tells how Palestine's movement towards peace was what triggered this. Moderate Palestinians were ready to stop attacks on Israel and to resume peace talks.
What really precipitated the raid was an imminent agreement between Hamas politicians and Mr. Abbas's Fatah movement. The two parties would pledge not to stage further attacks inside Israel and to aim for a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
Hamas's extremist wing, based in Damascus, is desperate to sabotage the accord, which Mr. Abbas hopes will make possible a centrist Palestinian government that could attract international aid and resume peace negotiations with Israel.
Link
"The Palestinian people have chosen to be governed by terrorists. They are being amply rewarded.
May their rewards increase. "
---
Yesterday
Latest (unconfirmed) report is that there are now three Israeli hostages.
I feel that one lesson the US learned well from the Iran hostage crisis was never to negotiate with terrorists over hostages.
He is a pretty good after action report on the raid itself
"Hamas’ Makes Good on Promise of New Weapons and Tactics as Merkava Tank Struck, Soldier Kidnapped"
> The film"Relentless" by Joseph Farah of the true nature of the wretched Palestinian entity.You can't reason with mad dogs
That may be true. According to an unconfirmed report, Palestinians killed an 18 year old Israeli hitchhiker who they took prisoner. It seems like the Palestinians are their own worst enemy.
The capture of the Israeli soldier was a lawful miltary event. The Israeli destruction of Palestinian electrical and water facilities, while probably legal, seemed over the top. If there had been a Palestinian Karl Rove, they might have been able to get sympathy from a lot of the world, and put Israel on the defensive.
Instead, with the game just starting to be played, they capture and butcher an 18 year old civilian, for reasons known only to them.
The Palestinians live in poverty, alone, with no real country, in some way the most pathetic people on earth. They blame Israel, the US, and other Arab countries, but ultimately they are their own worst enemies.
stated: The Palestinians live in poverty, alone, with no real country, in some way the most pathetic people on earth. They blame Israel, the US, and other Arab countries, but ultimately they are their own worst enemies.
But the palestinians are rich! they have BILLIONS in assets that they CHOOSE not to use. They have recieved more aid than the marshal plan per capitia. The have lots of money to buy arms, thier leaders have suitcases of 10s of millions in cash and for all of this, there has NEVER been a "country" called palestine.
They blame everyone but themselves... so?
stated: The capture of the Israeli soldier was a lawful miltary event. The Israeli destruction of Palestinian electrical and water facilities, while probably legal, seemed over the top.
Yes so lawful to capture an israeli solder, but then they threaten to execute him, is that "lawful"? but you think that taking out thier power grid and water pump is over the top... hmm to be, once the palestinians started firing thier "rockets" it would be over the top NOT to cause them great pains, bombing an electric power station is just to bad..
Maybe Israel should just ask "pretty please" stop shooting at us... really "pretty pretty please, stop shooting and stabbing our citizens..."
nonsense
More "lawful" palestinian actions:
GAZA (Reuters) - A spokesman for gunmen in the Gaza Strip said they had fired a rocket tipped with a chemical warhead at Israel early on Thursday.
The Israeli army had no immediate comment on the claim by the spokesman from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed wing of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement.
The group had recently claimed to possess about 20 biological warheads for the makeshift rockets commonly fired from Gaza at Israeli towns. This was the first time the group had claimed firing such a rocket.
"The al-Aqsa Brigades have fired one rocket with a chemical warhead" at southern Israel, Abu Qusai, a spokesman for the group, said in Gaza.
and let's not forget this LAWFUL PALESTINIAN:
Bin Laden to Issue Tribute to Al-Zarqawi
By LEE KEATH
Associated Press Writer
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Osama bin Laden will issue a videotaped message paying tribute to slain al-Qaida in Iraq chief Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a message posted on an Islamic militant Web site said Wednesday.
The message did not say when the video would be posted or whether bin Laden himself would appear in the video or just speak in a voice-over. The al-Qaida leader has issued three audiotapes this year but has not appeared in a video since one issued on Oct. 29, 2004.
A similar "advertisement" was issued for an al-Zarqawi tribute put out last week by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri. That advertisement appeared on the Web a day before the video was posted on Friday.
I never heard the Palestinians threaten to execute the soldier who they captured. They referred to him as a POW soldier captured in battle, which sounds correct. They have the legal right to keep him for the duration of the war.
Considering that Israel has held thousands of Palestinian prisoners for years, knocking out Palestinian electricity for a single POW was an over reaction and really a war crime by targeting the civilian population.
Wu Wei said...
Wu Wei: I never heard the Palestinians threaten to execute the soldier who they captured. They referred to him as a POW soldier captured in battle, which sounds correct. They have the legal right to keep him for the duration of the war.
Really? In the last 12 yrs the Palestinians have kidnapped and executed 9 israelis, the soldier is the latest in a string of kidnappings/murder. This same weekend, they kidnapped an 18 yr old civilan and executed him. If you are right and this people "palestine" are a legal group that can "capture" pow's, then please show me their sig's on the geneva convention. please look how these legal at war people have a right to carry bits of israeli body parts and hold those for ransom, please show me where it it legal to shoot rockets at civilans. If your thesis is correct then a real state of war exists...
Fine, the Israel doesnt have to supply the Gaza with food, water, electricty, medicine, collected taxes etc. Israel since it is at war, has the LEGAL right to shoot to KILL all armed Palestinians since as you state, the are legally at war. the NEXT hamas parade/funeral is now a military target, all palestinian Leaders do not need to be arrested, but shot on sight, thank you for clarifing Israel's LEGAL rights now that you say the Palestinians have a legal right to "capture/kidnap" israelis
stated: Considering that Israel has held thousands of Palestinian prisoners for years, knocking out Palestinian electricity for a single POW was an over reaction and really a war crime by targeting the civilian population.
actually no, the israelis withdrew from gaza, then the palestians ATTACKED with suicide bombers, and rockets INSIDE israel, this is an act of war. PERIOD
Then the palestinians attacked a israeli army outpost and at the same time kidnapped and executed an israeli civilian.
no your logic is flawed...
but i do suggest you go live with these savages you so ardently support, see how long til your head is chopped off...
Post a Comment
<< Home