Many people realize that Hamas provides social intiatives and funding ... It was all over the news after they took power in Gaza. The fact that they do so has no bearing upon the fact that they still pose a huge threat to true peace in the region, and nor does the fact that they were democratically elected. People will stop seeing them as an extremist group when they stop being one. Its not that complicated.
Why has no bearing that they were elected democratically? It has HUGE bearing. Not to mention it's a contradiction of Western policy: there's no democracy in the Middle East but when there are elections we ignore the results and the will of people. What clout can the US and Israel have then??!!
Which people see them as extremist? It's all a matter of perspective, right? For Hamas, they're going to extreme measures because the other measures (past policies with Arafat and Fatah) have not yielded anything for the Palestinians.
As well, my statement about the IRA was with regards to renouncing violence, something Hamas refuses to do. Your PLO analogy doesn't apply here, because the PLO never really renounced violence either. Hamas has political clout ... This does not mean that they aren't a huge part of the problem.
After how many years of terrorism did the IRA renounce violence and why?
Appealing for people's sympathies with regards to Hamas is something that only a privledged person who grew up in a truly safe society could do. That aside, correctly pointing out that Hamas is a big part of the problem is not ignoring the issues. Quite the opposite.
As well, my statement about the IRA was with regards to renouncing violence, something Hamas refuses to do. Your PLO analogy doesn't apply here, because the PLO never really renounced violence either. Hamas has political clout ... This does not mean that they aren't a huge part of the problem.
it has nothing to do with appealing to people's sympathies ... why do you give israel the leeway to continue to oppress and kill but not hamas in this war? ... you want hamas to stop fighting back from oppression and aren't willing to negotiate with the group that serves so many palestinians ...
how do you hope to accomplish peace? ... do you think if hamas stopped all attacks - the border checkpoints would come down? they can see their families in other areas? they will get their land back?
you have to remember - that when you take away the rockets and air raids - israel is oppressing the palestinians on a daily basis - that hasn't changed one iota in all these years ...
I also think that Israel DOES have a history of excessive military responding where diplomacy might be a better option
'military responding'? Your comments suggest that Israel merely 'responds' and is therefore simply defending itself.
This just simply isn't true, as anyone can discover if they look at the facts.
Israel's impetus to strike the Palestinians would disappear if Hamas were to cease its attacks...
The Palestinians have ceased their attacks on countless occasions, and have honoured countless ceasefires, and yet Israel has continued it's aggression, and it's illegal settlement building.
Your statement is just simply not true, and completely ignores the facts.
..and then Israel's hand would basically be forced in the direction of peace, assuming that they are interested in such.
Firstly, what do you mean by 'peace'? Do you mean a 'peace' that involves a south African style bunch of ghettoes for the Palestinians, with each ghetto or Aparthied style bantustan separated by Israeli checkpoints. and with no control over their air or sea space? Because this is what's been offered to them by Israel and the U.S In the name of so-called 'peace'. Every legitimate attempt at a realistic two-state solution has been singulary vetoed by the U.S. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html
Secondly, in the context of your belief that peace would ensue as soon as Palestinians stop trying to defend themselves, please explain the justification for the occupation and the continued settlement building.
Yes, it uses the ENTIRE social wing that supports over a million palestinians in gaza to pay for.... what.... 10 suicide bomber's families in like 5 years?
why do people always ignore statistics? Always in a debate when people compare death tolls of palestinians to israelis, all the pro-israeli people say "yeah i know israel always RESPONDS to the attacks on a much higher level"...
what the fuck is that supposed to mean? israel does not always respond to attacks by hamas, actually they often start MANY of the battles. just the other day byrnzie made a topic about hamas calling for a ceasefire and israel responding with more violence. why does no one ever remember things like this? you just remember that hamas militants, according to israeli and US govts, shoot some rockets into some random israeli cities, killing maybe 0.00003 people per rocket, and that calls for the army to run into gaza and kill 100 people.
you guys are so blind, it's terrifying.
Because Byrnzie is full of shit and so are his posts. Just like yours.
Its not a hard point to understand ... Hamas may be a "legitimate" government by virtue of being elected, but that has NO bearing upon their role as a huge part of the problem. Because they were elected people should be cool with what they do? That's absurd. Many highly problematic, immoral governments have been elected, in some fashion or another. My point regarding Hamas may be open to reasonable objections such as "How do we get them to change" or "How can they change while Israel also uses military force?", but the basic argument cannot really be disputed. This thing cannot change for the better unless extremist Islamic ideologies are dealt with in some way.
And once again .. I DO believe that Israel too should renounce violence. Do I have to spell it out every time for you guys? There is a difference between military responses to terrorism and deliberately targeting civilians, and Israel does less of the latter than Hamas does. That being said, heavy-handed military reprisals on poor Palestinian neighborhoods does nothing to help Israel and an awful lot to help Hamas, a point that the Israels cannot or will not grasp. So yes. .. Israel reactions need to change, as much as the terrorism does.
Its not a hard point to understand ... Hamas may be a "legitimate" government by virtue of being elected, but that has NO bearing upon their role as a huge part of the problem. Because they were elected people should be cool with what they do? That's absurd. Many highly problematic, immoral governments have been elected, in some fashion or another. My point regarding Hamas may be open to reasonable objections such as "How do we get them to change" or "How can they change while Israel also uses military force?", but the basic argument cannot really be disputed. This thing cannot change for the better unless extremist Islamic ideologies are dealt with in some way.
And once again .. I DO believe that Israel too should renounce violence. Do I have to spell it out every time for you guys? There is a difference between military responses to terrorism and deliberately targeting civilians, and Israel does less of the latter than Hamas does. That being said, heavy-handed military reprisals on poor Palestinian neighborhoods does nothing to help Israel and an awful lot to help Hamas, a point that the Israels cannot or will not grasp. So yes. .. Israel reactions need to change, as much as the terrorism does.
You seem to be asking Hamas to change without any reference to Israel. That's like asking all the little guys in the schoolyard to stop standing up to the bully. The bully won't stop kicking their ass, why should they stop standing up to him?
Its not a hard point to understand ... Hamas may be a "legitimate" government by virtue of being elected, but that has NO bearing upon their role as a huge part of the problem. Because they were elected people should be cool with what they do? That's absurd. Many highly problematic, immoral governments have been elected, in some fashion or another. My point regarding Hamas may be open to reasonable objections such as "How do we get them to change" or "How can they change while Israel also uses military force?", but the basic argument cannot really be disputed. This thing cannot change for the better unless extremist Islamic ideologies are dealt with in some way.
And once again .. I DO believe that Israel too should renounce violence. Do I have to spell it out every time for you guys? There is a difference between military responses to terrorism and deliberately targeting civilians, and Israel does less of the latter than Hamas does. That being said, heavy-handed military reprisals on poor Palestinian neighborhoods does nothing to help Israel and an awful lot to help Hamas, a point that the Israels cannot or will not grasp. So yes. .. Israel reactions need to change, as much as the terrorism does.
can i simplify this to mean that regardless of hamas role in palestinian society - they should not be dealt with unless they renounce their violence?
Do I have to spell it out every time for you guys? There is a difference between military responses to terrorism and deliberately targeting civilians, and Israel does less of the latter than Hamas does. That being said, heavy-handed military reprisals on poor Palestinian neighborhoods does nothing to help Israel and an awful lot to help Hamas, a point that the Israels cannot or will not grasp. So yes. .. Israel reactions need to change, as much as the terrorism does.
The above quoted passage is completely redundant, as I already pointed out above. You have chosen to completely ignore the facts.
I'll repeat myself: The Palestinians have issued, and adhered to, countless ceasefires and the Israeli's have continued their terrorism and settlement building. This has nothing to do with Israel simply 'responding', 'carrying out reprisals', and 'reacting'.
Your last sentence really sums it up: Israel 'reacts' and the Palestinians engage in 'terrorism'.
Fuck it, I'll go to the trouble of digging up sources/links to completely disprove this skewered and redundant notion that you've put forward.
You seem to be asking Hamas to change without any reference to Israel. That's like asking all the little guys in the schoolyard to stop standing up to the bully. The bully won't stop kicking their ass, why should they stop standing up to him?
The little guy in your analogy is an innocent victim ... Hamas is no such thing. The little guy is the Palestinian who basically wants to live his or her life, but cannot for fear of Israeli bombs or being used as a human shield by his so-called neighbor. Hamas is a powerful political organization, one that fans the flames and creates more problems than it solves.
If you really want to run with your analogy, one could break it down thus ... are the little guys in the schoolyard justified in hitting the bully back? Absolutely. Should they go kill the bully's family, though, in hopes of scaring him into backing down? Should they advocate that all associated with the bully be wiped out? No, that's just sick. Self-defense is one thing, and any Israeli who raids into Palestinian territories with the intent to harm should expect a fight ... Sure. That's called self-defense. Creating politically motivated terrorist groups is not the same thing as self-defense, especially not when the ideology of these groups goes WAY beyond protecting one's people. Do you really believe that Hamas is some noble protector of innocent victims, and that's it? At some point, I'll just have to conclude that some of you guys are unduly biased and that will be that.
And polaris ... No, I think one can negotiate with Hamas at the present time, before they have renounced their current approach to the problem. My point was more generally that they will have to change their ways at some point, if there is ever to be a peaceful solution to this problem.
The above quoted passage is completely redundant, as I already pointed out above. You have chosen to completely ignore the facts.
I'll repeat myself: The Palestinians have issued, and adhered to, countless ceasefires and the Israeli's have continued their terrorism and settlement building. This has nothing to do with Israel simply 'responding', 'carrying out reprisals', and 'reacting'.
Your last sentence really sums it up: Israel 'reacts' and the Palestinians engage in 'terrorism'.
Fuck it, I'll go to the trouble of digging up sources/links to completely disprove this skewered and redundant notion that you've put forward.
Don't start acting like a fuckhead just because someone else got you all riled up, pal ... I am not ignoring the goddamn facts ... Truth of the matter is that both sides have broken tons of ceasefires. Post your links, I've probably seen them already.
Go ahead and prove your point. I'm waiting patiently.
I'm sure you will. but I find it funny how you like to take the high road. sadly I have better things to do with my time then search through your 10000 posts finding where you said peoples posts are bullshit. or as you put it, bullocks. now go cry to the mods some more. I'll have some tissues fed ex over.
Before someone else has a temper tantrum, let me add that I agree that Israeli expansion needs to stop. Its not just Israel reacting. Aggressive military forays and settlement expansion are a huge part of the problem as well.
Before someone else has a temper tantrum, let me add that I agree that Israeli expansion needs to stop. Its not just Israel reacting. Aggressive military forays and settlement expansion are a huge part of the problem as well.
Israel is not reacting though. Isreal is instigating.
I'm sure you will. but I find it funny how you like to take the high road. sadly I have better things to do with my time then search through your 10000 posts finding where you said peoples posts are bullshit. or as you put it, bullocks. now go cry to the mods some more. I'll have some tissues fed ex over.
Before someone else has a temper tantrum, let me add that I agree that Israeli expansion needs to stop. Its not just Israel reacting. Aggressive military forays and settlement expansion are a huge part of the problem as well.
Israel holds all the cards. The occupation is the problem.
Israel holds all the cards. The occupation is the problem.
Excect no, they don't hold all the cards. If they really did put down their hand, completely, would Hamas disband and go back to being peaceloving farmers? Its a nice thought, to be sure.
My point is that Israel is going to keep menacing Palestine for as long as terrorist groups exist there. Israel may ultimately have to take the first steps here, but I do not see how there can be an ultimate resolution as long as Palestinians cannot accept a Jewish state in their midst.
Don't start acting like a fuckhead just because someone else got you all riled up, pal ... I am not ignoring the goddamn facts ... Truth of the matter is that both sides have broken tons of ceasefires. Post your links, I've probably seen them already.
I pointed out in a previous post above that Israel has consistently ignored ceasefires and continued it's attacks inside the West banck and Gaza. You chose to ignore my point and then repeat yourself. And you wonder why I reacted angrily?
Excect no, they don't hold all the cards. If they really did put down their hand, completely, would Hamas disband and go back to being peaceloving farmers? Its a nice thought, to be sure.
My point is that Israel is going to keep menacing Palestine for as long as terrorist groups exist there. Israel may ultimately have to take the first steps here, but I do not see how there can be an ultimate resolution as long as Palestinians cannot accept a Jewish state in their midst.
'Terrorist' groups - or those who seek to defend themselves - will continue to exist there for as long as the occupation, Israeli terrorism, and illegal settlement building continue.
As far as what Hamas, or anyone else would do once Israel pulls back to the 67 borders is anyone's guess, and so at the moment is completey irrelevant. If Israel ever did pull back and attacks from Palestinians continued, then you could take the moral high ground. Presently, however, Israel hasn't abided by international law and continues to be in breach of of over 60 U.N resolutions. Again, it holds all the cards.
I pointed out in a previous post above that Israel has consistently ignored ceasefires and continued it's attacks inside the West banck and Gaza. You chose to ignore my point and then repeat yourself. And you wonder why I reacted angrily?
Well, I wasn't ignoring your post at all, unless you define ignoring as not prefacing every single thing I say with the caveat "But please refer to Byrnzie's earlier post".
At no point did I state that everything Israel does is reactionary ... But attacks on Hamas, like I DID say, are such. Shoot a rocket into Israel, get a Hellfire missile in return.
'Terrorist' groups - or those who seek to defend themselves - will continue to exist there for as long as the occupation, Israeli terrorism, and illegal settlement building continue.
As far as what Hamas, or anyone else would do once Israel pulls back to the 67 borders is anyone's guess, and so at the moment is completey irrelevant. If Israel ever did pull back and attacks from Palestinians continued, then you could take the moral high ground. Presently, however, Israel hasn't abided by international law and continues to be in breach of of over 60 U.N resolutions. Again, it holds all the cards.
You're the one who thinks he's got the moral high ground, actually. Either you are in bald-faced denial, or you really do believe that Hamas' tactics are acceptable but you don't have the balls to outright say it.
And your "those who seek to defend themselves" manuveur is not cute, at all ... I have clearly laid out the differences between self-defense and terrorism. If they are the same thing in your mind, fine.
Comments
Why has no bearing that they were elected democratically? It has HUGE bearing. Not to mention it's a contradiction of Western policy: there's no democracy in the Middle East but when there are elections we ignore the results and the will of people. What clout can the US and Israel have then??!!
Which people see them as extremist? It's all a matter of perspective, right? For Hamas, they're going to extreme measures because the other measures (past policies with Arafat and Fatah) have not yielded anything for the Palestinians.
It's not that black and white.
After how many years of terrorism did the IRA renounce violence and why?
it has nothing to do with appealing to people's sympathies ... why do you give israel the leeway to continue to oppress and kill but not hamas in this war? ... you want hamas to stop fighting back from oppression and aren't willing to negotiate with the group that serves so many palestinians ...
how do you hope to accomplish peace? ... do you think if hamas stopped all attacks - the border checkpoints would come down? they can see their families in other areas? they will get their land back?
you have to remember - that when you take away the rockets and air raids - israel is oppressing the palestinians on a daily basis - that hasn't changed one iota in all these years ...
'military responding'? Your comments suggest that Israel merely 'responds' and is therefore simply defending itself.
This just simply isn't true, as anyone can discover if they look at the facts.
So you don't believe that the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?
The Palestinians have ceased their attacks on countless occasions, and have honoured countless ceasefires, and yet Israel has continued it's aggression, and it's illegal settlement building.
Your statement is just simply not true, and completely ignores the facts.
Firstly, what do you mean by 'peace'? Do you mean a 'peace' that involves a south African style bunch of ghettoes for the Palestinians, with each ghetto or Aparthied style bantustan separated by Israeli checkpoints. and with no control over their air or sea space? Because this is what's been offered to them by Israel and the U.S In the name of so-called 'peace'. Every legitimate attempt at a realistic two-state solution has been singulary vetoed by the U.S.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html
Secondly, in the context of your belief that peace would ensue as soon as Palestinians stop trying to defend themselves, please explain the justification for the occupation and the continued settlement building.
see post above
Because Byrnzie is full of shit and so are his posts. Just like yours.
I don't think I've ever seen you make an actual point.
And once again .. I DO believe that Israel too should renounce violence. Do I have to spell it out every time for you guys? There is a difference between military responses to terrorism and deliberately targeting civilians, and Israel does less of the latter than Hamas does. That being said, heavy-handed military reprisals on poor Palestinian neighborhoods does nothing to help Israel and an awful lot to help Hamas, a point that the Israels cannot or will not grasp. So yes. .. Israel reactions need to change, as much as the terrorism does.
can i simplify this to mean that regardless of hamas role in palestinian society - they should not be dealt with unless they renounce their violence?
The mods obviously aren't paying attention. :rolleyes:
Edit: I wonder what name you'll come back with after they finally get around to banning you again?
so its ok for you to make posts like that but not him?
The above quoted passage is completely redundant, as I already pointed out above. You have chosen to completely ignore the facts.
I'll repeat myself: The Palestinians have issued, and adhered to, countless ceasefires and the Israeli's have continued their terrorism and settlement building. This has nothing to do with Israel simply 'responding', 'carrying out reprisals', and 'reacting'.
Your last sentence really sums it up: Israel 'reacts' and the Palestinians engage in 'terrorism'.
Fuck it, I'll go to the trouble of digging up sources/links to completely disprove this skewered and redundant notion that you've put forward.
Go ahead and prove your point. I'm waiting patiently.
The little guy in your analogy is an innocent victim ... Hamas is no such thing. The little guy is the Palestinian who basically wants to live his or her life, but cannot for fear of Israeli bombs or being used as a human shield by his so-called neighbor. Hamas is a powerful political organization, one that fans the flames and creates more problems than it solves.
If you really want to run with your analogy, one could break it down thus ... are the little guys in the schoolyard justified in hitting the bully back? Absolutely. Should they go kill the bully's family, though, in hopes of scaring him into backing down? Should they advocate that all associated with the bully be wiped out? No, that's just sick. Self-defense is one thing, and any Israeli who raids into Palestinian territories with the intent to harm should expect a fight ... Sure. That's called self-defense. Creating politically motivated terrorist groups is not the same thing as self-defense, especially not when the ideology of these groups goes WAY beyond protecting one's people. Do you really believe that Hamas is some noble protector of innocent victims, and that's it? At some point, I'll just have to conclude that some of you guys are unduly biased and that will be that.
And polaris ... No, I think one can negotiate with Hamas at the present time, before they have renounced their current approach to the problem. My point was more generally that they will have to change their ways at some point, if there is ever to be a peaceful solution to this problem.
Don't start acting like a fuckhead just because someone else got you all riled up, pal ... I am not ignoring the goddamn facts ... Truth of the matter is that both sides have broken tons of ceasefires. Post your links, I've probably seen them already.
I'm sure you will. but I find it funny how you like to take the high road. sadly I have better things to do with my time then search through your 10000 posts finding where you said peoples posts are bullshit. or as you put it, bullocks. now go cry to the mods some more. I'll have some tissues fed ex over.
I asked you to prove your point. You can't. Fine.
Israel holds all the cards. The occupation is the problem.
Israel is indeed instigating when they attempt to expand their borders, yes. I still argue that attacking Hamas is itself reactionary, though.
Excect no, they don't hold all the cards. If they really did put down their hand, completely, would Hamas disband and go back to being peaceloving farmers? Its a nice thought, to be sure.
My point is that Israel is going to keep menacing Palestine for as long as terrorist groups exist there. Israel may ultimately have to take the first steps here, but I do not see how there can be an ultimate resolution as long as Palestinians cannot accept a Jewish state in their midst.
look out, we got another chest thumper!
I pointed out in a previous post above that Israel has consistently ignored ceasefires and continued it's attacks inside the West banck and Gaza. You chose to ignore my point and then repeat yourself. And you wonder why I reacted angrily?
'Terrorist' groups - or those who seek to defend themselves - will continue to exist there for as long as the occupation, Israeli terrorism, and illegal settlement building continue.
As far as what Hamas, or anyone else would do once Israel pulls back to the 67 borders is anyone's guess, and so at the moment is completey irrelevant. If Israel ever did pull back and attacks from Palestinians continued, then you could take the moral high ground. Presently, however, Israel hasn't abided by international law and continues to be in breach of of over 60 U.N resolutions. Again, it holds all the cards.
Well, I wasn't ignoring your post at all, unless you define ignoring as not prefacing every single thing I say with the caveat "But please refer to Byrnzie's earlier post".
At no point did I state that everything Israel does is reactionary ... But attacks on Hamas, like I DID say, are such. Shoot a rocket into Israel, get a Hellfire missile in return.
You're the one who thinks he's got the moral high ground, actually. Either you are in bald-faced denial, or you really do believe that Hamas' tactics are acceptable but you don't have the balls to outright say it.
And your "those who seek to defend themselves" manuveur is not cute, at all ... I have clearly laid out the differences between self-defense and terrorism. If they are the same thing in your mind, fine.