-
Posts
-
The military wing of Hamas claimed involvement in the raid but the political wing says that it doesn’t know the whereabouts of the prisoner. The people holding the prisoner now say that they want to exchange him for women and children held in Israeli jails. Whether you think the raid was the right thing to do in the big scheme of things, the fact remains that the raid was a legitimate act of war and not an act of terrorism.
I agree with Tiler though that you can expect the Israeli response to be wholly disproportionate as usual. Nobody will be safe from the reprisals because the Israelis will want to teach the Palestinians a lesson and to do that they will carry out random and punitive acts in addition to fighting palestinians police and militants. So once again innocent civilians will be caught in the middle of this conflict.
The political stalemate doesn’t benefit the ordinary Israeli nor the ordinary palestinian because they are the ones who pay the biggest price during the fighting. The USA put itself in the position of mediator yet refuses to talk to Hamas. The Americans could take a back seat and let a less biased party take over the mediation but it opposes that idea because of domestic american political considerations. So you can rely on the americans to obstruct any measure to put pressure on Israel to make concessions or even to negotiate. The inevitable result as we have seen since the start of the occupation almost 40 years ago is a never-ending cycle of violence. The only way this conflict will ever end is through dialogue and negotiation, so it’s up to US politicians to show some balls and move the peace process forward.
The US won’t talk to Hamas because Hamas is an admitted terrorist organisation. In fact nobody else will talk to them either – and that includes Arab countries as well as Western countries. Even the soppy old EU refuses to send any money at all to the Hamas ‘government’ as they will not support terrorism.
Hamas is a part of the problem not part of the solution. All this insistence on negotiation is simply another way to achieve their aims and try to secure what they cannot obtain by any other means. In the meantime they occupy themselves with cross border raids, suicide bombings and rocket attacks. These guys are not just out of control, they are uncontrollable – even by their own so-called Police authority.
If they truly wanted a peaceful settlement, which pretty much everybody doubts, then they wouldn’t have just carried out this attack and kidnap. They must have known that it would guarantee Israeli retaliation.
Nobody in the world believes that the Israelis are simply going to release all the Palestinians they currently hold in jail – so it is a pretty pointless ‘demand’ to make. I reckon that the attack was carried out specifically to provoke the inevitable Israeli response and get further world media coverage for the terrorists. Let’s face it, as a military exercise it had no siustainable objective and was frankly an exercise in futility.
So its back to the Israeli death squads, kill everyone they don’t like the look of, bayonet a few babies, like the Nazis did in Russia, after all Israel sees them as savages, to be killed, anywhere, anyhow.
The Russians and other countries have carried out talks with Hamas and anyway we all know that this rhetoric about not talking to terrorists is all bullsh1t because the British government talked to the IRA before they called a ceasefire. Plus we all remember the americans rolling the red carpet out for Gerry Adams year after year after year.
If you’re a mediator then you have to talk to both sides. If other countries don’t want to then fine, but you can’t be a mediator if you only want to talk to one side. Jimmy Carter believes that a solution has to be imposed on both sides and he’s absolutely right. The international community needs to formulate a solution based on international law and force both sides to implement it.
You could say that the attack on the israeli military outpost was bound to provoke a reaction but you could equally say that the constant attacks and persecution carried out by the Israelis was bound to provoke a reaction. It’s the never-ending cycle of violence that Secretary of State Marshall predicted way back in the 1940s and the only way to stop it is by 3rd party intervention. Unfortunately, the current 3rd party is the USA and so everyone’s screwed.
If you try being serious for a second Tommy you’ll realize that there is a national security issue attached to this arab-israeli conflict. The clear injustice towards the palestinians is a source of resentment that is felt across the entire Islamic world and as a result it acts as a recruiting sergeant for extremists. They are able to convince people that the West is anti-muslim and anti-arab and obviously these type of extremists are a threat to our own nation’s security.
@Mr Bigstuff wrote:
The Russians and other countries have carried out talks with Hamas and anyway we all know that this rhetoric about not talking to terrorists is all bullsh1t because the British government talked to the IRA before they called a ceasefire. Plus we all remember the americans rolling the red carpet out for Gerry Adams year after year after year.
Indeed the US did constantly talk to the IRA, much to our intense irritation – particularly whilst they (the IRA) were busy murdering British citizens. But Mr B, the not so subtle difference here is that the IRA were NOT the elected government of Ireland whereas Hamas ARE the elected government of the Palestinians.
It’s all well and good utilising the ‘if you did this then you must do that’ style of argument. I realise that it most probably doesn’t suit your entrenched view of things, but the plain fact is that the Hamas government is seen as a terrorist organisation by the vast majority of the world – other than those countries that sponsor terrorismn that is. No country is sending them money in the form of aid because they know it will simply be used to purchase arms and explosives. So yet again the Palestinians score an own goal.
@Mr B wrote:
If you’re a mediator then you have to talk to both sides. If other countries don’t want to then fine, but you can’t be a mediator if you only want to talk to one side. Jimmy Carter believes that a solution has to be imposed on both sides and he’s absolutely right. The international community needs to formulate a solution based on international law and force both sides to implement it.
Well Jimmy Carter – the ”Peanut President” – didn’t exactly go down in history as one of the most successful or revered of Presidents. I would suggest to you that he was more an appeaser than a negotiator. But let’s not get drawn into a side issue which would detract from the Israeli/Palestinian issue.
This international community that you refer to , suggesting that it uses force to impose its solution, simply doesn’t exist in reality. Oh…. unless you are talking about the United Nations and they are more a joke than a serious organisation. The UN using force against Israel – they’d get their asses whopped so fast…………. !!!
@Mr B wrote:
You could say that the attack on the israeli military outpost was bound to provoke a reaction (I DID say exactly that, there was no ‘could’ about it !!!) but you could equally say that the constant attacks and persecution carried out by the Israelis was bound to provoke a reaction. It’s the never-ending cycle of violence that Secretary of State Marshall predicted way back in the 1940s and the only way to stop it is by 3rd party intervention. Unfortunately, the current 3rd party is the USA and so everyone’s screwed.
And finally Mr B I think we have something in common in terms of our respective viewpoints. Yes everyone IS screwed. Whatever the idealistic solutions may be from negotiation to capitulation the reality is that both parties are going to be in their respective positions for many many years to come.
Mind you, here’s a thought. As the US clearly isn’t going to invade etc etc how about your friends (the Palestinians) calling in their Arab supporters from Egypt, Jordan and Syria to invade Israel and put an end to it once and for all?????
In all my life I have never met so many stupid people, trying to kid everyone, the Israelis are the good guys, they are the most vicious evil minded scum on the face of this earth and those that support are as bad.
The best thing that could happen, is give Iran the bomb, and that will solve the problem, and rid this world of the foul stench of Zionism, and the cockroaches that support it.
I guess I’m really struggling NOT to get into the analysis of the ”history” of all this as the facts can be shown to support whichever argument you feel like supporting, depending on who you speak to.
It seems to me that constantly going back over old ground and plucking ‘facts’ out to support a particular viewpoint is pretty pointless. What happened in the past happened in the past.
I prefer to take a ‘realpolitik’ view of things. When all is said and done, the Arab nations generally impose the Israeli boycott and have done so for years. Basically it is total window dressing and has no real effect on anything. If they were REALLY serious about finishing off Israel then they’d just get on with it and cut out the incessant yapping.
They tried a few years ago and got a beating so maybe they aren’t too excited about having another go. They all seem to take the soft option and let the Palestinians bleed themselves dry whilst wringing their hands and telling everybody how awful it is.
Well. well, the scumbags have started, three bridges destroyed, a power station, so the population will be without water or power, are they after the so-called terrorists or the genocide of the Palestinians
Well seeing as Hamas are an elected government I would think that this would give the USA more reason to talk to them than Sinn Fein.
Secondly you forget that Carter played the role of mediator in the negotations that brought about the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. It was a great achievement. He was hoping to incorporate a deal that sorted out the Palestinian problem but the Israelis backtracked at the last minute.
I’m not saying a solution can be imposed militarily, but it can be imposed through political and diplomatic means. It’s possible to make a peace deal the only viable option for both sides and that will force both sides to do what’s necessary to implement it.
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!