Posted by DipNote Bloggers on Mar 04, 2008 - 08:37 AM
![A Palestinian burns tyres during a rally in the West Bank town of Hebron, Mar. 3, 2008. [AP]](http://blogs.state.gov/images/UNGA/field/2008_0304_gaza_bh_m.jpg)
Should the U.S. engage Hamas as part of its efforts to bring about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?
|
Home Videos Photos Welcome About Legal Search Archive |
Share This Post
Recent Posts
Pacific Partnership Contributes to Samoan CommunitiesWhat Opportunities Will Full Diplomatic Representation Between the U.S. and Venezuela Present?
Operation Jacque: One Year Later
Strengthening Women in Afghanistan Creates Foundation for Peace, Prosperity
Building a Science Network of the Americas
Question of the Week: Should the U.S. Engage Hamas in the Peace Process Between the Israelis and Palestinians?
Posted by DipNote Bloggers on Mar 04, 2008 - 08:37 AM
Secretary Rice arrived in the Middle East today to discuss the future of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas suspended the talks to protest the Israeli incursions into Gaza. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has vowed to continue to do whatever is necessary to stop the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas fighters in Gaza. Many argue that the peace process will not be successful until Hamas, a foreign designated terrorist organization, is brought into the discussions.
Should the U.S. engage Hamas as part of its efforts to bring about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?
Posted by DipNote Bloggers on Mar 04, 2008 - 08:37 AM
Should the U.S. engage Hamas as part of its efforts to bring about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Follow Entry's Comments Via RSS
Do you want to know when a comment is added to this entry? Stay up-to-date:
Comments
Follow Entry's Comments Via RSS
Do you want to know when a comment is added to this entry? Stay up-to-date:
Comments
Bilbo in Virginia writes:
I don't think the U.S. should directly engage with Hamas until it, at the very least, stops conducting and supporting attacks against Israel. Both sides need to step back and stop the tit-for-tat violence before anything useful can come of engagement with Hamas. That said, I don't think Hamas would accept any public engagement with the U.S. ... they'd view it as a public compromise of their uncompromising stand against Israel. Perhaps a face-saving approach might be to engage at an unofficial, off-the-record level that would provide each side with deniability until enough of a level of trust is achieved to continue openly. But I'm not holding my breath.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
I don't think the U.S. should directly engage with Hamas until it, at the very least, stops conducting and supporting attacks against Israel. Both sides need to step back and stop the tit-for-tat violence before anything useful can come of engagement with Hamas. That said, I don't think Hamas would accept any public engagement with the U.S. ... they'd view it as a public compromise of their uncompromising stand against Israel. Perhaps a face-saving approach might be to engage at an unofficial, off-the-record level that would provide each side with deniability until enough of a level of trust is achieved to continue openly. But I'm not holding my breath.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Doug in Michigan writes:
Until Hamas recognizes Israel's right to exist and renounces violence against civilians and from civilian populations, they should be shunned and not supported.
They should not be engaged by the rest of the civilized world until they follow the basic rules of civilized society.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Until Hamas recognizes Israel's right to exist and renounces violence against civilians and from civilian populations, they should be shunned and not supported.
They should not be engaged by the rest of the civilized world until they follow the basic rules of civilized society.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Greg in Pittsburgh writes:
NO!!!
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
NO!!!
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Theodore in California writes:
I thought the United States policy was not to negotiate with terrorists.
Hamas openly states that they aren't interested in peace with Israel, but want Israel to be destroyed. Abbas/Fatah aren't any better.
Pretending that the PA want peace is foolish. They don't. We need to quit giving them money and arms. They are terrorists and murderers. There is no moral equivalence between the PA and Israel. If Israel had the same goals as PA/Hamas, there wouldn't be any "Palestine", nor would there be any Arabs living there, much less currently living in Israel. Tell us again how many Jews are living in Palestine?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
I thought the United States policy was not to negotiate with terrorists.
Hamas openly states that they aren't interested in peace with Israel, but want Israel to be destroyed. Abbas/Fatah aren't any better.
Pretending that the PA want peace is foolish. They don't. We need to quit giving them money and arms. They are terrorists and murderers. There is no moral equivalence between the PA and Israel. If Israel had the same goals as PA/Hamas, there wouldn't be any "Palestine", nor would there be any Arabs living there, much less currently living in Israel. Tell us again how many Jews are living in Palestine?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Terry in Colorado writes:
The very fact that you are asking this question is troubling.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
The very fact that you are asking this question is troubling.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Yonaton writes:
In short, change is desperately needed, but in the opposite direction. A "Palestinian" state would be a hub of terror in the Middle East, not at all the stabilizing influence that is hoped for. America has to come to terms with that reality.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
In short, change is desperately needed, but in the opposite direction. A "Palestinian" state would be a hub of terror in the Middle East, not at all the stabilizing influence that is hoped for. America has to come to terms with that reality.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Susan in North Carolina writes:
Absolutely not. To legitimize a terrorist state would contravene the principles of the UN (which bars states from attacking other states), not to mention it would undermine the current American government's position that Palestinians must first renounce terror before they achieve statehood. THe only thing that talking to Hamas will do is give them a propaganda victory and more breathing space to keep on lobbing larger and larger rockets at Israel. This is the most ridiculous idea yet out of the State Department. I hope the next President, whether of either party, will get rid of all these bureaucrats in the State Department and the CIA who have been actively working against the interests of the government elected by the American people. You bureaucrats are not elected and yet you try to wield the power that our Constitution gives to the people through their elected representatives and executives. I am ashamed of the U.S. Department of State. You are inept and ideologically committed to the defeat of the West. You seek only to appease enemies of the U.S. in order to insure your own safety. I wish you would all go back to your cushy academic jobs where you would do less harm to our country.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Absolutely not. To legitimize a terrorist state would contravene the principles of the UN (which bars states from attacking other states), not to mention it would undermine the current American government's position that Palestinians must first renounce terror before they achieve statehood. THe only thing that talking to Hamas will do is give them a propaganda victory and more breathing space to keep on lobbing larger and larger rockets at Israel. This is the most ridiculous idea yet out of the State Department. I hope the next President, whether of either party, will get rid of all these bureaucrats in the State Department and the CIA who have been actively working against the interests of the government elected by the American people. You bureaucrats are not elected and yet you try to wield the power that our Constitution gives to the people through their elected representatives and executives. I am ashamed of the U.S. Department of State. You are inept and ideologically committed to the defeat of the West. You seek only to appease enemies of the U.S. in order to insure your own safety. I wish you would all go back to your cushy academic jobs where you would do less harm to our country.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Yonaton writes:
It's still a terribly flawed policy.
...because Abbas, whom you call a "moderate," is really a terrorist, as are too many of the "Palestinian" Arabs.
Your support for a "Palestinian" state is really support for the ethnic cleansing of about 80,000 Jews from Judea and Samaria, the heart of historic Israel. That isn't fair or balanced, especially when Arabs can vote and even serve in the Knesset in Israel, while a Jew only goes into Arab controlled land at the risk of his life. Besides, it really IS Jewish land.
After the debacle of Gaza, it should be crystal clear that this will only create an even greater haven for the terrorists who want to destroy America as well as Israel. That isn't diplomacy, it is suicidal madness.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
It's still a terribly flawed policy.
...because Abbas, whom you call a "moderate," is really a terrorist, as are too many of the "Palestinian" Arabs.
Your support for a "Palestinian" state is really support for the ethnic cleansing of about 80,000 Jews from Judea and Samaria, the heart of historic Israel. That isn't fair or balanced, especially when Arabs can vote and even serve in the Knesset in Israel, while a Jew only goes into Arab controlled land at the risk of his life. Besides, it really IS Jewish land.
After the debacle of Gaza, it should be crystal clear that this will only create an even greater haven for the terrorists who want to destroy America as well as Israel. That isn't diplomacy, it is suicidal madness.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack writes:
@ Congressman Kirk -- Thank you for your comment, the first on the blog from a member of Congress. The question of the week portion of the blog is meant to allow public comment about questions we at the State Department are asked by the media and others in public fora. The asking of the question is not meant to indicate support for a policy different than that of the government. The asking of the question is also not meant to hint at a change in policy.
Sean McCormack
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
@ Congressman Kirk -- Thank you for your comment, the first on the blog from a member of Congress. The question of the week portion of the blog is meant to allow public comment about questions we at the State Department are asked by the media and others in public fora. The asking of the question is not meant to indicate support for a policy different than that of the government. The asking of the question is also not meant to hint at a change in policy.
Sean McCormack
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Kelsie in Texas writes:
Absolutely not. The official line of the United States holds that we do not negotiate with terrorists: that precludes any talks or "engagement" (of a non-military nature) with Hamas.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Absolutely not. The official line of the United States holds that we do not negotiate with terrorists: that precludes any talks or "engagement" (of a non-military nature) with Hamas.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Rob in Colorado writes:
Please tell Secretary Rice that the Palestinian Arabs do not want peace, e.g. see below. That's aside from the absurdity of the charade of "negotiating peace" by omitting the warring party [hamas]. She is out-Orwelling Orwell.
Official PA Daily: Killer of Eight Young Men Is Holy Martyr - Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
Mahmoud Abbas' official PA daily newspaper has honored the killer of the eight students gunned down this week with the status of Shahid - Holy Islamic Martyr. Al Hayat Al Jadida prominently placed a picture of the killer on the front page, with the caption, "The Shahid Alaa Abu D'heim." In a page one story, his act is defined as a "Shahada-achieving" action.
This honoring of terror and terrorists by the Abbas' PA is nothing new.
Palestinian Celebration of Murder Dooms Hope for Peace - Michael Goodwin (New York Daily News)
After an Arab gunman went on a rampage at a Jewish religious school in Jerusalem, we saw pictures of Palestinians celebrating the massacre. They shouted jubilantly from cars and danced in the streets of Gaza. Men fired bursts of automatic weapons skyward. Every society has its madmen, its gangsters and killers. But in functioning societies, they are shunned and punished as an example of how not to behave. Not so in Palestinian society or in too much of the Muslim world. Celebrations of death, as they did Thursday, soon become odes to martyrs. In less than a day, pictures of the lone gunman in the massacre appeared on posters glorifying his death. Behind his clean-shaven, ordinary face were a mosque and messages of heroic defiance.
March 7, 2008
JINSA Report #753
Cancel the "Peace Process"
Associated Press: Israel won't break off peace talks because of a Palestinian attack in Jerusalem that killed eight students studying the library of a rabbinical seminary, an Israeli official said Friday. Israel will push ahead with talks "so as not to punish moderate Palestinians for actions by people who are not just our enemies but theirs as well," the Israeli official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the government had yet to make an official announcement.
Fully agreeing that Hamas, Fatah's al Aksa Martyrs Brigade, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, et al. pose a threat to Palestinians as well as to Israelis, it would make much more sense to stop all presumed "peace talks" until the radicals have been defeated and defanged. Talking to Abu Mazen while Hamas and offshoots of his own Fatah (the shooting didn't have the hallmarks of Hamas or Hezbollah) are conducting open warfare against the State of Israel is akin to talking to the White Rose while Hitler is running the ovens. It may intellectually be more pleasant, but it ignores where the power and the dangers really lie.
The Palestinians certainly have suffered and are suffering from the failings of their own rotten terrorist leadership. But if you believe there are masses of Palestinians who long for liberation from Hamas; who believe Israel is a legitimate and permanent part of the Middle East; and who want nothing more than to share in the political freedom and economic advancement that association with the region's only full-fledged democracy and liberal society could bring, we respectfully disagree.
It is perfectly possible for Palestinians to want to be left alone to work and raise their children, and at the same time wish for their government to kill Jews. That, in fact, is the message of the Palestinian legislative elections that brought Hamas to power in the first place. Fatah had proven so thoroughly corrupt that, absent Arafat's mythic presence, people simply couldn't vote for it. On the other hand, both Fatah and Hamas believe the creation of Israel was a mistake by the international community. Both believe it needs to disappear - through negotiated salami tactics or by armed revolution, it doesn't matter. The Palestinians voted on domestic policy, not the "peace process."
There were Palestinians out there yesterday engaged in celebratory gunfire and passing out sweets; they are out there every day that Israelis die. Yeshiva students, children, fathers, soldiers, it doesn't matter who they were in life - dead Jews are an occasion for Palestinians to hand out treats to children. There are Palestinian mothers who talk about giving their children to martyrdom as an act of religious faith. There are Palestinian fathers who turn on the TV and let their children watch the Hamas bunny eating Jews.
These are not moderate people. These are people sucked into a vortex of ever increasing anarchy, death-worship for themselves and others, poverty, misery and radicalism. "Negotiating" with their "representatives" won't help them or Israel. The better course of action would be to cancel the "peace process" until the "war process" has been addressed - whether by Israel alone or by the international community.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Please tell Secretary Rice that the Palestinian Arabs do not want peace, e.g. see below. That's aside from the absurdity of the charade of "negotiating peace" by omitting the warring party [hamas]. She is out-Orwelling Orwell.
Official PA Daily: Killer of Eight Young Men Is Holy Martyr - Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
Mahmoud Abbas' official PA daily newspaper has honored the killer of the eight students gunned down this week with the status of Shahid - Holy Islamic Martyr. Al Hayat Al Jadida prominently placed a picture of the killer on the front page, with the caption, "The Shahid Alaa Abu D'heim." In a page one story, his act is defined as a "Shahada-achieving" action.
This honoring of terror and terrorists by the Abbas' PA is nothing new.
Palestinian Celebration of Murder Dooms Hope for Peace - Michael Goodwin (New York Daily News)
After an Arab gunman went on a rampage at a Jewish religious school in Jerusalem, we saw pictures of Palestinians celebrating the massacre. They shouted jubilantly from cars and danced in the streets of Gaza. Men fired bursts of automatic weapons skyward. Every society has its madmen, its gangsters and killers. But in functioning societies, they are shunned and punished as an example of how not to behave. Not so in Palestinian society or in too much of the Muslim world. Celebrations of death, as they did Thursday, soon become odes to martyrs. In less than a day, pictures of the lone gunman in the massacre appeared on posters glorifying his death. Behind his clean-shaven, ordinary face were a mosque and messages of heroic defiance.
March 7, 2008
JINSA Report #753
Cancel the "Peace Process"
Associated Press: Israel won't break off peace talks because of a Palestinian attack in Jerusalem that killed eight students studying the library of a rabbinical seminary, an Israeli official said Friday. Israel will push ahead with talks "so as not to punish moderate Palestinians for actions by people who are not just our enemies but theirs as well," the Israeli official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the government had yet to make an official announcement.
Fully agreeing that Hamas, Fatah's al Aksa Martyrs Brigade, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, et al. pose a threat to Palestinians as well as to Israelis, it would make much more sense to stop all presumed "peace talks" until the radicals have been defeated and defanged. Talking to Abu Mazen while Hamas and offshoots of his own Fatah (the shooting didn't have the hallmarks of Hamas or Hezbollah) are conducting open warfare against the State of Israel is akin to talking to the White Rose while Hitler is running the ovens. It may intellectually be more pleasant, but it ignores where the power and the dangers really lie.
The Palestinians certainly have suffered and are suffering from the failings of their own rotten terrorist leadership. But if you believe there are masses of Palestinians who long for liberation from Hamas; who believe Israel is a legitimate and permanent part of the Middle East; and who want nothing more than to share in the political freedom and economic advancement that association with the region's only full-fledged democracy and liberal society could bring, we respectfully disagree.
It is perfectly possible for Palestinians to want to be left alone to work and raise their children, and at the same time wish for their government to kill Jews. That, in fact, is the message of the Palestinian legislative elections that brought Hamas to power in the first place. Fatah had proven so thoroughly corrupt that, absent Arafat's mythic presence, people simply couldn't vote for it. On the other hand, both Fatah and Hamas believe the creation of Israel was a mistake by the international community. Both believe it needs to disappear - through negotiated salami tactics or by armed revolution, it doesn't matter. The Palestinians voted on domestic policy, not the "peace process."
There were Palestinians out there yesterday engaged in celebratory gunfire and passing out sweets; they are out there every day that Israelis die. Yeshiva students, children, fathers, soldiers, it doesn't matter who they were in life - dead Jews are an occasion for Palestinians to hand out treats to children. There are Palestinian mothers who talk about giving their children to martyrdom as an act of religious faith. There are Palestinian fathers who turn on the TV and let their children watch the Hamas bunny eating Jews.
These are not moderate people. These are people sucked into a vortex of ever increasing anarchy, death-worship for themselves and others, poverty, misery and radicalism. "Negotiating" with their "representatives" won't help them or Israel. The better course of action would be to cancel the "peace process" until the "war process" has been addressed - whether by Israel alone or by the international community.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Donna in Texas writes:
Absolutely not! Should the United States negotiate with a terrorist organization that says it will NEVER accept the existence of the Jewish state of Israel? Believe them! They will never stop trying to kill Israelis and the state of Israel.
Why is this question even being asked? Are you so willing to throw Israel under the bus pretending that Hamas can be dealt with diplomatically--that it is anything other than what it says it is?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Absolutely not! Should the United States negotiate with a terrorist organization that says it will NEVER accept the existence of the Jewish state of Israel? Believe them! They will never stop trying to kill Israelis and the state of Israel.
Why is this question even being asked? Are you so willing to throw Israel under the bus pretending that Hamas can be dealt with diplomatically--that it is anything other than what it says it is?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Craig in Virginia writes:
The foolishness of this question can be highlighted by substituting the parties, as such: "Should the U.S. engage Al Qaeda as part of its efforts to bring peace between the U.S. and the Muslim world?"
I think we all know the answer to that one. It is unconscionable that the Bush administration is pushing for Israel to engage any party that seeks to destroy it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
The foolishness of this question can be highlighted by substituting the parties, as such: "Should the U.S. engage Al Qaeda as part of its efforts to bring peace between the U.S. and the Muslim world?"
I think we all know the answer to that one. It is unconscionable that the Bush administration is pushing for Israel to engage any party that seeks to destroy it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Anthony in California writes:
Absolutely not. Hamas is a terrorist organization responsible for hundreds of deaths, including the recent massacre at a seminary in Jerusalem. It is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the goal of which is the destruction of Israel and the imposition of barbaric sharia law globally. It has broken every agreement it has ever made. Why on Earth would the United States want to lend this organization any credibility by dealing directly with it? Far from engaging it, we should be trying to diplomatically and economically isolate it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Absolutely not. Hamas is a terrorist organization responsible for hundreds of deaths, including the recent massacre at a seminary in Jerusalem. It is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the goal of which is the destruction of Israel and the imposition of barbaric sharia law globally. It has broken every agreement it has ever made. Why on Earth would the United States want to lend this organization any credibility by dealing directly with it? Far from engaging it, we should be trying to diplomatically and economically isolate it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
David in New York writes:
This is a joke, correct? The very question is so absurd I can't even find a pithy comparison. It was sad to see the Bush Doctrine on life support. Now that the plug's clearly been pulled I'm not even feeling the sense of closure that usually accompanies a death. If other countries are either "with us or with the terrorists", where does it leave them if we're with the terrorists?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
This is a joke, correct? The very question is so absurd I can't even find a pithy comparison. It was sad to see the Bush Doctrine on life support. Now that the plug's clearly been pulled I'm not even feeling the sense of closure that usually accompanies a death. If other countries are either "with us or with the terrorists", where does it leave them if we're with the terrorists?
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Matthew in Washington writes:
The only way that peace can be brought to that part of the world is to remove Hamas from it. If Hamas has no power then things become much easier. Peace can be reached between Israel and the other countries that threaten her. Remeber this though Iran wants Israel wiped from the face of the Earth. They won't let peace happen because if peace happens they would lose. So first we need to contain Iran and its group in Lebanon and then work on Hamas or should I say let the IDF work on Hamas. However when talking to these people remind them of this war is expenive peace isn't.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
The only way that peace can be brought to that part of the world is to remove Hamas from it. If Hamas has no power then things become much easier. Peace can be reached between Israel and the other countries that threaten her. Remeber this though Iran wants Israel wiped from the face of the Earth. They won't let peace happen because if peace happens they would lose. So first we need to contain Iran and its group in Lebanon and then work on Hamas or should I say let the IDF work on Hamas. However when talking to these people remind them of this war is expenive peace isn't.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Dave in Texas writes:
Hey, why bother with the time-wasting 'engagement' strategery? Why not just issue a public formal surrender now, to al Qaeda and Hamas and Hezbollah and the Iranians and the Saudi Sunni mob?
AFter all, they perceive you're already doing it. They believe talk is what you do when you're too weak to fight. IT motivates them, makes them believe they're winning. Causes them to launch more attacks.
In other words, talk of engagement causes American deaths.
Think about it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Hey, why bother with the time-wasting 'engagement' strategery? Why not just issue a public formal surrender now, to al Qaeda and Hamas and Hezbollah and the Iranians and the Saudi Sunni mob?
AFter all, they perceive you're already doing it. They believe talk is what you do when you're too weak to fight. IT motivates them, makes them believe they're winning. Causes them to launch more attacks.
In other words, talk of engagement causes American deaths.
Think about it.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Kim in The Netherlands writes:
Sure, right after you've given Osama Bin Laden a tour of the Oval Office.
Are you kidding?
The only way to solve the problem is by sending all Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, Saudis, and Egyptians that currently live in the Land of Israel back to their respective countries. Everything else only prolongs the conflict.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Sure, right after you've given Osama Bin Laden a tour of the Oval Office.
Are you kidding?
The only way to solve the problem is by sending all Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, Saudis, and Egyptians that currently live in the Land of Israel back to their respective countries. Everything else only prolongs the conflict.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
David in Israel writes:
Israel and the Palestinias have been involved in what should have been a serious peace process since 1993. In exchange for the famous Oslo DOP Israel received a huge rash of auto thefts and suicide bombers. 15 years of Israeli "confidense building measures", that is, releasing associates of murderers has only built up the self confidense of the terrorists!
Now that the late Arafat's assistant has proved to be useless the DOS want's to talk with Hamas, the terrorist agents of Iran! I am not sure what the DoS plan is but it certainly is not peace for Israel!
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Israel and the Palestinias have been involved in what should have been a serious peace process since 1993. In exchange for the famous Oslo DOP Israel received a huge rash of auto thefts and suicide bombers. 15 years of Israeli "confidense building measures", that is, releasing associates of murderers has only built up the self confidense of the terrorists!
Now that the late Arafat's assistant has proved to be useless the DOS want's to talk with Hamas, the terrorist agents of Iran! I am not sure what the DoS plan is but it certainly is not peace for Israel!
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Eric in Washington writes:
Our policy of "peace" in the middle east will not happen until the terrorists are rooted out of the area, and banished or killed.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Our policy of "peace" in the middle east will not happen until the terrorists are rooted out of the area, and banished or killed.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
VL writes:
Stop Arming these PLO terrorist Thugs in Hamas and Fatah, PA, Aqsa brigades, whatever you want to call them. Stop making distinctions. They are all the same. They all celebrate the murder of innocent Jews. They lust for Jewish blood and you provide them the ak-47's and you want to provide them with a state. Stop meddling in Israel's affairs. Mind your own business. U.S. has enough to worry about for itself.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Stop Arming these PLO terrorist Thugs in Hamas and Fatah, PA, Aqsa brigades, whatever you want to call them. Stop making distinctions. They are all the same. They all celebrate the murder of innocent Jews. They lust for Jewish blood and you provide them the ak-47's and you want to provide them with a state. Stop meddling in Israel's affairs. Mind your own business. U.S. has enough to worry about for itself.
Posted on Tue Mar 11, 2008
Russell in Pennsylvania writes:
If you mean "engage" in the military sense, as in "draw close in combat," then - yes, the U.S. should engage with Hamas - and wipe them out. But if you mean "negotiate" with a terrorist group and sworn enemy of a U.S. ally, then, no.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
If you mean "engage" in the military sense, as in "draw close in combat," then - yes, the U.S. should engage with Hamas - and wipe them out. But if you mean "negotiate" with a terrorist group and sworn enemy of a U.S. ally, then, no.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Joe in Tennessee writes:
Perhaps this may re direct the answers and questions:
QUOTE: A top Hamas official has confirmed reports that members of the militant Palestinian political organization have received military training in Iran. The unidentified Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades official said Hamas fighters have been trained in Tehran by members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard for more than two years, The Times of London reported Sunday END QUOTE.
The fuel to the fire must be eliminated as well don't you think?
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Perhaps this may re direct the answers and questions:
QUOTE: A top Hamas official has confirmed reports that members of the militant Palestinian political organization have received military training in Iran. The unidentified Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades official said Hamas fighters have been trained in Tehran by members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard for more than two years, The Times of London reported Sunday END QUOTE.
The fuel to the fire must be eliminated as well don't you think?
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Richard in New York writes:
The United States is making a terrible mistake via-a-vis Hamas by throwing all its weight behind Abbas� discredited and historically corrupt Palestinian Authority. Isolating, boycotting and excluding Hamas from peace talks while allowing the continued strangulation of Gaza will continue to be counterproductive.
With all its faults and rhetoric, Hamas (originally a creation of Israel as a counterforce to oppose Arafat's PLO) demonstrated that, unlike Al Qaida, it was willing to submit to the democratic process and thereby won in a fair election.
Refusing to talk to Hamas shows the sham of Administration policy and the Annapolis fiasco. It only leads to the further isolation and radicalization of the Palestinians.
As long as the US refuses to recognize the will of the Palestinian people and the democratic process there will be no peace. Hamas is no more terrorist than the policies of the state of Israel.
In the case of Hamas' election victory, it appears to the rest of the world (as in other instances) that the U.S. only supports democracy when it likes the results.
This is why we read (even in the press of our allies)in Dubai's �Gulf News (1/10/08), an accurate description of our present foreign policy: Speaking of the President's promises of democracy and human rights in the Middle East, the editor writes: �We really don't take them seriously. Your dreadful record on both gives you no moral right to lecture others.
After decades of pandering and blind cupport of anything Israel does, including vetoing UN resolutions that criticize its actions, the rest of the world muct wonder when and if ever the US is going to be even-handed and stop ignoring Israel's colonialist policy, its violations of international law and system of apartheit?
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
The United States is making a terrible mistake via-a-vis Hamas by throwing all its weight behind Abbas� discredited and historically corrupt Palestinian Authority. Isolating, boycotting and excluding Hamas from peace talks while allowing the continued strangulation of Gaza will continue to be counterproductive.
With all its faults and rhetoric, Hamas (originally a creation of Israel as a counterforce to oppose Arafat's PLO) demonstrated that, unlike Al Qaida, it was willing to submit to the democratic process and thereby won in a fair election.
Refusing to talk to Hamas shows the sham of Administration policy and the Annapolis fiasco. It only leads to the further isolation and radicalization of the Palestinians.
As long as the US refuses to recognize the will of the Palestinian people and the democratic process there will be no peace. Hamas is no more terrorist than the policies of the state of Israel.
In the case of Hamas' election victory, it appears to the rest of the world (as in other instances) that the U.S. only supports democracy when it likes the results.
This is why we read (even in the press of our allies)in Dubai's �Gulf News (1/10/08), an accurate description of our present foreign policy: Speaking of the President's promises of democracy and human rights in the Middle East, the editor writes: �We really don't take them seriously. Your dreadful record on both gives you no moral right to lecture others.
After decades of pandering and blind cupport of anything Israel does, including vetoing UN resolutions that criticize its actions, the rest of the world muct wonder when and if ever the US is going to be even-handed and stop ignoring Israel's colonialist policy, its violations of international law and system of apartheit?
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
Every idea to bring peace has already been tried. We tried talking to Palestinians, bribing them, begging them, threatening them, agreeing with them, disagreeing with them, shooting them, helping them, praising them, damning them, all to no effect, FOR THE PAST 60 YEARS!
Give us a break - there is nothing the State Department can do to get peace in Palestine except to join the terrorists and wipe Israel off the map. And if Israel is gone, there will be other demands because, above all, it is Islam we are dealing with, not ordinary beligerants.
So forget peace. It takes two sides for that and you only have one interested. In war, peace arrives when one side loses. As long as we continue trying to make both sides winners, there will never be peace.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Every idea to bring peace has already been tried. We tried talking to Palestinians, bribing them, begging them, threatening them, agreeing with them, disagreeing with them, shooting them, helping them, praising them, damning them, all to no effect, FOR THE PAST 60 YEARS!
Give us a break - there is nothing the State Department can do to get peace in Palestine except to join the terrorists and wipe Israel off the map. And if Israel is gone, there will be other demands because, above all, it is Islam we are dealing with, not ordinary beligerants.
So forget peace. It takes two sides for that and you only have one interested. In war, peace arrives when one side loses. As long as we continue trying to make both sides winners, there will never be peace.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Stephen in Massachusetts writes:
Engage: To enter into conflict or battle.
Preserve true faith capitalism democracy and communism in Israel ...cast apart covetousness practices of atheism and anarchy.
Truth faith is in one spiritual father and our god of brotherly and sisterly sacrifice of worldly works.
Capitalism: Owner’s government
Democracy: Representative government
Communism: Workers government
Anarchism: Covetists of true government and armed strugglers.
Atheism: Denialists of one true god or any form of forward moving governments.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Engage: To enter into conflict or battle.
Preserve true faith capitalism democracy and communism in Israel ...cast apart covetousness practices of atheism and anarchy.
Truth faith is in one spiritual father and our god of brotherly and sisterly sacrifice of worldly works.
Capitalism: Owner’s government
Democracy: Representative government
Communism: Workers government
Anarchism: Covetists of true government and armed strugglers.
Atheism: Denialists of one true god or any form of forward moving governments.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
Don in New York writes:
No way the U.S. should talk with a terrorist organization such as Hamas. It's absoulte insanity to even consider such a proposal.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
No way the U.S. should talk with a terrorist organization such as Hamas. It's absoulte insanity to even consider such a proposal.
Posted on Mon Mar 10, 2008
U.S. Congressman Mark Kirk in Washington, DC writes:
Worrying that you guys are asking questions like this using funds approved by the appropriations committee that I am a member of.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Worrying that you guys are asking questions like this using funds approved by the appropriations committee that I am a member of.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Jason in North Dakota writes:
No, we should not engage with Hamas. To do so would be to reward them for butchery. Hamas is a terrorist organization and should be treated as such. Fatah is no better. The Palestinians should be abandoned to their own devices and all thoughts of a "Two State" solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict should be put aside until such time as the Palestinians decide to behave like civilized humans.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
No, we should not engage with Hamas. To do so would be to reward them for butchery. Hamas is a terrorist organization and should be treated as such. Fatah is no better. The Palestinians should be abandoned to their own devices and all thoughts of a "Two State" solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict should be put aside until such time as the Palestinians decide to behave like civilized humans.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Kevin in South Dakota writes:
Would meeting and speaking to the rapist of your daughter help you, your daughter or the rapist? Of course not.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Would meeting and speaking to the rapist of your daughter help you, your daughter or the rapist? Of course not.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Patricia in California writes:
Are you people nuts?! Hamas, Hizbollah, the Palestinians are all TERRORISTS! They ALL vow and mean to obliterate Israel. We should not be talking to any of them until they vow to STOP THE VIOLENCE. Do you choose to ignore the thousands of rockets they lob into Israel? How can this be? I think Israel should carpet bomb Gaza to make the rockets stop. And Bush should never have released all that money...it will just go to propagate more terror. I truly cannot believe you have asked this question.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
Are you people nuts?! Hamas, Hizbollah, the Palestinians are all TERRORISTS! They ALL vow and mean to obliterate Israel. We should not be talking to any of them until they vow to STOP THE VIOLENCE. Do you choose to ignore the thousands of rockets they lob into Israel? How can this be? I think Israel should carpet bomb Gaza to make the rockets stop. And Bush should never have released all that money...it will just go to propagate more terror. I truly cannot believe you have asked this question.
Posted on Sun Mar 09, 2008
James in Arizona writes:
NO. Asking anyone to talk to Hamas is absurd. Too talk to Hamas and Fatah is to talk to al Queda. Hamas is the Gaza bureau of the Muslim brotherhood while Fatah is the other side to the same Islamic fascist terrorist coin. bin Laden's religious mentor the late Sheik Abdullah Azzam was Palestinian (a 1964 resurrected British political term used to describe Egyptians,desert Bedouins, and Lebanese living in the Palestine Mandate set aside for the Jews)as well as many other Al Queda commanders. The American people aren't so dumb as to not be aware of the true intentions of the Palestinians as the State Department wishes despite all of Rice's propaganda attempts to make this conflict appear as if it were a mere Orange County rezoning issue. The answer is NO, what America should do is quit supporting the PLO and Hamas and trying to force Israel to surrender to their enemies.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
NO. Asking anyone to talk to Hamas is absurd. Too talk to Hamas and Fatah is to talk to al Queda. Hamas is the Gaza bureau of the Muslim brotherhood while Fatah is the other side to the same Islamic fascist terrorist coin. bin Laden's religious mentor the late Sheik Abdullah Azzam was Palestinian (a 1964 resurrected British political term used to describe Egyptians,desert Bedouins, and Lebanese living in the Palestine Mandate set aside for the Jews)as well as many other Al Queda commanders. The American people aren't so dumb as to not be aware of the true intentions of the Palestinians as the State Department wishes despite all of Rice's propaganda attempts to make this conflict appear as if it were a mere Orange County rezoning issue. The answer is NO, what America should do is quit supporting the PLO and Hamas and trying to force Israel to surrender to their enemies.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
Gail in Texas writes:
No, I think that Hamas has demonstrated that their definition of "peace" is for the rest of the world to restrain Israel from self defense so that they can get about their business of genocide against the Jewish people. It is time to stop all foreign aid to Palestine and any nation that is not actively and militarily assisting in the war on terror (this includes idle countries in Europe).
Many middle eastern countries are awash in wealth from selling oil, they can provide food and "aid" as well as weapons to the Palestinians. Do not use any more of our tax dollars funding these people in their terrorism.
I do not know of a single violent uprising in the world today that is not perpetrated by Muslim radicals asserting their right to slaughter non-Muslims, from Serbia, to Darfur to Iraq and Gaza. The story is the same. And, anyone who fights back, is called a "racist". It's time we stop making excuses.
Israelis should no longer make any effort to protect people who volunteer to be human shields for terrorists. Human shields would not only not stop Hamas, but it would delight them to have civilian targets congregating to be massacred.
It's not enough that "moderate" Muslims refrain from committing heinous crimes, they must take a stand and help to prevent them and to protect Jews, Christians, Hindus and others against the murderous rampages of terrorists. They must at the very least speak up vigorously against terrorism anywhere and everywhere in the world.
Condoleezza Rice is a brilliant negotiator and a very decent, patient and exceptional person. If she cannot bring these people to the table, and get them to stop murdering their neighbors, then it cannot be done. We are wasting her precious time and talents. There are nations who really do want to resolve their problems, that is where her expertise should be directed.
Hamas and all Muslim nations must be held to the same standards as civilized countries if they wish to be recognized and accepted into the community of mankind. No more free passes.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
No, I think that Hamas has demonstrated that their definition of "peace" is for the rest of the world to restrain Israel from self defense so that they can get about their business of genocide against the Jewish people. It is time to stop all foreign aid to Palestine and any nation that is not actively and militarily assisting in the war on terror (this includes idle countries in Europe).
Many middle eastern countries are awash in wealth from selling oil, they can provide food and "aid" as well as weapons to the Palestinians. Do not use any more of our tax dollars funding these people in their terrorism.
I do not know of a single violent uprising in the world today that is not perpetrated by Muslim radicals asserting their right to slaughter non-Muslims, from Serbia, to Darfur to Iraq and Gaza. The story is the same. And, anyone who fights back, is called a "racist". It's time we stop making excuses.
Israelis should no longer make any effort to protect people who volunteer to be human shields for terrorists. Human shields would not only not stop Hamas, but it would delight them to have civilian targets congregating to be massacred.
It's not enough that "moderate" Muslims refrain from committing heinous crimes, they must take a stand and help to prevent them and to protect Jews, Christians, Hindus and others against the murderous rampages of terrorists. They must at the very least speak up vigorously against terrorism anywhere and everywhere in the world.
Condoleezza Rice is a brilliant negotiator and a very decent, patient and exceptional person. If she cannot bring these people to the table, and get them to stop murdering their neighbors, then it cannot be done. We are wasting her precious time and talents. There are nations who really do want to resolve their problems, that is where her expertise should be directed.
Hamas and all Muslim nations must be held to the same standards as civilized countries if they wish to be recognized and accepted into the community of mankind. No more free passes.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
Eric in New Mexico writes:
I think there's a bit of misplaced pride in the following, being that praise is heaped on those who hide behind civilians to fight.
"In the near future, we will witness the destruction of the cancerous existence of Israel by the powerful and competent hands of the Hezbollah combatants."
-- Iranian Revolutionary Guards Supreme Commandant Mohammad Ali Jafari, state-run news agency Fars, 18 February 2008
---End News Item---
I think Hamas is just a figment of a larger regional mindset that cannot stand the thought of living side by side in peace w/ Israel.
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, this doesn't bode well for the likelyhood of peace , and peace is not one cease fire after another. Nor is it possible for the U.S. to stay out of such a regional conflict that the leadership of a nation signatory to the UN charter seem to be trying to lend moral support for, and initiate by proxi.
More to the point, the above statement is a clear violation of Article 3(c) of the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide.
Incitement to commit.
Since the means to do so are being supplied by the author and at the wish of the leadership of Iran, one can add material support to an inditement tabled in the proper fora that will enforce international law.
Indeed as well such acts of intent should be studied by the properly authoritative leaders of Islam to decide why candidacy for "apostate of Islam", may apply in Supreme Commandant Mohammad Ali Jafari's case.
I don't know that you'd agree, but my thinking was that if this be a holy war, it is within Islam itself for the survival of anything sacred to life. And thusly, it is their fight as much as it is ours to defend this nation, as well as our friend's right to exist.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
I think there's a bit of misplaced pride in the following, being that praise is heaped on those who hide behind civilians to fight.
"In the near future, we will witness the destruction of the cancerous existence of Israel by the powerful and competent hands of the Hezbollah combatants."
-- Iranian Revolutionary Guards Supreme Commandant Mohammad Ali Jafari, state-run news agency Fars, 18 February 2008
---End News Item---
I think Hamas is just a figment of a larger regional mindset that cannot stand the thought of living side by side in peace w/ Israel.
Speaking as a U.S. citizen, this doesn't bode well for the likelyhood of peace , and peace is not one cease fire after another. Nor is it possible for the U.S. to stay out of such a regional conflict that the leadership of a nation signatory to the UN charter seem to be trying to lend moral support for, and initiate by proxi.
More to the point, the above statement is a clear violation of Article 3(c) of the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide.
Incitement to commit.
Since the means to do so are being supplied by the author and at the wish of the leadership of Iran, one can add material support to an inditement tabled in the proper fora that will enforce international law.
Indeed as well such acts of intent should be studied by the properly authoritative leaders of Islam to decide why candidacy for "apostate of Islam", may apply in Supreme Commandant Mohammad Ali Jafari's case.
I don't know that you'd agree, but my thinking was that if this be a holy war, it is within Islam itself for the survival of anything sacred to life. And thusly, it is their fight as much as it is ours to defend this nation, as well as our friend's right to exist.
Posted on Sat Mar 08, 2008
Rhoda in Florida writes:
Neither Hamas nor Fatah want peace with Israel. They do however, want as much money or munitions as possible.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Neither Hamas nor Fatah want peace with Israel. They do however, want as much money or munitions as possible.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Moon in California writes:
Absolutely NOT! Hamas is equal to any other terrorist organization.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Absolutely NOT! Hamas is equal to any other terrorist organization.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
James in Arizona writes:
No, America should not engage Hamas in the peace process. True, they were democratically elected, but with that same argument we can argue we should've engaged Nazi Germany instead of confronting them militarily.
If someone was lobbing rockets from Canada right into Buffalo, I can assume we wouldn't have a fraction of the patience Israel has shown in this situation. Quit negotiating with Hamas, quit giving them our tax dollars to help them with their war against a truly free nation, Israel. They are using our tax dollars to further arm themselves.
I highly suggest you read this http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,490160,00.html and pass it along to the rest of the State Department because clearly Condoleeza Rice doesn't watch the news. This was an interview that was posted June 22, 2007. Here's the part that stood out the most from the interview with the Co-Founder of Hamas.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The militant wings of Fatah and Hamas have been fully armed over the last few months. Are these weapons still in circulation?
Zahar: There are naturally very many weapons around now. Two years ago, one bullet in Gaza cost around $3.50 -- now it would cost 35 cents. The American aid money has been translated into weapons. Thank you, America! Please, State Department, stop supporting terrorism.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
No, America should not engage Hamas in the peace process. True, they were democratically elected, but with that same argument we can argue we should've engaged Nazi Germany instead of confronting them militarily.
If someone was lobbing rockets from Canada right into Buffalo, I can assume we wouldn't have a fraction of the patience Israel has shown in this situation. Quit negotiating with Hamas, quit giving them our tax dollars to help them with their war against a truly free nation, Israel. They are using our tax dollars to further arm themselves.
I highly suggest you read this http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,490160,00.html and pass it along to the rest of the State Department because clearly Condoleeza Rice doesn't watch the news. This was an interview that was posted June 22, 2007. Here's the part that stood out the most from the interview with the Co-Founder of Hamas.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The militant wings of Fatah and Hamas have been fully armed over the last few months. Are these weapons still in circulation?
Zahar: There are naturally very many weapons around now. Two years ago, one bullet in Gaza cost around $3.50 -- now it would cost 35 cents. The American aid money has been translated into weapons. Thank you, America! Please, State Department, stop supporting terrorism.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Maynard in Illinois writes:
It depends on the meaning of the word engage. If you mean negotiations, never. If you mean to engage them as we engaged Japan after Pearl Harbor, yes. Or at least give the Israelis permission to do so.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
It depends on the meaning of the word engage. If you mean negotiations, never. If you mean to engage them as we engaged Japan after Pearl Harbor, yes. Or at least give the Israelis permission to do so.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Mitch in Michigan writes:
NO!!! Unless by "engage" you mean in combat. They are TERRORISTS!
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
NO!!! Unless by "engage" you mean in combat. They are TERRORISTS!
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Yonaton in Florida writes:
Scott, at POWERLINE BLOG, asks "Is anyone paying attention?"
Tovia Singer, at Arutz Sheva, looks at the consequences of America's/Israel's miscalculations.
You cannot talk to those who are 100% committed to your destruction, period. And Hamas and Fatah both want not only Israel, but America and the West, destroyed.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Scott, at POWERLINE BLOG, asks "Is anyone paying attention?"
Tovia Singer, at Arutz Sheva, looks at the consequences of America's/Israel's miscalculations.
You cannot talk to those who are 100% committed to your destruction, period. And Hamas and Fatah both want not only Israel, but America and the West, destroyed.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Garrett in Colorado writes:
Are you kidding? Absolutely not. And get your money back from Gaza. Our money. Absolutely disgusting. No more Blood money, no diplomacy with barbaric thugs, no back stage discussions, no attendance at international meetings about the Palestinian plight until they grow up.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Are you kidding? Absolutely not. And get your money back from Gaza. Our money. Absolutely disgusting. No more Blood money, no diplomacy with barbaric thugs, no back stage discussions, no attendance at international meetings about the Palestinian plight until they grow up.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Jody in California writes:
No. Our principle of not negotiating with terrorists is correct. Whatever their motivation, indiscriminate killers are criminals.
People have been talking to them forever, and demonstrated it is unlikely to accomplish anything. Neither Hamas nor Fatah is in control of the militants, which has been proved ad nauseum. Fatah is only marginally preferable. Why talk to agents who can't or won't deliver, and whose commitment is undependable? Why ask a question if you can't believe the answer?
If you are into carrots and sticks, if we are to be a carrot, let them earn the carrot by demonstrating a change in tactics. As has been said before, we did not create the problem, so for the US to become a stick is minding someone else's business, until it becomes our business in a more concrete manner. If this is fixable at all, it is not fixable by the US. It is the UN's business, unlikely though it is that the UN will contribute anything useful.
The Arab nations could intervene constructively at any time, and obviously prefer the situation as it stands.
Of course we are grieved for the Palestinian people, who are being manipulated. Hamas is one of the manipulators, with their own agenda. Do we have anything to offer tantalizing enough to urge them to offer us, or Israel, anything we want? We threw money at them for years to no purpose. Does the US have the willingness to follow through on any threat that would influence them? I believe the answer is 'no' to both, because in many ways they have what they want, and we are not willing. They know that.
If we are to talk to criminals at all, the time should be when there is some potential for accomplishment. There isn't even any propaganda value left, pointless talks don't impress anyone.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
No. Our principle of not negotiating with terrorists is correct. Whatever their motivation, indiscriminate killers are criminals.
People have been talking to them forever, and demonstrated it is unlikely to accomplish anything. Neither Hamas nor Fatah is in control of the militants, which has been proved ad nauseum. Fatah is only marginally preferable. Why talk to agents who can't or won't deliver, and whose commitment is undependable? Why ask a question if you can't believe the answer?
If you are into carrots and sticks, if we are to be a carrot, let them earn the carrot by demonstrating a change in tactics. As has been said before, we did not create the problem, so for the US to become a stick is minding someone else's business, until it becomes our business in a more concrete manner. If this is fixable at all, it is not fixable by the US. It is the UN's business, unlikely though it is that the UN will contribute anything useful.
The Arab nations could intervene constructively at any time, and obviously prefer the situation as it stands.
Of course we are grieved for the Palestinian people, who are being manipulated. Hamas is one of the manipulators, with their own agenda. Do we have anything to offer tantalizing enough to urge them to offer us, or Israel, anything we want? We threw money at them for years to no purpose. Does the US have the willingness to follow through on any threat that would influence them? I believe the answer is 'no' to both, because in many ways they have what they want, and we are not willing. They know that.
If we are to talk to criminals at all, the time should be when there is some potential for accomplishment. There isn't even any propaganda value left, pointless talks don't impress anyone.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Art in California writes:
No. It's clear that Hamas is not interested in peace.
Israel is our friend and a sister democracy, we should stand by her and provide whatever aid and assistance is required to insure her survival.
If no Palestinian leaders can be found, who are interested in a peaceful future, then the Palestinians should be isolated diplomatically and embargoed financially.
Israel has shown remarkable restraint in the face of Palestinian aggression. If Israel feels they must retaliate, in self-defense, we should support them in that decision.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
No. It's clear that Hamas is not interested in peace.
Israel is our friend and a sister democracy, we should stand by her and provide whatever aid and assistance is required to insure her survival.
If no Palestinian leaders can be found, who are interested in a peaceful future, then the Palestinians should be isolated diplomatically and embargoed financially.
Israel has shown remarkable restraint in the face of Palestinian aggression. If Israel feels they must retaliate, in self-defense, we should support them in that decision.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
MWL in Massachusetts writes:
The peace process won't be successful until Hamas is exterminated.
Hamas' goal is the extinction of Israel. They are fanatics who will settle for nothing less. The only reason to invite them to any talks is to issue them an ultimatum: stop firing rockets or die.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
The peace process won't be successful until Hamas is exterminated.
Hamas' goal is the extinction of Israel. They are fanatics who will settle for nothing less. The only reason to invite them to any talks is to issue them an ultimatum: stop firing rockets or die.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Joe in Tennessee writes:
1. The people who sat at the table in 47 are not the same people who sit there now.
2. There was a time when we held meetings in Pakistan for peace with Arafat; so yes countless attempts by the U.S.
3. The compounded problems from 47 to now have been under constant attempted solution.
4. The conflict source varies, but continues to be the minority subverting peace, not the majority.
5. The entire Arab world profits from the conflict, not the U.S. Israel is a shinning example of a free democracy existing with opportunity for all citizens. The rest of the Arab world leadership does not welcome that ideology. Those who exist under Kingdoms, tribal societies, dictatorships or religious ideology would lose that control and profits.
Israel represents a free society, just as America. If we fail or they fail to maintain that freedom, the world will fall to dictatorship and chaos and it's not the same as it was in 1947, 57, 67, 77, 87, 97...this is a new set of complications which are intertwined to all civilization. It is not a localized issue anymore. To even imply such is ignorance.
Again this is the major problem: The conflict source varies, but continues to be the minority subverting peace, not the majority.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
1. The people who sat at the table in 47 are not the same people who sit there now.
2. There was a time when we held meetings in Pakistan for peace with Arafat; so yes countless attempts by the U.S.
3. The compounded problems from 47 to now have been under constant attempted solution.
4. The conflict source varies, but continues to be the minority subverting peace, not the majority.
5. The entire Arab world profits from the conflict, not the U.S. Israel is a shinning example of a free democracy existing with opportunity for all citizens. The rest of the Arab world leadership does not welcome that ideology. Those who exist under Kingdoms, tribal societies, dictatorships or religious ideology would lose that control and profits.
Israel represents a free society, just as America. If we fail or they fail to maintain that freedom, the world will fall to dictatorship and chaos and it's not the same as it was in 1947, 57, 67, 77, 87, 97...this is a new set of complications which are intertwined to all civilization. It is not a localized issue anymore. To even imply such is ignorance.
Again this is the major problem: The conflict source varies, but continues to be the minority subverting peace, not the majority.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Daniel in Illinois writes:
It figures that the dips at the State Department would consider engaging Hamas.
Which terrorist group do you plan to appease next? Al-Qaeda in Iraq?
The Palestinians don't want peace.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
It figures that the dips at the State Department would consider engaging Hamas.
Which terrorist group do you plan to appease next? Al-Qaeda in Iraq?
The Palestinians don't want peace.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Matt in North Carolina writes:
I'm torn. On the one hand, Hamas is clearly a terrorist organization, the type of entity we just don't deal with. On the other hand, they are representatives for Gaza Palestine people -- what other voice do they have? What a dilemma!
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
I'm torn. On the one hand, Hamas is clearly a terrorist organization, the type of entity we just don't deal with. On the other hand, they are representatives for Gaza Palestine people -- what other voice do they have? What a dilemma!
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Gary in Washington writes:
Uh... NO! We don't negotiate with terrorists, I thought.
What is the matter with you people? Reward a group that does this???
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Uh... NO! We don't negotiate with terrorists, I thought.
What is the matter with you people? Reward a group that does this???
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Mike in America writes:
After the bloody slaughter of Jewish students is this really the right question to be asking at this time?
We are at war with terrorists around the world that think that violence works. We should not give one dime to these savages, they spend it on arms and candy to celebrate the death of innocents. We should get out of the way and let Israel defend itself. God knows we won't. What ever happened to either you are with U.S. or against U.S. The state dept nor the administration realize we are in a fight for our very existnce. Islam is the problem it can not exist in a country that is based on personal freedoms. Make the terrorists pay for their behavior.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
After the bloody slaughter of Jewish students is this really the right question to be asking at this time?
We are at war with terrorists around the world that think that violence works. We should not give one dime to these savages, they spend it on arms and candy to celebrate the death of innocents. We should get out of the way and let Israel defend itself. God knows we won't. What ever happened to either you are with U.S. or against U.S. The state dept nor the administration realize we are in a fight for our very existnce. Islam is the problem it can not exist in a country that is based on personal freedoms. Make the terrorists pay for their behavior.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
DM in Pennsylvania writes:
The United States should stop all aid to Gaza and the West Bank, including aid that is being distributed by the United Nations and so called "humanitarian" aid which is simply feeding our enemies, promoting terrorism, and prolonging the war there. Hamas has no shortage of funds to buy missiles and weapons.
After a promising start, the Bush Administration has gone seriously astray in the Middle East with its one-sided pro-Palestinian approach apologizing for terrorists and giving them aid and comfort.
Imagine America feeding the German population at the height of WW2, or giving "humanitarian" aid to the Japanese during Guadalcanal while they were killing our troops and spewing their hatred toward our country. Imagine the UN stepping in after Gettysburg and calling for a cease fire so that both sides could rebuild, only to fight again -- the most costly conflict in American history would have lasted 100 years.
Finish this war so the Palestinians realize they are defeated and we will have peace at last. Keep feeding them, giving them aid, and encouraging them and the war will go on forever. Thanks to the State Department's approach we are on the side of perpetual bloodshed.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
The United States should stop all aid to Gaza and the West Bank, including aid that is being distributed by the United Nations and so called "humanitarian" aid which is simply feeding our enemies, promoting terrorism, and prolonging the war there. Hamas has no shortage of funds to buy missiles and weapons.
After a promising start, the Bush Administration has gone seriously astray in the Middle East with its one-sided pro-Palestinian approach apologizing for terrorists and giving them aid and comfort.
Imagine America feeding the German population at the height of WW2, or giving "humanitarian" aid to the Japanese during Guadalcanal while they were killing our troops and spewing their hatred toward our country. Imagine the UN stepping in after Gettysburg and calling for a cease fire so that both sides could rebuild, only to fight again -- the most costly conflict in American history would have lasted 100 years.
Finish this war so the Palestinians realize they are defeated and we will have peace at last. Keep feeding them, giving them aid, and encouraging them and the war will go on forever. Thanks to the State Department's approach we are on the side of perpetual bloodshed.
Posted on Fri Mar 07, 2008
Patricia in Massachusetts writes:
You cannot be serious...
And HELL NO!!
CAIR et al have unfiltrated every aspect of American institutions as it is...
You might as well be asking if we should allow them to destroy U.S. from w/in and get it over with...
I cannot believe it, this is not how to win a holy war declared on U.S. by Islamofascists..
Please consult with Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of AIFD, at least he has a brain between his ears.. as a matter of fact, i wish he were our president...
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
You cannot be serious...
And HELL NO!!
CAIR et al have unfiltrated every aspect of American institutions as it is...
You might as well be asking if we should allow them to destroy U.S. from w/in and get it over with...
I cannot believe it, this is not how to win a holy war declared on U.S. by Islamofascists..
Please consult with Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of AIFD, at least he has a brain between his ears.. as a matter of fact, i wish he were our president...
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
Yonaton writes:
I'm sorry, but this is so serious I must be blunt.
I can't believe you have to even ask such a ridiculous question.
When will you realize there is no "peace process?" Are you so obtuse that you can't see what is under your nose? Hamas and Fatah are BOTH terrorist organizations. All you are doing is enabling them, at the expense not only of Israel but also of the United States and the Free World.
The "Palestinian" Arabs are ALL IN ON IT, and have been for decades; and I'm beginning to think that you might be, too.
The "innocents" that Ms. Rice, Ban Ki Moon and others are so sympathetic with are not all so, and even if they were, that is no reason for you to blame the Israeli victims of terror for their deaths. Are you so ignorant of International Law that you don't know that it is the Arabs, not Israel, who is responsible? Or don't you care that it is your policies that foster the death and destruction?
When Mr. Bush said, "...if you harbor a terrorist, if you support a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorists,...", did he mean it? Because it is true, and yes you are! Israeli self defense IS NOT AND NEVER WILL BE equivalent to the unspeakable evil perpetrated by our mutual enemies.
Please, for America's sake, as well as Israels, come to your senses!
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
I'm sorry, but this is so serious I must be blunt.
I can't believe you have to even ask such a ridiculous question.
When will you realize there is no "peace process?" Are you so obtuse that you can't see what is under your nose? Hamas and Fatah are BOTH terrorist organizations. All you are doing is enabling them, at the expense not only of Israel but also of the United States and the Free World.
The "Palestinian" Arabs are ALL IN ON IT, and have been for decades; and I'm beginning to think that you might be, too.
The "innocents" that Ms. Rice, Ban Ki Moon and others are so sympathetic with are not all so, and even if they were, that is no reason for you to blame the Israeli victims of terror for their deaths. Are you so ignorant of International Law that you don't know that it is the Arabs, not Israel, who is responsible? Or don't you care that it is your policies that foster the death and destruction?
When Mr. Bush said, "...if you harbor a terrorist, if you support a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorists,...", did he mean it? Because it is true, and yes you are! Israeli self defense IS NOT AND NEVER WILL BE equivalent to the unspeakable evil perpetrated by our mutual enemies.
Please, for America's sake, as well as Israels, come to your senses!
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
NB in Pakistan writes:
Both the Palestinians and the Israelis are a reality and should be treated as such when efforts are made to reach some peaceful agreement. If there's a chance of success then anyone and everyone should be involved, no harm in it. However, Hamas has to first decide what it really wants and whether what it wants is practical and fair to all. I pray for Ma'am Condoleezza Rice's efforts to succeed. The lady has been working very hard. The enemity between the Israelis and the Palestinians has got to be brought to an end so that loss of valuable human lives comes to an end on both the sides and both sides could live together in peace and harmony. If engaging Hamas can help bring this about in any way, then why not.
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
Both the Palestinians and the Israelis are a reality and should be treated as such when efforts are made to reach some peaceful agreement. If there's a chance of success then anyone and everyone should be involved, no harm in it. However, Hamas has to first decide what it really wants and whether what it wants is practical and fair to all. I pray for Ma'am Condoleezza Rice's efforts to succeed. The lady has been working very hard. The enemity between the Israelis and the Palestinians has got to be brought to an end so that loss of valuable human lives comes to an end on both the sides and both sides could live together in peace and harmony. If engaging Hamas can help bring this about in any way, then why not.
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
Eric in New Mexico writes:
"Should the U.S. engage Hamas as part of its efforts to bring about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?"
Seems we've already engaged Hamas by designating them a terrorist org.
Frankly, Israeli policy regarding it's version of "the war on terror" has been ineffective, and can never be effective so long as it does not incorperate nation building as an intergral strategy to long term security.
That is I think one of the primary realizations that caused President Bush to call for a two-state solution.
Common sense sometimes takes awhile to sink in , but now that it has, those opposed not only need to be marginalized, but prevented from exerting negative influence on the negotiating parties.
Those opposed to peace can only expect to reap the concequence of their stated position.
As it regards Hamas, it serves no useful purpose to legitimize its role by negotiating with its leadership.
If the "quartet" decided to end this tommorrow, humanity could certainly be witness to a close in a sad chapter of history. Time is now for action to support the rhetoric.
What that would require in my opinion is nothing short of D-day on the beach in Gaza by many thousands of NATO and Russian troops ( be an opprtunity to truly be a world "superpower"), in a history making joint effort under UN mandate to restore peace and security and place Gaza and the West bank under interim UN protectorate status, giving Abbas the breathing space to make effective negotiations with Israel possible.
A "Marshal Plan" for Palestinian statehood cannot include terrorists being coddled and appeased. They need to be told in no uncertain terms to "Get out of town, get busted, or get buried. You don't get to do this."
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
"Should the U.S. engage Hamas as part of its efforts to bring about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?"
Seems we've already engaged Hamas by designating them a terrorist org.
Frankly, Israeli policy regarding it's version of "the war on terror" has been ineffective, and can never be effective so long as it does not incorperate nation building as an intergral strategy to long term security.
That is I think one of the primary realizations that caused President Bush to call for a two-state solution.
Common sense sometimes takes awhile to sink in , but now that it has, those opposed not only need to be marginalized, but prevented from exerting negative influence on the negotiating parties.
Those opposed to peace can only expect to reap the concequence of their stated position.
As it regards Hamas, it serves no useful purpose to legitimize its role by negotiating with its leadership.
If the "quartet" decided to end this tommorrow, humanity could certainly be witness to a close in a sad chapter of history. Time is now for action to support the rhetoric.
What that would require in my opinion is nothing short of D-day on the beach in Gaza by many thousands of NATO and Russian troops ( be an opprtunity to truly be a world "superpower"), in a history making joint effort under UN mandate to restore peace and security and place Gaza and the West bank under interim UN protectorate status, giving Abbas the breathing space to make effective negotiations with Israel possible.
A "Marshal Plan" for Palestinian statehood cannot include terrorists being coddled and appeased. They need to be told in no uncertain terms to "Get out of town, get busted, or get buried. You don't get to do this."
Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
Hamas won't ignore how Israel came to exist, so neither should we. There are good reasons why Israeli peace is both a UN and a British problem, rather than an American problem.
After Britain's Peel Commission recommended partition of British-occupied Palestine into a small Jewish state and an Arab state to be attached to Jordan, an armed uprising spread through the country. On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly approved a plan, UN General Assembly Resolution 181, to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict by partitioning Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jews would get 56% of the territory, the Palestinians would get 42% of the land and because of its religious significance, Jerusalem, including Bethlehem with 100,000 Jews and an equal number of Palestinians, was to become a Corpus Separatum, to be administered by the UN.
The resolution was welcomed by most of the Jewish population; Palestinian Arabs and the Arab League firmly opposed the UN action and even rejected its authority to involve itself in the entire matter. They held "that the rule of Palestine should revert to its inhabitants, in accordance with the provisions of ... the Charter of the United Nations." According to Article 73b of the Charter, the UN should develop self-government of the peoples in a territory under its administration. In the immediate aftermath of the United Nations' approval of the Partition plan, the explosions of joy amongst the Jewish community were counterbalanced by the expression of discontent amongst the Arab community. Soon thereafter, violence broke out and became more and more prevalent. Murders, reprisals, and counter-reprisals came one after the other, killing dozens of victims on both sides in the process. The fact that Israel began as a fake state created at gunpoint by outside powers never became "negotiable" to Arabs.
A long succession of U.S. presidents and State Departments have, without success, jumped onto the illusory "peace conference" bandwagon that both the UN and British have avoided, using billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer funds from the U.S. treasury to support both Israel and Palestine on an annual basis. A more illegal gift of taxpayer funds could not be imagined unless the Congress decided to donate billions of dollars to the Vatican to buy peace with the Pope.
How many "peace conferences" has America held so far, 50, 100, 150? Does anyone keep an accurate count? When Palestinians fire rockets into Israel during peace conferences how can the State Department ignore this "vote by rocket" against any peace agreement?
Are these peace conferences a pretext to buy expensive friends and not peace, and if not, how did Yassir Arafat die with a vast personal fortune in diverted foreign aid money?
One reason why America has failed to solve this dispute is because it is very profitable to those in power in both Israel and Palestine to keep the dispute going on indefinitely. Even though it is not our problem, and it should not be made our problem, we are paying them to do it.
The U.S. government employs brilliant, well-meaning people skilled at solving problems under a major disadvantage of compartmentalized knowledge, which suggests that if the UN's Israeli-Palestinian problem was necessary to be solved by America, it would have been solved a long time ago. But why is the Israeli-Palestinian dispute a U.S. problem? Why has no one asked this question? From history of the region, the answer is no, it is a UN problem. The UN created this mess and the UN must solve it, with or without British help.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Hamas won't ignore how Israel came to exist, so neither should we. There are good reasons why Israeli peace is both a UN and a British problem, rather than an American problem.
After Britain's Peel Commission recommended partition of British-occupied Palestine into a small Jewish state and an Arab state to be attached to Jordan, an armed uprising spread through the country. On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly approved a plan, UN General Assembly Resolution 181, to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict by partitioning Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jews would get 56% of the territory, the Palestinians would get 42% of the land and because of its religious significance, Jerusalem, including Bethlehem with 100,000 Jews and an equal number of Palestinians, was to become a Corpus Separatum, to be administered by the UN.
The resolution was welcomed by most of the Jewish population; Palestinian Arabs and the Arab League firmly opposed the UN action and even rejected its authority to involve itself in the entire matter. They held "that the rule of Palestine should revert to its inhabitants, in accordance with the provisions of ... the Charter of the United Nations." According to Article 73b of the Charter, the UN should develop self-government of the peoples in a territory under its administration. In the immediate aftermath of the United Nations' approval of the Partition plan, the explosions of joy amongst the Jewish community were counterbalanced by the expression of discontent amongst the Arab community. Soon thereafter, violence broke out and became more and more prevalent. Murders, reprisals, and counter-reprisals came one after the other, killing dozens of victims on both sides in the process. The fact that Israel began as a fake state created at gunpoint by outside powers never became "negotiable" to Arabs.
A long succession of U.S. presidents and State Departments have, without success, jumped onto the illusory "peace conference" bandwagon that both the UN and British have avoided, using billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer funds from the U.S. treasury to support both Israel and Palestine on an annual basis. A more illegal gift of taxpayer funds could not be imagined unless the Congress decided to donate billions of dollars to the Vatican to buy peace with the Pope.
How many "peace conferences" has America held so far, 50, 100, 150? Does anyone keep an accurate count? When Palestinians fire rockets into Israel during peace conferences how can the State Department ignore this "vote by rocket" against any peace agreement?
Are these peace conferences a pretext to buy expensive friends and not peace, and if not, how did Yassir Arafat die with a vast personal fortune in diverted foreign aid money?
One reason why America has failed to solve this dispute is because it is very profitable to those in power in both Israel and Palestine to keep the dispute going on indefinitely. Even though it is not our problem, and it should not be made our problem, we are paying them to do it.
The U.S. government employs brilliant, well-meaning people skilled at solving problems under a major disadvantage of compartmentalized knowledge, which suggests that if the UN's Israeli-Palestinian problem was necessary to be solved by America, it would have been solved a long time ago. But why is the Israeli-Palestinian dispute a U.S. problem? Why has no one asked this question? From history of the region, the answer is no, it is a UN problem. The UN created this mess and the UN must solve it, with or without British help.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Ronald in New York writes:
No. ...Hamas is a terrorist organization. We don't reward terrorists by engaging them. Hamas has no interest in peace. It wants the annihilation of Israel. How did U.S. get into this mess?
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
No. ...Hamas is a terrorist organization. We don't reward terrorists by engaging them. Hamas has no interest in peace. It wants the annihilation of Israel. How did U.S. get into this mess?
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Alan writes:
We should do whatever will bring peace. The most important steps, in my opinion, is to bring greater legitimacy to Mr. Abbas. He has to sell the Annapolis process to his constituency. If he cannot provide a decent economy and security his voice will not carry much weight.
A December 2007 poll by Near East Consulting, Inc. in Palestine (contact for a copy) refutes notions of Palestinians not willing to accept a 2-state solution (see Page 31 if you get a copy). The numbers back then show 70% support in the West Bank and 73% in Gaza.
If Abbas can get the support he needs to promote peace, Hamas will eventually become irrelevant. This would be better than supporting a military defeat of Hamas, which I believe is virtually impossible. I strongly urge the President and our Congress to help make the Annapolis process continue.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
We should do whatever will bring peace. The most important steps, in my opinion, is to bring greater legitimacy to Mr. Abbas. He has to sell the Annapolis process to his constituency. If he cannot provide a decent economy and security his voice will not carry much weight.
A December 2007 poll by Near East Consulting, Inc. in Palestine (contact for a copy) refutes notions of Palestinians not willing to accept a 2-state solution (see Page 31 if you get a copy). The numbers back then show 70% support in the West Bank and 73% in Gaza.
If Abbas can get the support he needs to promote peace, Hamas will eventually become irrelevant. This would be better than supporting a military defeat of Hamas, which I believe is virtually impossible. I strongly urge the President and our Congress to help make the Annapolis process continue.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Joe in Tennessee write:
Al Jazeera reported yesterday: 'US plot against Hamas' revealed
Posted on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 9:09am
Documents that appear to show that the US attempted to overthrow the Hamas-led Palestinian government have surfaced. One of the documents from March 2007 details a plan to oust Hamas by force and install the rival Fatah movement in power, by supporting fighters from the group with weapons and money.
How'd you miss that Zharkov?
President Bush has repeatedly tried to get them to stop fueling the situation there. He and others have made every attempt to negotiate...but like the agreements on Oil price caps, no one seems to be paying attention.
The only way to stop an abstract is to eliminate it, if it doesn't produce a desired result. With the centralization of the leadership and identification of movements, it would behoove the entire world to do so. Nuclear war is not even an issue of limitation in decision making with this fanatical group.
I'm afraid Evil is prevailing due to the contentment of the homeostasis of those who can help. This isn't polarization of major powers, it is simply evil and you cannot buy peace from evil. The Clinton administration proved that. You can only postpone it and if you are not going to eliminate it during that period you end up right back where you started. The proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. I feel the same should be done with Iran's leadership. No questions, no talk, no more negotiations...the stability of the world, not just the middle east is in question because of the minority and it shouldn't be tolerated.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Al Jazeera reported yesterday: 'US plot against Hamas' revealed
Posted on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 9:09am
Documents that appear to show that the US attempted to overthrow the Hamas-led Palestinian government have surfaced. One of the documents from March 2007 details a plan to oust Hamas by force and install the rival Fatah movement in power, by supporting fighters from the group with weapons and money.
How'd you miss that Zharkov?
President Bush has repeatedly tried to get them to stop fueling the situation there. He and others have made every attempt to negotiate...but like the agreements on Oil price caps, no one seems to be paying attention.
The only way to stop an abstract is to eliminate it, if it doesn't produce a desired result. With the centralization of the leadership and identification of movements, it would behoove the entire world to do so. Nuclear war is not even an issue of limitation in decision making with this fanatical group.
I'm afraid Evil is prevailing due to the contentment of the homeostasis of those who can help. This isn't polarization of major powers, it is simply evil and you cannot buy peace from evil. The Clinton administration proved that. You can only postpone it and if you are not going to eliminate it during that period you end up right back where you started. The proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. I feel the same should be done with Iran's leadership. No questions, no talk, no more negotiations...the stability of the world, not just the middle east is in question because of the minority and it shouldn't be tolerated.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
H.G. Wells, a strong proponent of a planned world state, wrote in The New World Order in 1940,
"Countless people, from maharajas to millionaires from pukka sahibs to petty ladies, will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to estimate its promise we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people."
While speaking at a conference hosted by AKbank in Istanbul Turkey on May 31, 2007, just prior to the scheduled Bilderberg meeting, Henry Kissinger gave a speech in which he stated,
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..."
A December 2000 CIA report titled "Global Trends 2015" outlines possible outcomes of globalization and worldwide integration. The report states:
"Scenario Two: Pernicious Globalization - Global elites thrive, but the majority of the world's population fails to benefit from globalization... migration becomes a major source of interstate tension... Internal conflicts increase, fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal tensions..."
A report released from the U.K. Ministry of Defense, "Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036", states that globalization and the effective erasing of borders in an international system will cause upheaval.
If international socialists could rewrite American history, they would have the first Continental Army appear to be terrorists for attacking the British Redcoats; General George Washington would then be a traitor who fought against "existing order", which is only permitted to change if those in authority allow it to be changed. The Boston Tea Party would be a terrorist attack against commerce of the Colonies and perhaps those colonists would be sent to a foreign land to be interrogated.
Consider, if General George Washington had negotiated a "peace agreement" allowing the British Army to remain in America, would that have ended the revolutionary war?
I don't think so - it would merely postpone a future war and prolong an inevitable war. If Israel abandoned the middle east tomorrow, there would be no peace in the middle east because there is an Islamic Revolution occurring, and a power struggle over arab control of oil reserves which continues to influence arab people. Israel today is a focal point; tomorrow it might be Christians in Lebanon, and then perhaps Turkey, and finally France and on throughout Europe, as the Islamic Revolution spreads and strengthens, which thanks to State Dept. recognition of Kosovo independence, the Islamic Revolution has a solid base for future expansion.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
H.G. Wells, a strong proponent of a planned world state, wrote in The New World Order in 1940,
"Countless people, from maharajas to millionaires from pukka sahibs to petty ladies, will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to estimate its promise we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people."
While speaking at a conference hosted by AKbank in Istanbul Turkey on May 31, 2007, just prior to the scheduled Bilderberg meeting, Henry Kissinger gave a speech in which he stated,
"What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system..."
A December 2000 CIA report titled "Global Trends 2015" outlines possible outcomes of globalization and worldwide integration. The report states:
"Scenario Two: Pernicious Globalization - Global elites thrive, but the majority of the world's population fails to benefit from globalization... migration becomes a major source of interstate tension... Internal conflicts increase, fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal tensions..."
A report released from the U.K. Ministry of Defense, "Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036", states that globalization and the effective erasing of borders in an international system will cause upheaval.
If international socialists could rewrite American history, they would have the first Continental Army appear to be terrorists for attacking the British Redcoats; General George Washington would then be a traitor who fought against "existing order", which is only permitted to change if those in authority allow it to be changed. The Boston Tea Party would be a terrorist attack against commerce of the Colonies and perhaps those colonists would be sent to a foreign land to be interrogated.
Consider, if General George Washington had negotiated a "peace agreement" allowing the British Army to remain in America, would that have ended the revolutionary war?
I don't think so - it would merely postpone a future war and prolong an inevitable war. If Israel abandoned the middle east tomorrow, there would be no peace in the middle east because there is an Islamic Revolution occurring, and a power struggle over arab control of oil reserves which continues to influence arab people. Israel today is a focal point; tomorrow it might be Christians in Lebanon, and then perhaps Turkey, and finally France and on throughout Europe, as the Islamic Revolution spreads and strengthens, which thanks to State Dept. recognition of Kosovo independence, the Islamic Revolution has a solid base for future expansion.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Yavuz in New Jersey writes:
Without a doubt yes. Now maybe we should do it through some back channel or some sort of multi lateral framework. but without out a doubt we should as if do not then the only way Hamas has to stay relevant is through bombings and terror.
Also I rather have Hamas in the tent of peace pissing out rather them outside of it and pissing in it.
Please get some logic and remember you do the hard talking with your enemies and not your friends
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Without a doubt yes. Now maybe we should do it through some back channel or some sort of multi lateral framework. but without out a doubt we should as if do not then the only way Hamas has to stay relevant is through bombings and terror.
Also I rather have Hamas in the tent of peace pissing out rather them outside of it and pissing in it.
Please get some logic and remember you do the hard talking with your enemies and not your friends
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
SNP in Syria writes:
No, they should stay out of this Israeli-Palestinian conflict and leave it to Israel to deal with it and they are dealing with even though they are not so effective, partly due to Israeli mentality of shock and awe tactics and lack of creative, smart modern thinking and planning. Something the West had proven is not capable of providing as well.
Palestinians are simply not ready for state because neither capable leadership to lead nor effective administrative cadre to run any sort of state resemblance. The current henchman's are PLO militants on the West side and ignorant, coward, ignorant, Moslem suicidal gang that are mainly backed by Syria and Iran on the Gaza side. Iran backs these ignorant weaklings simply not for the interest of Palestinians but more in the interest of frustrating the Israeli. When Ahmadinejad loudly proclaim in Nasser and Baathist style about the destruction and annihilation of Israel, he is not talking about sending his coward Moslem hordes of IRGC but using these non Arabs Palestinian (Heksos) now called Moslem Hamas thugs to do that job. In his silly mind he really believes what he says and that this is an effective strategy to install a Shia Moslem State in all of Palestine.
As Syrian nationalist, the Palestinian issue and the conflict were resolved decade ago. It is the ignorant Arabs and coward Moslems that are keeping it as front cover to distract from their miserable existence. Israel should take charge and does the job right, remove Abbas and PLO thugs from control of Judea and Samaria and remove Hamas from Gaza, but first and foremost prepare and train set of capable, uncorrupted leaders and have a ready plan that can deliver these Palestinian people out of their self inflicted misery. It is obvious that it is in U.S. arm dealer interests to maintain mayhem in the Middle East, but it is not in Israel best interest. It is not even in the interest of XOM. Legit corporate America can do much better business in safe, secure and free countries.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
No, they should stay out of this Israeli-Palestinian conflict and leave it to Israel to deal with it and they are dealing with even though they are not so effective, partly due to Israeli mentality of shock and awe tactics and lack of creative, smart modern thinking and planning. Something the West had proven is not capable of providing as well.
Palestinians are simply not ready for state because neither capable leadership to lead nor effective administrative cadre to run any sort of state resemblance. The current henchman's are PLO militants on the West side and ignorant, coward, ignorant, Moslem suicidal gang that are mainly backed by Syria and Iran on the Gaza side. Iran backs these ignorant weaklings simply not for the interest of Palestinians but more in the interest of frustrating the Israeli. When Ahmadinejad loudly proclaim in Nasser and Baathist style about the destruction and annihilation of Israel, he is not talking about sending his coward Moslem hordes of IRGC but using these non Arabs Palestinian (Heksos) now called Moslem Hamas thugs to do that job. In his silly mind he really believes what he says and that this is an effective strategy to install a Shia Moslem State in all of Palestine.
As Syrian nationalist, the Palestinian issue and the conflict were resolved decade ago. It is the ignorant Arabs and coward Moslems that are keeping it as front cover to distract from their miserable existence. Israel should take charge and does the job right, remove Abbas and PLO thugs from control of Judea and Samaria and remove Hamas from Gaza, but first and foremost prepare and train set of capable, uncorrupted leaders and have a ready plan that can deliver these Palestinian people out of their self inflicted misery. It is obvious that it is in U.S. arm dealer interests to maintain mayhem in the Middle East, but it is not in Israel best interest. It is not even in the interest of XOM. Legit corporate America can do much better business in safe, secure and free countries.
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008
Page 1 of 1 pages