roachboy

at this point, the question of whether hamas would have moderated as a function of being able to assume power after they were elected in a free election, and had been able to actually govern is kinda academic. i think they would have. i said it at the time, i say it again here. de soto thinks they would have. the reasons he gives are more or less what i thought at the time, and is basically what i put up in the last post. those reasons are supported with a large amount of empirical detail in the report that i had no access to--i just thought it logical.

but the present outcome is self-evidently a function of the choices made under the assumption that it made sense not to allow this moderation (real or potential) to happen at all.
it is a blunder of very significant proportions carried out by two politically weak governments in collusion with each other.
to my mind the united states and israel decided to allow gaza to starve and then become a battlefield because the respective administrations stood to benefit from the carnage politically.

this is reactionary realpolitik at its most foul.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite