Thread: gaza redux
View Single Post
Old 01-13-2009, 10:29 PM   #213 (permalink)
tisonlyi
Nothing
 
tisonlyi's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNasty View Post
I would accept your analogy, and agree with you, if I believed that Hamas and other organizations would eventually stop if Israel simply chose to ignore the attacks.
No, that's not the analogy.

The analogy is a process with meaningful results and progress, whih has pronlems as it progresses - For the IRA progress was release of prisoners (many/most with 'blood on their hands), the institution of cross-border institutions and political reform (which was the initial reason for the start of 'The Troubles').

So, the British didn't simply sit on their hands and wait for the IRA to stop bombing them... They, through a process of NEGOTIATION, put in place a series of measures, which over more than a decade led from a low intensity war to peace.

It didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen without pain... but, eventually, it happened.

Patience. Tolerance. Fortitude.

Making peace is harder than waging war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNasty View Post
That being said, I do believe Hamas and other organizations wouldn't stop until Israel, as a nation, was gone. That belief really is at the heart of the disagreement between me and you (and I suspect others).
In a conflict, one side postures that it will not stop until the other side is completely defeated. In reality, almost all conflicts stop a long way short of that.

Israel's stated intention is to destroy Hamas.

How would that even be possible? Ever?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNasty View Post
Which leads me back to my original line of thought, I really think that Israel finds itself in a dichotomy. Respond with force or accept the consequences of doing nothing. It is unfortunate that a multitude of every day people that do not want any harm done to Israel or themselves are caught in the middle.
There's a huge area of exploring options for peace in between the two extremes of all-out-war and pacifism.

Lifting the siege peace meal in return for reduced missile attacks.
Recognising Hamas as the legitimately elected authority.
Negotiations over release of prisoners.
Programs of spending on hospitals, schools and jobs inside Gaza and the West Bank.
etc, etc, etc... and that's before you even start to think about endgame settlements and things like right of return and borders.

There are so many political options to bribe and kick Hamas and the Palestinians toward moderation and peace, it's ludicrous to suggest that violence of pacifism are the only two options.

'Unfortunate'

It was 'unfortunate' that a lot of people on 9/11 got caught up in a political dispute between a group of terrorists and the US govt's policies.
__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--
tisonlyi is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73