How do you negotiate with terrorists? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Xazy · 01-26-2006, 09:04 AM

Well Hamas won the Palestinian election. While I am for a democracy, how can you try to make peace, or even attempt to negotiate with someone who just three days ago said ". "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay [on the land], nor his ownership of any inch of land."

While I am shocked by this, it is insane, I have no good faith in any more peace talks with a governemnt run by such an organization. Even if they just 'say' lets make peace. Arafat did say that, while in other speeches say the opposite. It has to be more then words.

Meanwhile the current administration all resigned in mass.

Elphaba · 01-26-2006, 09:14 AM

I would like to discuss this as well. Below is an article that offers various viewpoints regarding the Hamas victory. I'm still sorting out my thoughts on this, so please allow me to post without opinion for the moment.

Truthout Link

Quote:

Hamas Claims Victory in Palestinian Elections
By Scott Wilson
The Washington Post

Thursday 26 January 2006

Group says it has clear majority of seats; Prime Minister and Cabinet resign.

Ramallah, West Bank - The radical Islamic group Hamas claimed victory Thursday in voting for the first Palestinian parliament in a decade, saying it won a clear majority of seats and had the right to form the next government.

The claims, although unconfirmed officially, were followed by the resignation of Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia and the rest of his cabinet. Resignation was a formality following parliamentary elections, but Qureia acknowledged that Hamas had likely won a majority in the 132-seat legislature and should be given the opportunity to form the next cabinet.

"This is the choice of the people," Qureia told reporters in the West Bank city of Ramallah. "It should be respected."

If confirmed by election officials in a Thursday evening news conference, the Hamas victory would end the governing Fatah party's decade-long control of the Palestinian Authority. It would also severely complicate Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' policy of pursuing negotiations with Israel under a U.S.-backed peace plan known as the roadmap, which conflicts with Hamas' platform in several key respects.

Hamas officials in Gaza City, where their victory was greatest, said the group has no plans to negotiate with Israel or recognize Israel's right to exist. Europe, Israel and the United States classify Hamas, formally known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, as a terrorist organization.

Hamas leaders said they had won between 68 and 80 seats in the legislature, a range Fatah officials acknowledged was likely. Abbas, who is president of the Palestinian Authority, must now appoint a prime minister to form a cabinet approved by the parliament. If invited to do so, Hamas would be able to assemble a cabinet free of other parties, although its leaders said before the vote they would seek a coalition government if given the opportunity.

Mahmoud Zahar, a Hamas leader in Gaza who won a legislative seat from its national list, said party officials would address questions over whether Hamas will form the next government after announcement of official election results.

Hamas' unconfirmed victory contradicted two exit polls released after the polls closed Wednesday that projected Fatah with a slim margin of victory, though not a parliamentary majority. Polling has underestimated Hamas' showing in recent municipal elections but never to this extent.

"We knew that Hamas had this strength," said Ghassan Khatib, the Palestinian Authority's planning minister who does not belong to either party. "Having them inside the council, abiding by its laws and regulations, hopefully will be better than having them outside. Now competition will be based on legal politics, rather than outside the law in the streets."

Election officials reported no serious problems Wednesday either as the result of Israeli security measures or inter-factional rivalry that had threatened to disrupt voting in several cities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinian elections officials said 77 percent of the 1.3 million registered Palestinians voters cast ballots on a brisk day, far surpassing the turnout in last year's presidential race.

In an initial assessment, a member of one international observer mission described the voting as "a generally smooth process with only sporadic violence and a robust turnout." The observer from the National Democratic Institute/Carter Center delegation, who declined to be named because of the preliminary nature of his evaluation, said his team had received only isolated reports of problems with voting materials.

The only apparent violation, the observer said, was the active political campaigning that occurred throughout the day. Palestinian election law requires campaigning to end 24 hours before the start of voting. But because all parties appeared to be violating the rule, the observer said, "at this point it doesn't appear to be a serious impediment to the election."

The atmosphere was celebratory during voting Wednesday in the West Bank city of Ramallah where cars bearing the green banner of Hamas and the black-and-white kaffiyehs of the governing Fatah party jammed the streets. Each party appeared to have well-organized efforts to insure their supporters made it to the polls.

The last parliamentary voting in 1996 led to a Fatah-dominated legislature, which has now been expanded by 50 percent. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of Fatah, postponed the elections in July 2005 in order to secure an election law more favorable to his party.

At the al-Bireh Girls Secondary School, Hamas supporters set up a card table with a bound voter-registration list and laptop computer loaded with a database of all voters and their assigned polling stations. Hamas activists running the help-booth said they were helping anyone who had questions, not just those who supported their movement.

"I saw Hamas closer to the people, closer to the feelings and problems of the people," said Hassan Hamudah, 44, a Hamas supporter who works for the Palestinian Water Authority. "They are honest men. The others have made many promises, but we have only seen corruption."

Hamas has built its popularity over the years through patient political organizing, charity work, and an unyielding position regarding Israel, which it refuses to recognize. The secular Fatah movement is suffering from generational divisions and a reputation for corrupt, ineffective government. The executive branch will remain under Abbas, who before the vote threatened to resign if Hamas moved after elections to block his program in the legislature.

As the main faction in the Palestine Liberation Organization, Fatah joined Israel in the 1993 Oslo accords and the U.S.-backed roadmap signed in 2003. The plan has been frozen during the last years of the Palestinian uprising, but each side has pledged to return to its staged framework culminating in the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

It remains unclear how much influence Hamas could exert over a future peace process since it is not a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization, although its apparent victory could hasten talks to bring the group inside the organization that represents Palestinians inside and outside of the occupied territories. Hamas has pledged to maintain its military wing, whose dismantlement Israel says is a pre-requisite for beginning peace talks under the roadmap.

"Israel can't accept a situation in which Hamas, in its present form as a terrorist group calling for the destruction of Israel, will be part of the Palestinian Authority without disarming," Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) Wednesday, according to the prime minister's office.

Hamas supporters say the party will concentrate first on political and education reform before moving onto issues of peace and diplomacy. Israeli and U.S. officials warned that its presence in government could undermine diplomatic initiatives and undermine foreign aid.

President Bush, in an interview Wednesday with the Wall Street Journal, lauded the democratic trend that produced the Palestinian elections but said Hamas would not be a suitable partner for diplomacy until it renounced its call for the destruction of Israel.

"A political party, in order to be viable, is one that professes peace, in my judgment, in order that it will keep the peace," Bush said. "And so you're getting a sense of how I'm going to deal with Hamas if they end up in positions of responsibility. And the answer is: Not until you renounce your desire to destroy Israel will we deal with you."

In a school adjacent to the El-Amari refugee camp, Ahmad Safi cast his vote for Fatah, an affiliation indicated by the black-and-white kaffiyeh across his shoulders against the cold.

"Historically, this is the movement that has given the most to the Palestinian cause," said Safi, 42, who works for the Fatah-run Interior Ministry and spent a dozen years in Israeli prisons.

Cars decked in banners and posters of Hamas green, Fatah yellow and the red of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine clogged the street in front of him. Many of the parties rented collective taxis to ferry their supporters to the polls.

"They are secular and democratic," he said of Fatah. "The proof of this is that we are now in pluralistic elections."

The Israeli police presence was heavy in East Jerusalem where roughly 6,000 of the 120,000 Palestinians eligible to vote in the city were expected to cast ballots. Olmert agreed to allow the voting to proceed in the city, which both Israelis and Palestinians claim as their capital, but prohibited the participation of Hamas.

Palestinian election officials extended voting in East Jerusalem for two hours, saying long lines caused by Israeli security measures prevented many from casting ballots on time. In a statement issued after polls closed, Hamas officials accused Fatah of rigging the vote in the city.

At the post office on Salahudeen Street near the Old City's Damascus Gate, members of the governing party's youth movement chanted "Your Blood Is Fatah" from the steps and passed out lists with the names of the party's local and national candidates.

"It's good that all factions are participating in this," said Omar Bazian, 56, a Fatah supporter from the Old City. "Never mind losing some power, this is a vote for the future."

Beyond Israel's separation barrier in the town of Abu Dis, a cluster of Hamas flags flew from the dome of a mosque along the wide, worn avenue into town. The 24-foot-high wall itself, sealing what was once the main road from Jerusalem to Jericho, is covered with candidate posters and graffiti, including "This Wall Must Fall" in English.

"We're telling people Islam is the solution," said Radi Johar, 29, who was passing out Hamas candidate pamphlets in the dirt street outside a crowded polling station. "We are victorious, whether we win or not, since we are raising the flag of Islam."

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 09:33 AM

Time will tell on how this ultimately plays out. It should be noted that there are factions in Israel that claim that Palestine doesn't exist.

Quote:

"A political party, in order to be viable, is one that professes peace, in my judgment, in order that it will keep the peace," Bush said. "And so you're getting a sense of how I'm going to deal with Hamas if they end up in positions of responsibility. And the answer is: Not until you renounce your desire to destroy Israel will we deal with you."

I can undestand any governments position on dealing with those who want peace... but really. Looked at in one light, Hamas is doing what any government would do. I don't agree with their methods, but are they really that different from other nations (or would be nations in this case)?

What I am getting at is, demonizing them does nothing to solve this situation. Clearly, they have the support of the Palestinian people, right or wrong they are not a fringe group looking to just stir up shit.

This is an organization that provides schools and hospitals and is heavily involved in their communities, just like any good political organization should be... what I am trying to get at, is that we shouldn't look at this in strictly black and white, good vs. evil terms.

stevo · 01-26-2006, 09:34 AM

The only difference now is that palistine is now a terrorist state. Terrorists were elected by their people. I don't care if they were elected or not. They're terrorists still. You can't negotiate with people who run on a platform of destroying israel and glorify beheadings. Just because they were elected doesn't change who they are, it just puts them out front, they are no longer in the shadows.

I do think that what we'll see now is a palistinian civil war between fatah and hamas. Who thinks fatah is going to just back down and go home? I don't.

highthief · 01-26-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

This is an organization that provides schools and hospitals and is heavily involved in their communities, just like any good political organization should be... what I am trying to get at, is that we shouldn't look at this in strictly black and white, good vs. evil terms.

Insurgent groups in Columbia, Peru and other nations have done the same things - you still wouldn't want to deal with them. Setting up infrastrucure is simply a signpost along the road leading to the insurgent state, so this signals nothing in terms of their goals or aspirations. They aren't in any way "good" because they built a school (especially when said school teaches kids to blow themselves up on a city bus).

Personally, I'd like to leave Israel, Palestine and the rest of the Middle East to sort themselves out. Whoever is left standing at the end can do civilized business with the rest of the world.

Xazy · 01-26-2006, 09:55 AM

That is a great article, I did not even know which one to post since there was easily few dozen that i have read today, and a number in the past few days.

I am torn on Hamas, for a number or reasons. I have a friend of mine who was stabbed about 7 years ago by a hamas member, while just walking down the street while visiting Israel.

I am not trying to remove the Palestenian voice, but the voice that comes is nothing with negotiating, nothing to do with peace. It is a voice of hate, and destruction. They have never disarmed the militant groups, and the terrorists have taken control (true via legitimate means). To me you cannot even talk to them, until they do a 180, and not just a quick 180, they have to change to start dialog, and before any action it has to be proven that it is beyond the surface.

Abbas, while he was pretty much powerless as PM, at least attempted to clean up. Not that he was succesful, but you can talk. But when Hamas 3 days ago, announces they are still for the destruction of Israel, well then you arm your borders and prepare for war. Sadly in Israel that is already a face of life.

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Personally, I'd like to leave Israel, Palestine and the rest of the Middle East to sort themselves out. Whoever is left standing at the end can do civilized business with the rest of the world.

I agree with this...

For the record, I am not defending the Palestinians per se. Rather, I am saying that let's see what happens now, before we start to judge.

Israel has also done some very horrible things to the Palestinians.

The Palestinians are not able to mount an army that can face the Irsaelis head on... they are fighting with what they have to get what they want... just like the Israeli "terrorists" did under Menachem Begin in the late 1940s against the British occupiers.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 10:02 AM

You don't negotiate with terrorists. When the shit hits the fans because these sociopaths are behind the wheels I say leave Israel to do what they have to do. It's a great a thing really, because now that the Palestinians will be operating within a legitimate government, it should makes things easier for Israel legally when Hamas tries some bullshit.

roachboy · 01-26-2006, 10:27 AM

this is quite odd. it would seem to me that the folk who characterize hamas as a "terrorist" organization should be pleased at the election results as it pulls hamas into conventional politics. and besides, the transformation from "terrorist" group to political organization is a big part of the early history of israeli politics itself, so you would think that this would be not a terribly frightening outcome.

second is that hamas' showing does not surprise me: it is only surprising if you imagine that the coverage of israeli-=palestinian relations you see on american tv is anything like an accurate representation of what is happening on the ground.
another way: why does it surprise anyone that actions like building a wall to split palestinian and israeli land would radicalize the political situation amongst the palestinians? that it would is not rocket science, folks.

third: it is always heartwarming to see yet another dsiplay of conservative contempt for democracy. thanks, stevo.

negociate with terrorists....well that is certainly one way to shut down an informed discussion, isnt it? you have already decided everything, based on anecdotal information...so what's to talk about?

stevo · 01-26-2006, 10:36 AM

so what do you call hamas? what do you call a group of people who teach children to grow up hating israel and live and die for its destruction. What do you call people that blow themselves up on a sidewalk cafe? What do you call a group of people with a huge billboard overlooking an israeli army post that says "Sharon, your pigs die here" showing a picture of a hooded hamas member weilding a bloody knife in one hand and a decapitated head in the other? What do you call them?

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 10:38 AM

RB, it could be beneficial to put Hamas in a coventional political position, that is ofcourse if you can see them amending their charter and ever accept any sort of peace with Israel. Such line of thinking is delusional at best.

Second, I don't think it comes as a big surprise to any America who pays attention to the situation, at least not me, that this happened. To the Palestinian people Hamas is great, it educates their children, feeds them, provides civil/social services, plus gives them hope against the evil zionists. Not to mention that by and large even the Palestinians knew Arafat and the PA was a joke and not working for their plight.

In response to three I don't see contempt this as "conservative contempt" for democracy. I just think it is an acknowledgement of the sad reality is that the choice these people made could potentially suck really really bad, for them, for Israel, for everyone. It was their choice to make no doubt, doesn't make it the right, or that we should have to accept it with a smile.

Xazy · 01-26-2006, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

negociate with terrorists....well that is certainly one way to shut down an informed discussion, isnt it? you have already decided everything, based on anecdotal information...so what's to talk about?

Got to agree with Stevo. What do you say when their head JUST said 3 days ago "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay [on the land], nor his ownership of any inch of land."

I did not have to say anything, their talk, their actions, everything they do calls them a terrorist.

trickyy · 01-26-2006, 10:43 AM

i wonder if hamas will be capable of leading. how have militant groups fared upon transforming into political parties (particularly majorities) in the past? i'm not just talking about sharon and arafat...any other countries to look at?

i guess israel's pullout didn't include negotiations last time, but i think further withdrawls (which haven't been discussed) are implicitly dependent upon palestine's ability to take care of itself.

you've got to admit political parties in america are missing a little of the fatah/hamas panache. you just don't see carl levin or ted stevens shooting a machine gun in the air after passing important legislation.

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 10:49 AM

You know, perhaps we should have ostracized Israel when their terrorists were elected head of state (Menachem Begin).

Like I said, above, time will tell how this plays out.

roachboy · 01-26-2006, 11:13 AM

a non-post. sorry folks.

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

You know, perhaps we should have ostracized Israel when their terrorists were elected head of state (Menachem Begin).

Like I said, above, time will tell how this plays out.

Exactly what I was thinking. Palestine is quite the mirror image of Israel once upon a time. We can't assume that Palestine will turn out differntly or the same as Israel. Any hufing and puffing about terrorism is clearly premature.

Edit: Roach, is your lack of capitol letters a stand against capitolism?

roachboy · 01-26-2006, 11:16 AM

i agree with charlatan: you dont know how this will play out--i think that pulling hamas into conventional politics could be a good thing.

stevo etc.: if you want a serious discussion about hamas, it would have to include something like adequate/accurate information about conditions on the ground in palestine, the political situation up to now--you know, fatah under and since arafat---an analysis of the conflicts over the israeli settlement policy in the west bank--something like a rational understanding of israeli politics. if you want to proceed on that basis, fine--i would be interested. but a goofball content-free non-discussion predicated on tossing about idiotic one-dimensional images like you see in stevo's last post is not of any interest to me at all--i am too busy to fuck about with stupidity on that order, and not posting to this thread is just as easy as posting to it if this is all that one can hope for.

same goes for the politics forum in general. but that is a different matter.

make an effort to creat the conditions for an interesting conversation and maybe the forum will start to come around a bit.

alpha phi · 01-26-2006, 11:32 AM

Funny how people would define who is a terrorist,
and who is a patriot.
If they are on your side they are patriots.
If they are against you they are terrorists.
Same acts by either side, different title given.
Would burning the personal home of the lieutenant goverment
be a terrorist act? Sure.
That's what the sons of liberty did.
And yes the British called them terrorists,
Yet the colonists saw them as patriots.
The Sons of liberty even opperated in cells

Quote:

The two original Sons of Liberty organizations (New York City and Boston) quickly established correspondence and communications with ever emerging Sons of Liberty groups in New England, the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia. Typically, members of this organization were men from the middle and upper classes of American colonial society. Although the movement began as a secret society, for reasons of safety and anonymity, the organization quickly sought to build a broad, public base of political support among the colonists. Frequently, cooperation with undisciplined and extralegal groups (city gangs) set off violent actions.

http://earlyamerica.com/review/fall96/sons.html

When the colonies won the fight for independance,
and became a legitimate nation.
Those "terrorists" became our founding fathers.

Hamas sound much like the sons of liberty
Only the future will tell if they will be remembered
as the "founding Fathers" of a Palestinian Nation
or
A group of rouge terrorist's ultimatly destroyed by their enemies
The victor gets to write history.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 11:44 AM

Going after government targets is legitimate, blowing up school buses/civilian buses/civilian anything is not, and is terrorism. Get serious with that crock of shit comparison.

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Going after government targets is legitimate, blowing up school buses/civilian buses/civilian anything is not, and is terrorism. Get serious with that crock of shit comparison.

Very different times dictated very different targets. I think the comparison is sound.

Let's put aside the US struggle for liberty for a moment and look at the number of civilians (jewish, arab and british alike) that the Irgun killed in their struggle for a Zionist state.

ObieX · 01-26-2006, 01:05 PM

I don't see why Israel doesn't step up and say "ok.. here's your land palistinians.It's your now. We'll go away, here are the borders.. if you don't like it tough." Then there will be the two states and anything that happens after that will be considered two countries at war. Why have both sides been dragging their feet for so many decades? Sharon started to pull Israeli people from disputed territories.. ok. Now why not just finish the job by saying "ok, now you guys run your shit and we're outa here."

I don't think the US should involve itself with two sides who obviously don't want peace. If they truly wanted peace there would have been peace long ago. There have been border lines relatively agreed upon for a long time now. Both sides know where they stand, and anything else is just posturing. End this crap and leave eachother thehell alone. If you don't wnt to do that you don't want peace and are just talking out of your ass. (by you and your i refer to Israel and palestine for any posters who may mistake me for refering to them hehe)

Just end it.

WillyPete · 01-26-2006, 01:17 PM

To ad another view, the ANC was once a terrorist organisation in South Africa.
The won an election by the voice of the people and was heralded into power by one of the greatest leaders of our time, who himself was jailed for planning a coup which in some countries would be considered treason.

Yes they blew up shopping centres, buses, laid landmines in farm roads. But would you deny that they have proved themselves since then?

Responsibility is an impressive force that can change even the most vociferous of us.
They have to deliver the goods now or their people won't be so happy.

Ustwo · 01-26-2006, 01:33 PM

Personally I'd say this gives Isreal the green light to declare war on the Palistinian state.

By voting for Hama's the Palistinian's voted for war, and war they should recieve.

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Personally I'd say this gives Isreal the green light to declare war on the Palistinian state.

When has either side really stopped being at war with each other?

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 02:04 PM

I wonder if any superpower would back Palestine in the next Israel/Palestine war. I'd like to think evereyone would either try to force them into negotiations, or would butt out, but I know the US wouldn't do either of those. This means that Palestine will be SOL in the conflict. I'd like to see the EU or the East pushing for an independant Palestinian state (a PEACEFUL state, of course).

irateplatypus · 01-26-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

This is an organization that provides schools and hospitals and is heavily involved in their communities, just like any good political organization should be... what I am trying to get at, is that we shouldn't look at this in strictly black and white, good vs. evil terms.

really? you think every good political organization should be in charge of providing education to children and be the gatekeepers of hospital care? that seems like a disastrous idea. i'm certain you would hate the reality of living under such a system.

i don't understand the need morally equivocate at every turn. just because there is good and evil on both sides (as is always the case when dealing with men and women), it shouldn't prevent us from realizing that Hamas is an organization with plainly-stated evil as its objective. that a population actively supports such an organization is indeed an evil thing.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

When has either side really stopped being at war with each other?

They haven't, this just makes it nice and legal for any action by Israel. Any action by Hamas will be directly tied to the government of Palestine, no longer a movement, it would be a declaration of war from a nation state against another.

And Will your statement doesn't seem to have any grounding in reality, as through this road map to peace that we have been so very much behind has forced Israel to the table and to make major concessions, we have very much been holding the leash tight on Israel as of late. Why would we shift from this policy in the near future in the case of war?

alpha phi · 01-26-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

really? you think every good political organization should be in charge of providing education to children and be the gatekeepers of hospital care? that seems like a disastrous idea. i'm certain you would hate the reality of living under such a system.

You ask that question of a Canadain? where that system is a reality.
And better reality than we have here in the states.
What with heathcare costs rising ten times inflation
companies and workers going broke trying to pay for healthcare.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

i don't understand the need morally equivocate at every turn.

equivocate

VERB: 1. To stray from truthfulness or sincerity: palter, prevaricate, shuffle. See TRUE. 2. To use evasive or deliberately vague language: euphemize, hedge, shuffle, tergiversate, weasel. Informal : pussyfoot, waffle. Idioms: beat about (or around) the bush, mince words.

Using big words to call someone a liar?

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

just because there is good and evil on both sides (as is always the case when dealing with men and women), it shouldn't prevent us from realizing that Hamas is an organization with plainly-stated evil as its objective. that a population actively supports such an organization is indeed an evil thing.

A nation to call their own is evil?
Resisting oppression is evil?
They are at war........
Wait.....I get it.... it evil if it's on the otherside
Good is only allowed for friends and allies
Evil is everyone else.

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

They haven't, this just makes it nice and legal for any action by Israel.

Which suggests that what Israel has done up until now hasn't been legal. That should give you some hint as to why the Palestinians are willing to go so far and do so much harm to the Israeli people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Any action by Hamas will be directly tied to the government of Palestine, no longer a movement, it would be a declaration of war from a nation state against another.

Of course, there are thousands of independant Palestinian organizations involved in attacks, all only loosely associated with Hamas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

And Will your statement doesn't seem to have any grounding in reality, as through this road map to peace that we have been so very much behind has forced Israel to the table and to make major concessions, we have very much been holding the leash tight on Israel as of late. Why would we shift from this policy in the near future in the case of war?

A giant wall around the West Bank isn't a concession, it's a prison. Our ultimate goal should walys be peace for all people. Letting Israel finally finish off the Palestinians isn't peace. It's genocide.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 03:17 PM

First all action taken thus far by Israel has been legal, one of the sole functions of a government is to protect its sovereign. They have recieved much condemnation sure, but they are doing what any other country would do, especially when it comes to dealing with a hostile population surrounding its country. The State Palestine lost the fight with Israel along time ago, it has been only through concessions from Israel that they exist today, some very generous concessions I might add.

Your comment about the loosely affiliated groups is a TOTAL copout, it almost doesn't merit a counter point because of its sheer ridiculousness. That not withstanding the sole goal of Hamas is armed resistance against Israel, the ending point being the total destruction; saying that terrorist action taken "by loosely affiliated groups" is just straight up false.

As for that wall, I remember a few people on these boards bitching about it, but then their voices seemed to lose all clout when the FACT was presented that since the walls rising, terrorist attacks have dramtically been reduced. But it must be some coincident perpetuated by teh Evil Bushco.

irateplatypus · 01-26-2006, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Which suggests that what Israel has done up until now hasn't been legal. That should give you some hint as to why the Palestinians are willing to go so far and do so much harm to the Israeli people.

i think mojo was alluding to a more recognizable relationship between the two. "nice and legal" meaning... "more conducive to fitting within existing framework". there is far less established law/protocol in dealing with internationally-subsidized human bombs and more structure for relations between two sovereign states.

edit: mojo already addressed this before my response was submitted, i'll let him speak for himself.

Quote:

A giant wall around the West Bank isn't a concession, it's a prison. Our ultimate goal should walys be peace for all people. Letting Israel finally finish off the Palestinians isn't peace. It's genocide.

where did this fantasy begin? i'd like to hear a serious argument establishing this in reality. it should explain how israel's supposed genocidal objectives jive with the thousands of palestinians living in israel-proper who enjoy full rights as citizens... even though jews living in hamas-controlled territory would have been butchered long ago.

the two sides are not on equal moral footing. i'm at a loss at why people try so hard to make them so.

Charlatan · 01-26-2006, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

really? you think every good political organization should be in charge of providing education to children and be the gatekeepers of hospital care? that seems like a disastrous idea. i'm certain you would hate the reality of living under such a system.

i don't understand the need morally equivocate at every turn. just because there is good and evil on both sides (as is always the case when dealing with men and women), it shouldn't prevent us from realizing that Hamas is an organization with plainly-stated evil as its objective. that a population actively supports such an organization is indeed an evil thing.

As alpha points out, I do think government has a place in providing these things. Are you really ready to suggest that this all about communism (am I wrong that this is where you are heading with this?)

As for "morally equivocating"... you must be very comfortable in your black and white world where there is only one right answer and one wrong answer... I don't believe in an absolute world.

Hamas has done some very evil things. The state of Israel has done some very evil things. I condemn them both.

What I am reacting to is the one-sided support of Israel, who's own activities get white washed because their actions are state sponsored and carried out by a millitary rather than a rag-tag group with bombs strapped to their chests.

In the end, both sides are equally convinced of the rightness of their position and their methods for achieving their ends. Nothing good will ever come of this part of the world.

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

First all action taken thus far by Israel has been legal,

Oh, boy. You've been misinformed.
From the International Court of Justice (the principal judicial organ of the United Nations):

Quote:

The Court finds that the construction by Israel of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and its associated régime are contrary to international law; it states the legal consequences arising from that illegality
http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/ipress...p_20040709.htm

Amnesti International:

Quote:

The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force.
http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/isr-summary-eng

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 03:57 PM

Yeah well here is the thing Willravel, World Organizations such as the UN have no sovereignity, they have no authority, they are empty words at best. Second off is Israel even party to the ICC? I don't know honestly, but I would bet the farm they are not, so again that makes anything they have to say moot.

irateplatypus · 01-26-2006, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

As alpha points out, I do think government has a place in providing these things. Are you really ready to suggest that this all about communism (am I wrong that this is where you are heading with this?)

your original statement was speaking about political organizations (such as hamas) providing education/healthcare, not government. the two terms aren't remotely interchangeable.

Quote:

As for "morally equivocating"... you must be very comfortable in your black and white world where there is only one right answer and one wrong answer... I don't believe in an absolute world.

that's nice. read my post again. it's quite obvious that i do not consider the issue black-and-white... but that's no reason to call it all black either. a world without absolutes is no reason to abandon critical observation.

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Yeah well here is the thing Willravel, World Organizations such as the UN have no sovereignity, they have no authority, they are empty words at best.

Legality isn't about authority. The Judicial parts of government and other organizations decide on legality, it is up to the executive parts of said government or organization to back it up or not. They are inherently seperate by function.

If I see someone go and kill someone else, I

Willravel · 01-26-2006, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Yeah well here is the thing Willravel, World Organizations such as the UN have no sovereignity, they have no authority, they are empty words at best.

Legality isn't about authority. The Judicial parts of government and other organizations decide on legality, it is up to the executive parts of said government or organization to back it up or not. They are inherently seperate by function.

If I see someone go and kill someone else (for no reason, Murder 1), I can state that it is illegal (knowing that murder is a breech of US law), with or without the support of the police.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 04:09 PM

Yeah, but by the framework of a sovereign country, by the laws of Israel is it illegal? And I realize so far as the wall is concerned it is illegal, I seem to remember their SC ruling to that effect. But as far as the reprisal killings and occupations go...

samcol · 01-26-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xazy

Well Hamas won the Palestinian election. While I am for a democracy, how can you try to make peace, or even attempt to negotiate with someone who just three days ago said ". "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay [on the land], nor his ownership of any inch of land."

While I am shocked by this, it is insane, I have no good faith in any more peace talks with a governemnt run by such an organization. Even if they just 'say' lets make peace. Arafat did say that, while in other speeches say the opposite. It has to be more then words.

Meanwhile the current administration all resigned in mass.

It's too bad people continute to pretend that democracy is the end all solution to rouge nations. The US's founding fathers recognized the problems with democracy and set up a constitutional republic utilizing few aspects of democracy. The key difference is that in a democracy, the government exists to do the will of the people, in a constitutional republic the government exists to protect the rights of people. Unfortunetly, this system has deteriorated over the years.

I'd rather have a government that protects the rights of people, instead of a government that can be elected to do the will of the mob whether it be good or bad (terrorism in the case of Hamas). So what if the majority of the people are behind Hamas in this election, that doesn't give them the authority to commit terrorism.

Mojo_PeiPei · 01-26-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

It's too bad people continute to pretend that democracy is the end all solution to rouge nations. The US's founding fathers recognized the problems with democracy and set up a constitutional republic utilizing few aspects of democracy. The key difference is that in a democracy, the government exists to do the will of the people, in a constitutional republic the government exists to protect the rights of people. Unfortunetly, this system has deteriorated over the years.

I'd rather have a government that protects the rights of people, instead of a government that can be elected to do the will of the mob whether it be good or bad (terrorism in the case of Hamas). So what if the majority of the people are behind Hamas in this election, that doesn't give them the authority to commit terrorism.

Well said

01-26-2006, 09:04 AM	#1 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	How do you negotiate with terrorists? Well Hamas won the Palestinian election. While I am for a democracy, how can you try to make peace, or even attempt to negotiate with someone who just three days ago said ". "We do not recognize the Israeli enemy, nor his right to be our neighbor, nor to stay [on the land], nor his ownership of any inch of land." While I am shocked by this, it is insane, I have no good faith in any more peace talks with a governemnt run by such an organization. Even if they just 'say' lets make peace. Arafat did say that, while in other speeches say the opposite. It has to be more then words. Meanwhile the current administration all resigned in mass.

01-26-2006, 09:34 AM	#4 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	The only difference now is that palistine is now a terrorist state. Terrorists were elected by their people. I don't care if they were elected or not. They're terrorists still. You can't negotiate with people who run on a platform of destroying israel and glorify beheadings. Just because they were elected doesn't change who they are, it just puts them out front, they are no longer in the shadows. I do think that what we'll see now is a palistinian civil war between fatah and hamas. Who thinks fatah is going to just back down and go home? I don't. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

01-26-2006, 10:02 AM	#8 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	You don't negotiate with terrorists. When the shit hits the fans because these sociopaths are behind the wheels I say leave Israel to do what they have to do. It's a great a thing really, because now that the Palestinians will be operating within a legitimate government, it should makes things easier for Israel legally when Hamas tries some bullshit. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

01-26-2006, 10:27 AM	#9 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	this is quite odd. it would seem to me that the folk who characterize hamas as a "terrorist" organization should be pleased at the election results as it pulls hamas into conventional politics. and besides, the transformation from "terrorist" group to political organization is a big part of the early history of israeli politics itself, so you would think that this would be not a terribly frightening outcome. second is that hamas' showing does not surprise me: it is only surprising if you imagine that the coverage of israeli-=palestinian relations you see on american tv is anything like an accurate representation of what is happening on the ground. another way: why does it surprise anyone that actions like building a wall to split palestinian and israeli land would radicalize the political situation amongst the palestinians? that it would is not rocket science, folks. third: it is always heartwarming to see yet another dsiplay of conservative contempt for democracy. thanks, stevo. negociate with terrorists....well that is certainly one way to shut down an informed discussion, isnt it? you have already decided everything, based on anecdotal information...so what's to talk about? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

01-26-2006, 10:36 AM	#10 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	so what do you call hamas? what do you call a group of people who teach children to grow up hating israel and live and die for its destruction. What do you call people that blow themselves up on a sidewalk cafe? What do you call a group of people with a huge billboard overlooking an israeli army post that says "Sharon, your pigs die here" showing a picture of a hooded hamas member weilding a bloody knife in one hand and a decapitated head in the other? What do you call them? __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

01-26-2006, 09:55 AM	#6 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	That is a great article, I did not even know which one to post since there was easily few dozen that i have read today, and a number in the past few days. I am torn on Hamas, for a number or reasons. I have a friend of mine who was stabbed about 7 years ago by a hamas member, while just walking down the street while visiting Israel. I am not trying to remove the Palestenian voice, but the voice that comes is nothing with negotiating, nothing to do with peace. It is a voice of hate, and destruction. They have never disarmed the militant groups, and the terrorists have taken control (true via legitimate means). To me you cannot even talk to them, until they do a 180, and not just a quick 180, they have to change to start dialog, and before any action it has to be proven that it is beyond the surface. Abbas, while he was pretty much powerless as PM, at least attempted to clean up. Not that he was succesful, but you can talk. But when Hamas 3 days ago, announces they are still for the destruction of Israel, well then you arm your borders and prepare for war. Sadly in Israel that is already a face of life.

01-26-2006, 10:38 AM	#11 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	RB, it could be beneficial to put Hamas in a coventional political position, that is ofcourse if you can see them amending their charter and ever accept any sort of peace with Israel. Such line of thinking is delusional at best. Second, I don't think it comes as a big surprise to any America who pays attention to the situation, at least not me, that this happened. To the Palestinian people Hamas is great, it educates their children, feeds them, provides civil/social services, plus gives them hope against the evil zionists. Not to mention that by and large even the Palestinians knew Arafat and the PA was a joke and not working for their plight. In response to three I don't see contempt this as "conservative contempt" for democracy. I just think it is an acknowledgement of the sad reality is that the choice these people made could potentially suck really really bad, for them, for Israel, for everyone. It was their choice to make no doubt, doesn't make it the right, or that we should have to accept it with a smile. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

01-26-2006, 10:43 AM	#13 (permalink)
trickyy ►	i wonder if hamas will be capable of leading. how have militant groups fared upon transforming into political parties (particularly majorities) in the past? i'm not just talking about sharon and arafat...any other countries to look at? i guess israel's pullout didn't include negotiations last time, but i think further withdrawls (which haven't been discussed) are implicitly dependent upon palestine's ability to take care of itself. you've got to admit political parties in america are missing a little of the fatah/hamas panache. you just don't see carl levin or ted stevens shooting a machine gun in the air after passing important legislation. Last edited by trickyy; 01-26-2006 at 10:47 AM..

01-26-2006, 10:49 AM	#14 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	You know, perhaps we should have ostracized Israel when their terrorists were elected head of state (Menachem Begin). Like I said, above, time will tell how this plays out. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

01-26-2006, 11:13 AM	#15 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	a non-post. sorry folks. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 01-26-2006 at 06:40 PM..

01-26-2006, 11:16 AM	#17 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i agree with charlatan: you dont know how this will play out--i think that pulling hamas into conventional politics could be a good thing. stevo etc.: if you want a serious discussion about hamas, it would have to include something like adequate/accurate information about conditions on the ground in palestine, the political situation up to now--you know, fatah under and since arafat---an analysis of the conflicts over the israeli settlement policy in the west bank--something like a rational understanding of israeli politics. if you want to proceed on that basis, fine--i would be interested. but a goofball content-free non-discussion predicated on tossing about idiotic one-dimensional images like you see in stevo's last post is not of any interest to me at all--i am too busy to fuck about with stupidity on that order, and not posting to this thread is just as easy as posting to it if this is all that one can hope for. same goes for the politics forum in general. but that is a different matter. make an effort to creat the conditions for an interesting conversation and maybe the forum will start to come around a bit. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

01-26-2006, 11:44 AM	#19 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Going after government targets is legitimate, blowing up school buses/civilian buses/civilian anything is not, and is terrorism. Get serious with that crock of shit comparison. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

01-26-2006, 01:05 PM	#21 (permalink)
ObieX Pickles Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)	I don't see why Israel doesn't step up and say "ok.. here's your land palistinians.It's your now. We'll go away, here are the borders.. if you don't like it tough." Then there will be the two states and anything that happens after that will be considered two countries at war. Why have both sides been dragging their feet for so many decades? Sharon started to pull Israeli people from disputed territories.. ok. Now why not just finish the job by saying "ok, now you guys run your shit and we're outa here." I don't think the US should involve itself with two sides who obviously don't want peace. If they truly wanted peace there would have been peace long ago. There have been border lines relatively agreed upon for a long time now. Both sides know where they stand, and anything else is just posturing. End this crap and leave eachother thehell alone. If you don't wnt to do that you don't want peace and are just talking out of your ass. (by you and your i refer to Israel and palestine for any posters who may mistake me for refering to them hehe) Just end it. __________________ We Must Dissent.

01-26-2006, 01:17 PM	#22 (permalink)
WillyPete Addict	To ad another view, the ANC was once a terrorist organisation in South Africa. The won an election by the voice of the people and was heralded into power by one of the greatest leaders of our time, who himself was jailed for planning a coup which in some countries would be considered treason. Yes they blew up shopping centres, buses, laid landmines in farm roads. But would you deny that they have proved themselves since then? Responsibility is an impressive force that can change even the most vociferous of us. They have to deliver the goods now or their people won't be so happy.

01-26-2006, 01:33 PM	#23 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Personally I'd say this gives Isreal the green light to declare war on the Palistinian state. By voting for Hama's the Palistinian's voted for war, and war they should recieve. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

01-26-2006, 02:04 PM	#25 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I wonder if any superpower would back Palestine in the next Israel/Palestine war. I'd like to think evereyone would either try to force them into negotiations, or would butt out, but I know the US wouldn't do either of those. This means that Palestine will be SOL in the conflict. I'd like to see the EU or the East pushing for an independant Palestinian state (a PEACEFUL state, of course).

01-26-2006, 03:17 PM	#30 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	First all action taken thus far by Israel has been legal, one of the sole functions of a government is to protect its sovereign. They have recieved much condemnation sure, but they are doing what any other country would do, especially when it comes to dealing with a hostile population surrounding its country. The State Palestine lost the fight with Israel along time ago, it has been only through concessions from Israel that they exist today, some very generous concessions I might add. Your comment about the loosely affiliated groups is a TOTAL copout, it almost doesn't merit a counter point because of its sheer ridiculousness. That not withstanding the sole goal of Hamas is armed resistance against Israel, the ending point being the total destruction; saying that terrorist action taken "by loosely affiliated groups" is just straight up false. As for that wall, I remember a few people on these boards bitching about it, but then their voices seemed to lose all clout when the FACT was presented that since the walls rising, terrorist attacks have dramtically been reduced. But it must be some coincident perpetuated by teh Evil Bushco. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. Last edited by Mojo_PeiPei; 01-26-2006 at 03:30 PM..

01-26-2006, 03:57 PM	#34 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Yeah well here is the thing Willravel, World Organizations such as the UN have no sovereignity, they have no authority, they are empty words at best. Second off is Israel even party to the ICC? I don't know honestly, but I would bet the farm they are not, so again that makes anything they have to say moot. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

01-26-2006, 04:09 PM	#38 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Yeah, but by the framework of a sovereign country, by the laws of Israel is it illegal? And I realize so far as the wall is concerned it is illegal, I seem to remember their SC ruling to that effect. But as far as the reprisal killings and occupations go... __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.