Quote:
Originally Posted by Strangelet
(Post 107803)
Will they talk? The propaganda has us buy into a story where the less well-dressed, darker skinned lot are a monolith of evil, devoid of any significant pragmatic wing. There are two kinds of extremists. Those that are pushed into that role from the lack of alternative means of survival, and those that have everything provided them, but still feel the need to whip themselves up into a frenzy of religious superiority. Which should you most fear? Which side of this conflict has more of the well fed/well dressed nut balls?
Will they commit? the propaganda has us buy into the story that agreements must be upheld through out Hamas' entire ranks before talks can be considered. There are criminals in every organization. Its a convenient ploy to continue pushing Israeli agenda at gun point because of how believable it is that some nob will still blow themselves up or launch a missle after a battery of negotiatons. Even though its just as believable that some nob will still blow themselves up or launch a rocket after a battery of bombings.
|
You got it. This is the kind of thing I was pointing out at the very start of the ceasefire (and incidentally, have we resolved
who actually broke it yet?) - if both sides are serious about peace, they have to expect that there will be militants looking to disrupt it, as there were in Northern Ireland.
There's a lot to question and criticize about Hamas, but it's laughable the way I've heard some people talk about them as if they're just Hollywood-style Bad EvilDoer Arabs, kind of like the Muslim Borg.
Don't take this as an endorsement of them as a political movement, but some links that counter this debate-shutting impression of them as nothing but terrorist maniacs who want to swallow up every last Jew...
Hamas willing to accept Palestinian state with 1967 borders (09/11/2008)
Quote:
The Hamas leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said on Saturday his government was willing to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
"Our conflict is not with the Jews, our problem is with the occupation," Haniyeh said.
Clare Short, who served in the cabinet of former British prime minister Tony Blair, asked Haniyeh to repeat his offer. He said the Hamas government had agreed to accept a Palestinian state that followed the 1967 borders and to offer Israel a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights.
In response to a question about the international community's impression that there are two Palestinian states, Haniyeh said: "We don't have a state, neither in Gaza nor in the West Bank. Gaza is under siege and the West Bank is occupied. What we have in the Gaza Strip is not a state, but rather a regime of an elected government. A Palestinian state will not be created at this time except in the territories of 1967."
|
A 2006 interview with a Hamas leader where he
states clearly they would accept Israel within the 1967 borders.
Quote:
RR: In the West, Hamas is generally depicted as being absolutely against talks with Israel and [it's believed] that Hamas only wants to drive the Israeli Jews into the sea.
KM: This is not correct. Killing Jews is not our aim. For centuries we have lived in Palestine peacefully with Jews and Christians of all kinds. We are fighting Israel because it occupies our land and oppresses our people. We are fighting Israel to finish this occupation. We want to live freely on our land just as other nations. We want to have our own country just like other people. But the Zionist movement came from all over the world to occupy our land. And the real owner of the land has been kicked out. This is the root of the problem.
Because of many factors, we now accept to build a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967. But that doesn't mean that we recognize Israel. But we are prepared to make a long-term truce with Israel. Accepting the status of Israel without recognizing it.
RR: But no recognition? Doesn't that mean continued tensions and war?
KM: No. There are plenty of examples where no recognition does not mean war. China and Taiwan, for example, have not recognized each other, but they trade and cooperate with each other. By withholding a formal recognition, we just don't want to give Israel the legitimacy for having taken our land in the first place.
|
Also writing a couple of days ago, the health minister in the Hamas government:
We believe in resistance, not revenge
(OMG, he's talking like one of us, I thought all they did was repeat, "Death to all infidels!!!!?")
As I say, Hamas unquestionably have blood on their hands too. But the idea that this wider conflict is between the civilized country whose a bit heavy-handed but essentially it's understandable because they've come under fire for so long..... versus the irrational terrorists who want to push them into the sea - well, it's clearly a perception that's benefitting one side, and it's no surprise to realise which country beyond the region it's most prevalent in.
Where are we now? Well over 1,000 dead Palestinians, nearly 5,000 injured. More than a third of the dead are children. 13 Israelis killed.
With the obvious statement that those 13 Israeli deaths are just as appalling.... what the hell, it's like some people I've heard are in a coma. Mainstream opinion in the UK is still on the side of Israel (assuming the bulk of posts and comment are not from well-organized propaganda outfits like
GIYUS.org)
Quote:
Originally Posted by myrrh
Where was all the outcry for the past six years over the Iraqi's being killed? Or the Afghani's? Or if we take it back a bit - Chechnia? You get the point.
|
Plenty of protests against the Iraq war were organised by the Stop the War Coalition and people here continued to march and speak out, I don't know about abroad. Afghanistan? I think plenty still labour under the assumption (mistaken in my view) that it was somehow the 'just' war. Chechnya? I think the lack of coverage has a lot to do with it, plus the sense that the oppression and violence is not being committed by our side (US/UK) or done in our name. Gaza will always generate more anger around the world simply because it has so many international ramifications and represents the key long-running dispute/injustice - and in a region dominated by Muslims, the establishment of Israel has always stood out like a sore thumb, particularly with it being so widely regarded (by much of the rest of the world) as America's client state in the region. It's no surprise to me that Gaza will generate more outcry.
Btw, sorry to hear what happened to you at the Changing of the Guard. It happens a lot, especially if you're brown or olive-skinned and sport a beard. Hope it didn't ruin your time here - just add it to your list of accomplishments and experiences. ;)
