Palestine UN Membership Bid

And you fail to see reason why Hamas is seens as freedom fighters and is popular in West Bank. Because they are seen as freedom fighters. Moment they stop being that they lose major portion of their supporters, forcing them to either

1. Pull IRA and concerate at political wing, leaving violence behind.
2. Face destruction by combined Palestine-Israel force.
3. Pull out of Palestine and set up shop somewhere else thus not being Palestine problem anymore.

I agree that Hamas is founded on religious fundamentalism, which was on a roll when it was founded, and they do have destruction of Israel in their charter, more speficly "Hamas's 1988 charter calls for the replacement of Israel and the Palestinian Territories with an Islamic Palestinian state." Hamas, as it currently stands, may never truly be in peace with Israel but that does not mean they will forever be the major political movement.

Takes these away and make them something that Palestine government does and Hamas loses power. Not instantly, mind you. A lot of people wil remember how "those evil Israels made our live hell and Hamas was there to support us", just as many Israels will remember "those evil Palestine who killed us because they are evil". I do not expect Israel and Palestines suddenly be best friends forever. However, I do expect that Israel has enough brains not to reoccupy Palestine again just because and Palestines, as whole, smart enough not to provoke them to do that by officialy supporting terrorism.

If Palestine state is born and there is peace between two, I fully expect both sides to suddenly have terrorist groups doing their private war.

edited 24th Sep '11 1:53:29 AM by Mandemo

That might very well work if you can strip the popular support away but that is going to be quite the task when they are part of government. Much like what happened with the IRA the troubles later sprung up and ushered in a new era of violence.

That would also require Hamas to be 100% in charge, which I do not think is going to happen. Both sides will have assholes calling for destruction of another, but it doesn't automatically mean they are the guys calling the shots. More likely, Hamas will initialy enjoy some popularity but it will decline as time goes unless they complety rework their charter.

I hate say this, but I rather sacrifice 100 on both sides now to save 1000 in the long run.

I more or less agree with you on that. How does that saying go? Too many cooks spoil the broth/soup?

Small time thugs? I'll just ignore that.

The real issue is that the war they are fighting really just goes down to low pot-shots against one another before flaring up every now and again. That is, it never ends. You talk about "if they stop rocket attacks", while ignoring Israel's typical practice of helicopter gunships going in and blowing up whole city blocks to take out a politician they don't like. You talk about suicide bombers but ignore Israeli military incursions that kill a lot of Palestinians. Really, the problem is that you're demonising (Hamas in this case) something because you have no love for their cause but in the context that they live in, they are freedom fighters.

Plus, Mandemo's post on Hamas' activity should go to show you're completely ignoring a heck of a lot of things. The vast majority of the money that Hamas gets is used in social services, basic infrastructure and to help people survive day to day, the very things that Israel attacks in the name of "combating terrorism". In fact, the vast majority of rockets weren't even from Hamas in the lead up to the last conflict, they're not even sure if a single one was from Hamas. So you might be complaining about something that isn't even happening.

There's no sacrificing. It'd end up just like Afghanistan. Take out the Taliban, put a bunch of drug lords and mass murderers in charge. Woo, I bet Afghans are simply ecstatic about that.

Hamas is a terrorist organisation, I do not challenge that. That is simple hard truth.

However, reason why they are so popular is explained by their non-terrorism acts, whic allow the mto carry out the terrorist acts.

Israels heavy handed tactics are one the reason why Hamas is so popular. True, it is hard to hunt down group of people hiding behind civilian shield, but that does not justify going in like you would expect total war from other side.

Both sides are at the fault here, but I expect Israel, more advanced and democratic state that claims to hold the higher moral ground, to be first to stop being idiot.

And that means what exactly? Turn the other cheek while Israeli citizens get slaughtered and terrorized by rocket attacks? Go to Interpol when the last 15 years have proven you don't treat terrorism as a crime?

What can they possibly do short of military action that will ensure no further rocket attacks or terrorist activity of any kind? There is nothing. Either they have to retaliate or they simply keep dying. That's the truth of the entire matter. Hamas won't stop killing no matter what you give them concession wise.

I have alreayd posted causes of Hamas being popular. I will not start providing some 75 page plan of how to turn West Bank into some utopia. Responding terrorism needs to be quit, swift and deadly. To the terrorist, not massive assault against city that they use to hide.

This blockade only cements Hamas popularity, since they are the one providing people the food and stuff they need. It is not weakening them, more it's going to hurt Israel on the long run.

But I will not argue about this. I have no interest into going into argument where my arguments mean nothing against magical words "terrorist", "security" and "genocide".

^ The blockade runs weapons to Gaza, this has been documented and proven time and time and time again. Same thing with the cross-border tunnels to Egypt.

And you can't respond lightfooted and quiet with Hamas. They fully utilize the civilian populace to the maximum possible protection for their activities to where any retaliatory action will ensure civilian collateral. What do think will cause more outrage? IDF commandos killing a civilian deep inside Gaza with no public knowledge after pursuing a wanted Hamas operative or an airstrike that destroys a rocket launch site and hits a few?

There is no possible way Israel can be surgically clean in their operations. Collateral damage is just the fact of life for that conflict. So it becomes more in Israel's interest to deliver maximum firepower wherever possible to ensure maximum destruction of Hamas' capabilities. They simply have no alternative otherwise both in the court of public opinion and the court of practical knowledge.

edited 24th Sep '11 8:30:26 AM by MajorTom

"Kash: Did you read all of my post? Yeah sure give them state hood. It fixes nothing, it solves none of the issues in the first place and will only lead to more trouble because neither side has resolved their issues at hand."

Yes, I've read all of your posts, and I find them nonsensically Israel-centric. All of your complaints apply to the founding of Israel as well. To address your actual speculations, what will change is Palestine's ability to be taken seriously when bringing up terrorist charges against Israel.

"And that means what exactly? Turn the other cheek while Israeli citizens get slaughtered and terrorized by rocket attacks? Go to Interpol when the last 15 years have proven you don't treat terrorism as a crime?"

Much of the rest of the world did not seem to have a problem with turning the other cheek when Palestinians were getting terrorized. I would like it if you answered my previous question, Tom, regarding where you get your patently false news from.

^ The opposite places everyone gets their Palestinian sob stories and propaganda. The BBC, AP, Telegraph, etc.

What makes you confident that your news sources aren't heavily biased as well?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities_1948-present

In case you miss it, the sources for the chart are Israeli.

^^ Wait, the news agency most consider the most neutral out there, the BBC, is now spreading Palestinian propoganda? How does this follow?

edited 24th Sep '11 9:11:22 AM by Acebrock

^ They are the opposite of Palestinian propaganda! That's what I was getting at!

The BBC is far from neutral, and it has repeatedly been noted for its pro-Israeli bias. Tom, any comment on those statistics I've linked you to?

What about them? That Palestinian militants over the years have loved to cluster around civilians so as to deliberately draw collateral damage for use against Israel? There is nothing new I haven't already known from that link. (Yes even the lopsided casualties of both sides.)

If you've known about them, why did you express surprise at the information that Israel has attacked Palestinian citizens earlier in the thread?

And don't you realize how biased it sounds to blame the deaths on Palestinians as opposed to the aggressor? It is a responsibility of the attacking party to make sure that no civilians are around.

edited 24th Sep '11 9:27:05 AM by kashchei

Have you learned NOTHING of the conflict? That is an impossibility! Hamas deliberately hides behind and among civilians, there is no possible way short of evicting every last Palestinian from Gaza to avert collateral damage like that.

Palestine isn't a legitimate nation, so I don't see on what grounds it could join the United Nations. That said, the UN is a joke, so it's not like it matters.

Ummm, what? How is Palestine not a legitamte nation? It fits the four requirements.

edit: dammit, ninja'd into irrelevance.

edited 24th Sep '11 9:32:25 AM by InsomniacWeasel

"Have you learned NOTHING of the conflict? That is an impossibility! Hamas deliberately hides behind and among civilians, there is no possible way short of evicting every last Palestinian from Gaza to avert collateral damage like that."

And if Israel ceased abusing and depriving Palestinians, groups like Hamas would be a little harder pressed to find support. It takes two to tango, and you're refusing to admit any Israeli culpability. Why?

"Palestine isn't a legitimate nation, so I don't see on what grounds it could join the United Nations."

Please do elaborate.

edited 24th Sep '11 9:34:09 AM by kashchei

The rocket attacks still continue.

Let's recap the whole Second Intifada in a few words shall we?

Every concession the Israelis have made in the last 10 years has been responded to in kind by more Palestinian violence.

Because they didn't give them a country.

Face it, consessions mean nothing.

Also, it is patently untrue that all civilian casualties were collateral damage from attacking Hamas. If you remember the bulldozing campaign, which had the flimsy pretext of searching for underground networks of weapons trade located under people's homes, that was pure targeting of civilians themselves.

The rocket attacks still continue because the "concessions" Israel has made do not amount to much at all. And if you want to recap the Second Intifada in a few words, I think "the conflict with five times more Palestinian casualties" is a rather more apt summary.

edited 24th Sep '11 9:40:21 AM by kashchei