Why are majority of Arabs, Anti-america

[Mr Spinkles]

i think its time for people in the middle east to stop listening to the likes of Hamas who make such outlandish claims that they can defeat Israel and make all of Palestine fall under Islamic rule. There needs to be a reality check here.

Reality check: Kadima, the party in control of the Israeli government, denies Palestine's "right" to exist. Examples:

• The Israeli prime minister explicitly denied Palestine the right to exist;
• The official position of the Kadima party, which won the 2006 elections, denies Palestine the right to exist.
• Their actions also do not recognize Palestine's right to exist.
  • Normally the citizens of a sovereign nation do not have to get a license from a foreign nation to own houses on their own land.
  • Normally the right of a sovereign nation to have its own military is not rejected in principle.
  • Normally a sovereign nation has the right to control its own borders with other nations, and its own waters and airspace; etc. etc.

So if we apply the same logic most Westerners apply to the Palestinians and the issue of recognizing Israel's right to exist, we reach the following conclusions (assuming the balance of power permitted):

• Negotiations are impossible unless Kadima officially recognizes Palestine's right to exist and "renounces violence"
• Any ceasefire offer from Kadima, or other moves towards compromise, are surely a ruse so they can prepare for a military showdown to destroy Palestine
• Israel ought to be completely blockaded by land, air, and sea; the resulting economic ruin will put pressure on Kadima
• The following are breaches of the peace:
  • weapons smuggling (e.g. import of US-made Apache helicopters)
  • any attack on Palestinians (e.g. settler violence, confrontations between IDF and civilians, IDF kidnapping of Palestinian soldiers)
• In case of such a breach, it would be legitimate to retaliate--always in greater proportion--in the following ways:
  • Assassinate Kadima party leaders like Sharon, Olmert, and Livni
  • Bomb Kadima government buildings and offices
  • Possible large-scale campaign to bomb infrastructure

Yet virtually all Westerners would reject the above conclusions (assuming the balance of power permitted). They emphasize that even though the Kadima party rejects Palestine's right to exist, they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement. The same is true of the Palestinians: many of them don't accept the "historic right" of Jews to any of the land / Israel's right to exist; but they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement.

The fact that the US/Israel has been rejecting a two-state solution for decades--which has continuously been advocated by the Palestinians, Arabs, Europeans, the UN and virtually the entire world--and the double standard in recognizing Palestine's "right to exist" shows that this whole issue is just a convenient excuse for continued US/Israeli rejectionism.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

tell me does Hamas allow any alternative political party to campaign in Gaza?
in order for the Palestinians to have any kind of future they must leave Hamas and that kind of ideology in the past.

Let's run through a list of possible reasons Hamas has repressed alternative political parties in Gaza:

• Israel has said that it has infiltrated Fatah, the primary opposition party, "to the very top".
• Collaborators inside Gaza have always been crucial in identifying leaders for assassination and weapons depots for bombing, and undoubtedly they were helpful in Israel's latest bombing campaign.
• The US/Israel provided massive arms to Fatah and encouraged a violent coup to overthrow Hamas, despite the fact that it was democratically elected.
• Israel's policy was to bomb Gaza and kill Hamas members, and re-close the borders (devastating the population) any time "alternative parties" such as Islamic Jihad or Fatah's militant wing fired rockets during the ceasefire (Israeli minister Livni said "I don't care who fired").

Now, these are all reasons we KNOW have contributed to Hamas' police-state policies in Gaza, although there have been measures for reconciliation as well.

An additional reason could be:

• Hamas opposes the right of Palestinians to form opposition parties and vie for power through the democratic process.

We can only speculate on this one since all the aforementioned ones have been at work since Hamas' election. My guess is if it weren't for the other factors, there would be alternative parties and Hamas would yield to the democratic process.

 

[kai]

Reality check: Kadima, the party in control of the Israeli government, denies Palestine's "right" to exist. Examples:

• The Israeli prime minister explicitly denied Palestine the right to exist;
• The official position of the Kadima party, which won the 2006 elections, denies Palestine the right to exist.
• Their actions also do not recognize Palestine's right to exist.
  • Normally the citizens of a sovereign nation do not have to get a license from a foreign nation to own houses on their own land.
  • Normally the right of a sovereign nation to have its own military is not rejected in principle.
  • Normally a sovereign nation has the right to control its own borders with other nations, and its own waters and airspace; etc. etc.

So if we apply the same logic most Westerners apply to the Palestinians and the issue of recognizing Israel's right to exist, we reach the following conclusions (assuming the balance of power permitted):

• Negotiations are impossible unless Kadima officially recognizes Palestine's right to exist and "renounces violence"
• Any ceasefire offer from Kadima, or other moves towards compromise, are surely a ruse so they can prepare for a military showdown to destroy Palestine
• Israel ought to be completely blockaded by land, air, and sea; the resulting economic ruin will put pressure on Kadima
• The following are breaches of the peace:
  • weapons smuggling (e.g. import of US-made Apache helicopters)
  • any attack on Palestinians (e.g. settler violence, confrontations between IDF and civilians, IDF kidnapping of Palestinian soldiers)
• In case of such a breach, it would be legitimate to retaliate--always in greater proportion--in the following ways:
  • Assassinate Kadima party leaders like Sharon, Olmert, and Livni
  • Bomb Kadima government buildings and offices
  • Possible large-scale campaign to bomb infrastructure

Yet virtually all Westerners would reject the above conclusions (assuming the balance of power permitted). They emphasize that even though the Kadima party rejects Palestine's right to exist, they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement. The same is true of the Palestinians: many of them don't accept the "historic right" of Jews to any of the land / Israel's right to exist; but they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement.

The fact that the US/Israel has been rejecting a two-state solution for decades--which has continuously been advocated by the Palestinians, Arabs, Europeans, the UN and virtually the entire world--and the double standard in recognizing Palestine's "right to exist" shows that this whole issue is just a convenient excuse for continued US/Israeli rejectionism.

and yet Kadima endorses the road map to peace,

 

[Mr Spinkles]

and yet Kadima endorses the road map to peace,

Precisely. As I said: even though the Kadima party rejects Palestine's right to exist, they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement. The same is true of the Palestinians: many of them don't accept the "historic right" of Jews to any of the land / Israel's right to exist; but they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement.

 

[kai]

Precisely. As I said: even though the Kadima party rejects Palestine's right to exist, they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement. The same is true of the Palestinians: many of them don't accept the "historic right" of Jews to any of the land / Israel's right to exist; but they are willing to accept a peaceful settlement.

What gives you the idea that Hamas is willing to accept anything more than Hudna. when i think of "a peaceful setlement" i am think of a two state solution with peace treaties not ceasefires.


and here is the problem.

The headline says:

Hamas must be brought into peace process, says Tony Blair

Asked whether he had changed his view about talking to Hamas since the Palestinian elections, Mr Blair replies that his “basic predisposition is that in a situation like this you talk to everybody”.

but then goes on to say:

However, he repeated the Quartet position that there can be no talks, official or unofficial, with Hamas until they renounce violence and recognise Israel.

round and round we go.



Hamas must be brought into peace process, says Tony Blair - Times Online

 

[Mr Spinkles]

kai there is a very clear and unmistakable correlation between occupation/oppression and militancy, for example when you compare Arab-Israelis with the other Palestinians. In ten years, if democracy is permitted and the 'hudna' accepted, what are the odds that the Palestinian people will support a political party that wants to resume violence and risk re-occupation after ten years of peace and autonomy, for the first time in 30 years? By that time Hamas will have other political parties to compete with and if it supports self-destructive violence, the Palestinians won't support it. I don't think you give Palestinians enough credit.

 

[kai]

kai there is a very clear and unmistakable correlation between occupation/oppression and militancy, for example when you compare Arab-Israelis with the other Palestinians. In ten years, if democracy is permitted and the 'hudna' accepted, what are the odds that the Palestinian people will support a political party that wants to resume violence and risk re-occupation after ten years of peace and autonomy, for the first time in 30 years? By that time Hamas will have other political parties to compete with and if it supports self-destructive violence, the Palestinians won't support it. I don't think you give Palestinians enough credit.

well i tend to use Lebanon as an example Hezbollah is a similar organisation to Hamas with the same aims, they have other political parties to contend with and no occupation.

 

[kai]

For God's sake, i'm not talking about Gaza, but about the Palestinian territories as a whole. Sharon is gone but the method is still hanging around.

neither was i ,i clearly said i dont agree with any settlements on the west bank