Peace with Hamas impossible while there's a bomb under the table.

[dogbone]

How can you negotiate with people who are killing you?

Israel has been asking this for years, now Fatah is asking the same question.

"How can the dialogue go on when there is a bomb underneath the table?" Reuters news agency quoted Fatah spokesman Tawfiq Abu Khoussa as saying.

link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6301763.stm)

[skunk]

The violence began when two Hamas members died in what the group said was a roadside bomb attack on a convoy by Fatah militants.What point are you trying to make here? :confused:
Quoting one side of the story does not help.

[Dont Hurt Me]

So Israel makes a deal with Hamas, terrific then the next terror group comes along and again the problem continues. PLO,Hamas,Hezbolla who's next? How do you cut deals when the people you are dealing with want you dead? This is Israel's problem. Its dealing with all these groups who have a fanatical religion as the base of their society. Who's next?

[skunk]

This is Israel's problem. Its dealing with all these groups who have a fanatical religion as the base of their society.Pot=Kettle.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Pot=Kettle.
Who's the next terror group skunk? you know theres another waiting in line.

[skunk]

Who's the next terror group skunk? you know theres another waiting in line.Islam is no more fanatical a religion than is Judaism or Christianity. There is, however, an almost inexhaustible source of aggrieved Muslims. Without addressing this problem, it's like chopping heads off the Hydra.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I agree with some of that but look at the palestians at the moment, you have 1 hate group fighting another. Rule of Law,Democracy has little meaning to this society. I wonder how long before Fatah & Hamas engage in a full scale war?

[Sayhey]

How can you negotiate with people who are killing you?

Israel has been asking this for years, now Fatah is asking the same question.

"How can the dialogue go on when there is a bomb underneath the table?" Reuters news agency quoted Fatah spokesman Tawfiq Abu Khoussa as saying.

link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6301763.stm)

The nature of negotiations during times of war is to negotiate with people who are trying to kill you. The only reason to raise this as an objection to negotiations is to stop negotiations from taking place or to put out the false propaganda that only one side is seeking to kill the other - or both.

[dogbone]

What point are you trying to make here?

The point is obvious. That is what hope is there for Israel to come to any sort of understanding with Hamas when Hamas and Fatah, (supposedly on the same side) cannot trust each other and deal with their grievances with bombs, machine guns and murder of their own innocent civillians?

[mactastic]

Hmm... How can you negotiate with people who are killing you? I don't know, ask the Japanese how they managed?

Or the IRA. It's been done before.

[freeny]

Pot=Kettle.

Im willing to bet a years salary that if Israel laid down its weapons the attacks againced them would continue...

I wouldnt be willing to do the same bet the other way around.

[AP_piano295]

Im willing to bet a years salary that if Israel laid down its weapons the attacks againced them would continue...

I wouldnt be willing to do the same bet the other way around.

Flawed arguement the Israelis happen to inhabiting a bit of the world that was NOT theirs only a short time ago and during their conquest of this bit of countryside they forced lots of people out of their homes.

So as long as the refugees continue to feel wronged and others continue to side with them no end is in sight.

[freeny]

Flawed arguement the Israelis happen to inhabiting a bit of the world that was NOT theirs only a short time ago and during their conquest of this bit of countryside they forced lots of people out of their homes.

So as long as the refugees continue to feel wronged and others continue to side with them no end is in sight.

Yes, they need to work out their differences.

But how do you work with people who are trying to kill you?

And the cycle continues.....:rolleyes:

[skunk]

Im willing to bet a years salary that if Israel laid down its weapons the attacks againced them would continue...

I wouldnt be willing to do the same bet the other way around.Israel is holding several thousand Palestinian prisoners, and is effectively occupying a huge swathe of Palestinian territory. Are you also assuming this would no longer apply, and that all confiscated lands would be returned? The playing field is nothing like level.

[mactastic]

So a safe bet would also be that if the Palestinians laid down their arms that their lands would still be occupied and their comrades still in prison?

[skunk]

So a safe bet would also be that if the Palestinians laid down their arms that their lands would still be occupied and their comrades still in prison?I believe you catch my drift.

[AP_piano295]

Yes, they need to work out their differences.

But how do you work with people who are trying to kill you?

And the cycle continues.....:rolleyes:

I agree it's a vicious cycle, I was saying that if those attacking Israel were to lay down their weapons the fighting probably would end because Israel has already acomplished its goals, but the same cant be said for the exiled Palestinians.

^^
basically what they just said

[Swarmlord]

Flawed arguement the Israelis happen to inhabiting a bit of the world that was NOT theirs only a short time ago and during their conquest of this bit of countryside they forced lots of people out of their homes.

So as long as the refugees continue to feel wronged and others continue to side with them no end is in sight.

Where exactly on the map was the kingdom of David and Soloman before the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt? Where did they return to after they were freed from Egypt? Seems to me a long time before 1948.

Here's the borders as I've studied them. Note to the size of the area controlled by the Philistines and the Phoenicians.

http://encarta.msn.com/media_461532970/Kingdom_of_Israel.html

[Sayhey]

Where exactly on the map was the kingdom of David and Soloman before the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt? Where did they return to after they were freed from Egypt? Seems to me a long time before 1948.

And most Palestinians believe they are the descendant of the Canaanites, who pre-date the Kingdoms of David and Soloman as well as Moses. If you can find someone who can really trace their ancestors back to these times they might have a claim on a piece of land. Truth is most folks, on both sides, have no such ancient claims in their families. Instead, what is used is a religious claim to the land. Works if you believe in a particular god and believe he handed out land deeds, but otherwise isn't much of a basis to say which land belongs to whom. We used the same idea, calling it "manifest destiny," to rob the Native Americans of their land. It's about time to stop using God as an excuse for aggression.

[hulugu]

Where exactly on the map was the kingdom of David and Soloman before the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt? Where did they return to after they were freed from Egypt? Seems to me a long time before 1948.

Here's the borders as I've studied them. Note to the size of the area controlled by the Philistines and the Phoenicians.

http://encarta.msn.com/media_461532970/Kingdom_of_Israel.html

So, you're saying that a claim to land 3,000 years ago has more presidence than 100 years? Somehow, I think the French would be less than excited if the Italians tried to use the same logic, or imagine the reaction if Mexico tried to seize Texas with the same idea.

[Swarmlord]

So, you're saying that a claim to land 3,000 years ago has more presidence than 100 years? Somehow, I think the French would be less than excited if the Italians tried to use the same logic, or imagine the reaction if Mexico tried to seize Texas with the same idea.

You talking about recreating the Ottoman empire? I guess it all depends on how far people want to unwind what's been done. Since Israel was created and is now history (even more recent than 100 years!) and the Palestineans are welcome to the land they currently are on, sound like everyone should just concern themselves with the plot of dirt they're living on.

[obeygiant]

You talking about recreating the Ottoman empire? I guess it all depends on how far people want to unwind what's been done. Since Israel was created and is now history (even more recent than 100 years!) and the Palestineans are welcome to the land they currently are on, sound like everyone should just concern themselves with the plot of dirt they're living on.

Good idea. What does everybody think is going to happen? Israel just pack up and say "hey, sorry, we're gunna take off now. please forward our mail to Baja, Mexico, we bought it from the Mexicans and we're starting up a tourism enterprise."

The entire argument of "who was where first" is completely pointless.

[freeny]

Israel is holding several thousand Palestinian prisoners, and is effectively occupying a huge swathe of Palestinian territory. Are you also assuming this would no longer apply, and that all confiscated lands would be returned? The playing field is nothing like level.

No, what I am saying is that negotiations are impossible because the Palestinians wont stop stabbing Israel in the eye long enough to negotiate anything.

Continuing down the eye for an eye path you are running with has never solved anything. How far do you want to go back?

Laying down arms on both sides and creating an atmosphere where real discussion is possible will.

It dont believe the Palestinians are capable of this.

[Sayhey]

No, what I am saying is that negotiations are impossible because the Palestinians wont stop stabbing Israel in the eye long enough to negotiate anything.

Continuing down the eye for an eye path you are running with has never solved anything. How far do you want to go back?

Laying down arms on both sides and creating an atmosphere where real discussion is possible will.

It dont believe the Palestinians are capable of this.

Do you honestly believe the Palestinians under Israeli rule, to use your colorful phrase, haven't been "stabbed in the eye" every day for the last 60 years? The idea that this is all because of Palestinian violence that is somehow inherent in the Palestinian character is not only offensive and untrue, but shows how deep one can buy into delusional thinking. The violence is pushed on both sides for a political agenda. You may agree with the agenda of one side and not see anything of value in the other's viewpoint, but don't distort history to justify the delusion.

[obeygiant]

The idea that this is all because of Palestinian violence that is somehow inherent in the Palestinian character is not only offensive and untrue, but shows how deep one can buy into delusional thinking.

Havent you ever seen Bowling for Columbine (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310793/)? Michael Moore makes the case that America is a violent nation by contrasting murder rates in Detroit and across the river in Windsor. He's making a case against the American Character. So who's delusional? The Palestinians as of today (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/30/ap/world/mainD8MVBMOO3.shtml) broke a nine month cease fire by killing three Israelis in Eilat. Now these are extremists, not joe sixpack palestinian. However joe sixpack palestinian voted in Hamas into power in their elections. So what does that tell you that the people voted an extremist government into power? Does it seem soooo unreasonable to you that the Palestinian people may be more violent than others?

[Sayhey]

Havent you ever seen Bowling for Columbine (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310793/)? Michael Moore makes the case that America is a violent nation by contrasting murder rates in Detroit and across the river in Windsor. He's making a case against the American Character. So who's delusional? The Palestinians as of today (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/30/ap/world/mainD8MVBMOO3.shtml) broke a nine month cease fire by killing three Israelis in Eilat. Now these are extremists, not joe sixpack palestinian. However joe sixpack palestinian voted in Hamas into power in their elections. So what does that tell you that the people voted an extremist government into power? Does it seem soooo unreasonable to you that the Palestinian people may be more violent than others?

Yes, it is entirely unreasonable to characterize one people as more violent than another based solely on ethnicity. If, like Moore, one gives a historical context for violence then we have a basis for a reasonable discussion, but to put out the idea an inherent ethnic propensity for violence is, indeed, very offensive. As way of an example of how this is so, if on the basis of the following information from Amnesty International (http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engMDE150932006?open&of=eng-ISR) I charged that Israelis were four times more likely to kill people than Palestinians based on being Israeli and not based on government policies, I would justly be criticized as being anti-Semitic.
Some 4,000 Palestinians, most of them unarmed civilians and including some 800 children, have been killed by Israeli forces in disproportionate and reckless bombardments as well as shelling and shooting by Israeli forces into densely populated residential areas and refugee camps throughout the Occupied Territories in the past six years. In the same period some 1,100 Israelis, 700 of them civilians and including 120 children, have been killed by Palestinian armed groups in shooting attacks, suicide bombings in civilian areas and indiscriminate rocket attacks. Tens of thousands of Palestinians and thousands of Israelis have been injured, many maimed for life.

Is it offensive to talk about the inherent violent character of any people? You bet it is.

btw, in answer to your question, yes, I've seen Bowling for Columbine.

[dogbone]

Israel is ... effectively occupying a huge swathe of Palestinian territory.


Seeing as you want to bring this up, why don't we ask the rhetorical question how did Israel come to be occupying any Palestinian territory.

Do you honestly believe the Palestinians under Israeli rule, to use your colorful phrase, haven't been "stabbed in the eye" every day for the last 60 years?

And do *you* honestly believe that the Palestinians haven't been stabbing themselves in the eye since the 2nd intifada?

[dogbone]

Rather than us all going over the 'who was there first' and other well done themes, we could choose to keep the thread on topic, which basically is...

Hamas is still committed to eradicating Israel. In fact they are so intent on this that they are virtually at war with their own people in order to fight for this goal.

So I say what chance is there of peace when Hamas will fight their own people in order to achieve their aims. Sort of reminds me of that scene in The Long Goodbye, where the gangster calls his girlfriend in then, in front of Marlowe, he smashes a bottle across her face, then say. "That's someone I love, you I don't even like".

[Sayhey]

And do *you* honestly believe that the Palestinians haven't been stabbing themselves in the eye since the 2nd intifada?

I've many disagreements with the polices of parties on both sides of this conflict, so, yes, I think that there are actions by Palestinian leaders that I think are counterproductive to their aims. I can say the same for Israeli politicians from all along the political spectrum. Not really my point, but in response to your question there it is. The point I was making is that Palestinians have been subject to tremendous violence under Israeli rule. It shouldn't be news to anyone, but it is true.

[spork183]

Hamas is still committed to eradicating Israel. In fact they are so intent on this that they are virtually at war with their own people in order to fight for this goal.

The most compelling visuals that come out of this whole mess for me are the pictures of adults, and their small children are waving guns or knives. When you are indoctrinated at such an early age, what hope is there for breaking the cycle? I just can't see a philosophy that rewards killing yourself and as many of the other side as possible. Neither side is blameless, but neither side is strong enough to effect change without force. Peace? In the Middle East? Never gonna happen.:(

[dogbone]

The point I was making is that Palestinians have been subject to tremendous violence under Israeli rule. It shouldn't be news to anyone, but it is true.

Yes but if we go back into, not how Palestine came to be occupied, but more recent history, we will see that the main opportunity/turning point, came at the Camp David meeting where a pretty good offer was made to Arafat, but he didn't even attempt to use this as a basis for further negotiation, he immediately declared a new intifada and it's been pretty well downhill from there.

But what say ye to the fact that Hamas is fighting their own people (Palestinians) for the right to have an agenda that calls for the ultimate eradication of Israel, so if they fight their own guys so vehemently what possibility is there of them making or indeed wanting peace with Israel.

[Sayhey]

Yes but if we go back into, not how Palestine came to be occupied, but more recent history, we will see that the main opportunity/turning point, came at the Camp David meeting where a pretty good offer was made to Arafat, but he didn't even attempt to use this as a basis for further negotiation, he immediately declared a new intifada and it's been pretty well downhill from there.

But what say ye to the fact that Hamas is fighting their own people (Palestinians) for the right to have an agenda that calls for the ultimate eradication of Israel, so if they fight their own guys so vehemently what possibility is there of them making or indeed wanting peace with Israel.

No, the Taba negotiations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taba_Summit) came after the breakdown of talks at Camp David and used the Camp David discussions as a starting point. I've no problem with Arafat's decision not to sign the deal at Camp David, but I do have a problem with the Israelis walking away from on-going negotiations because the new Sharon government had no intention of reaching an accord that could be acceptable to Palestinians.

With Hamas, I've no sympathy for their politics or their goals, but I also don't think it is possible to tell the Palestinians who they want to represent them. Israel has been setting conditions on who they would negotiate with for decades and it hasn't brought peace any closer. Do you really think Israel will set down at the negotiating table with Hamas and give away Israel's existence? Of course not. Then, what is the danger of including them in negotiations? If anything it would force Hamas to set conditions with which they would reach a peaceful settlement with Israel or be exposed as religious zealots they are.

[hulugu]

You talking about recreating the Ottoman empire? I guess it all depends on how far people want to unwind what's been done. Since Israel was created and is now history (even more recent than 100 years!) and the Palestineans are welcome to the land they currently are on, sound like everyone should just concern themselves with the plot of dirt they're living on.

No, you're misunderstanding my point. I don't want to reform the Ottoman Empire, I just see that a historical claim from two generations ago is more meaningful than one from 3,000 years ago. I wouldn't expect the Holy Roman Empire to be reformed and for the French to just pack up their stuff and move.
Let's be honest here. No one group gets to pretend to be the protagonists in this story. The British made agreements for land they didn't really own. The Arabs who owned the land were more than happy to sell worthless desert to the Jews, without any regard to the Palestinians. And the Zionists used a combination of tactics ranging from the honest purchasing of land to the bombing of a British police station. There are no good guys in this story, and anyone who brings up the 'well we owned it first' is just manipulating the argument for the century they believe has meaning (ignoring all the others in the process.)

[mactastic]

But what say ye to the fact that Hamas is fighting their own people (Palestinians) for the right to have an agenda that calls for the ultimate eradication of Israel, so if they fight their own guys so vehemently what possibility is there of them making or indeed wanting peace with Israel.
You're certainly correct that political infighting makes it harder for those among radicals who want peace to negotiate with the opposing side, but don't forget that it wasn't all that long ago that a radical Jew assassainated Yitzak Rabin because Rabin wanted peace. I'd call that pretty clear evidence of political infighting on the Israeli side as well, or Israeli extremists "fighting their own people" if you will.

You're seeing only one side of this issue again...

[freeny]

Do you honestly believe the Palestinians under Israeli rule, to use your colorful phrase, haven't been "stabbed in the eye" every day for the last 60 years? The idea that this is all because of Palestinian violence that is somehow inherent in the Palestinian character is not only offensive and untrue, but shows how deep one can buy into delusional thinking. The violence is pushed on both sides for a political agenda. You may agree with the agenda of one side and not see anything of value in the other's viewpoint, but don't distort history to justify the delusion.

And the cycle continues....:rolleyes:

I dont care who is right or wrong nor do I want to take sides.
I do know the Israelis have attempted on several occasions to lay down arms in hopes the Palestinians do the same.... to no avail.

The Israelis have shown they are willing to negotiate by giving back land and the Palestinians continue their attacks.

The Palastinians need to show a willingness to negotiate but they still continue to attack.

How do you negotiate with people who want to kil you?.....

This cycle has no end.

Im not saying the Palestinians haven't been wronged, they have. but they cant expect Israel to move if they are always on the defensive.

[Swarmlord]

Despite the circumstances which resulted in the current property lines drawn for Israel and Palestine, I still can't understand why the Palestineans can't make something out of what they got and then peacefully negotiate as adults with their neighbors. No one wants to negotiate anything with an angry teenager who's solution to everything is to destroy everything and everyone around them until someone gives them something.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Despite the circumstances which resulted in the current property lines drawn for Israel and Palestine, I still can't understand why the Palestineans can't make something out of what they got and then peacefully negotiate as adults with their neighbors. No one wants to negotiate anything with an angry teenager who's solution to everything is to destroy everything and everyone around them until someone gives them something.And thats why they are living in poverty, its now the standard way of life. Arafat was given 99% of everything he wanted and he said no.

[obeygiant]

If, like Moore, one gives a historical context for violence then we have a basis for a reasonable discussion,

Well, how much historical context do you need? Does suicide bomber ring any bells? Its my view that there is plenty of historical context to go around on this one.


Is it offensive to talk about the inherent violent character of any people? You bet it is.

I really dont think its offensive to talk about violent charateristics in a group.
A single person can be more violent than another for a host of reasons so why couldnt a group of people have violent characteristics. I'm sure the palestinians love their children and they probably wish to live in peace. But how much context does it take to say, "Hey, those extremists have taken over the hearts and minds of the others and are pushing violence on the populace."

[Swarmlord]

And thats why they are living in poverty, its now the standard way of life. Arafat was given 99% of everything he wanted and he said no.

I'm sure that Arafat understood that keeping his people poor and in a state of complete discontent while blaming someone else for their plight (in this case the universal scapgoat - the Jooozz) would keep him in power. Leaders like Arafat are great at fomenting fanatics, but terrible at running an efficient, peaceful country.

[Sayhey]

Well, how much historical context do you need? Does suicide bomber ring any bells? Its my view that there is plenty of historical context to go around on this one.

I really dont think its offensive to talk about violent charateristics in a group.
A single person can be more violent than another for a host of reasons so why couldnt a group of people have violent characteristics. I'm sure the palestinians love their children and they probably wish to live in peace. But how much context does it take to say, "Hey, those extremists have taken over the hearts and minds of the others and are pushing violence on the populace."

I don't want to talk past each other, so let's be clear, ok? If you want to talk about the politics in a given country or within a given ethnic group, I've no problem with that discussion. I have no problem with discussing the very violent lives the people of Israel and Palestine are forced to live by their respective leaders and by the political context they find themselves in. What I do have a major problem with is ascribing inherent violent characteristics to a particular ethnic group. This is called racism. It is racism if it is directed against Palestinians. It is racism if it is directed at Israelis. It is racism if it is directed at ANY ethnic group. Simple?

[Macky-Mac]

.... I still can't understand why the Palestineans can't make something out of what they got and then peacefully negotiate as adults with their neighbors......

For some of them it's a religious issue.

from the founding covenant of the islamic resistance Movement (better known here as Hamas);

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that."

there are certainly others, Fatah for example, who don't believe this but the last round of elections brought the Islamicists to power so they're having a major impact right now

[hulugu]

And the cycle continues....:rolleyes:

I dont care who is right or wrong nor do I want to take sides.
I do know the Israelis have attempted on several occasions to lay down arms in hopes the Palestinians do the same.... to no avail.

The Israelis have shown they are willing to negotiate by giving back land and the Palestinians continue their attacks.

The Palastinians need to show a willingness to negotiate but they still continue to attack.

How do you negotiate with people who want to kil you?.....

This cycle has no end.

Im not saying the Palestinians haven't been wronged, they have. but they cant expect Israel to move if they are always on the defensive.

One of the things to keep in mind is neither group is a single monolithic power, rather there are many smaller groups that compete for power and have different aims. Remember there are radicals on both sides, Jews who think nothing of shooting up a mosque or someone like Rabin, and Palestinians who believe that blowing up a cafe will ultimately achieve their various aims.
The Israelis have to recognize this, and understand that they cannot demand complete security—giving Hamas a chance to stall negotiations with a single bomb.

[solvs]

Leaders like Arafat are great at fomenting fanatics, but terrible at running an efficient, peaceful country.

Hm, sounds like someone else we know.

These threads always go the same way. Hamas is bad, Israel is also bad, you're a racist, you're an anti-Semite. Fun stuff. I'm not going to say it's all Israel's fault, but I'm not going to say they're completely without fault. They're there, Palestinians need to understand they're not going anywhere, but they both need to work together towards a common goal. Something I don't see either side doing, despite a lot of talk.

Let's just agree that everyone is making things worse and realize the irony of them fighting over holy land.

[skunk]

They're there, Palestinians need to understand they're not going anywhere, but they both need to work together towards a common goal. Something I don't see either side doing, despite a lot of talk. Since Arafat's (possibly engineered) departure, there is nobody on the Palestinian side for Israel to negotiate with, even if they wanted to, which they may not.

[solvs]

there is nobody on the Palestinian side for Israel to negotiate with, even if they wanted to, which they may not.

Pretty much the whole situation in a nutshell.

[Macky-Mac]

Since Arafat's (possibly engineered) departure, there is nobody on the Palestinian side for Israel to negotiate with, even if they wanted to, which they may not.

You don't think Abbas would negotiate with Israel if Hamas would let him?

[Macky-Mac]

There's another deal between Fatah and Hamas to stop the fighting and maybe this time it will last longer than the other recent truces. This one was negotiated between Abbas and some of the Hamas officials who are based in Syria and are higher up in the organiztion than the Palestian prime minister was also present at the talks. So perhaps the Palestinians will find a way to stop killing each other?

Unfortuantely the prospects for talks between the Palestinians and Israel don't look good. Here's a quote taken from a report on the al-Jazeera english web site;

"Hamas has said it will never recognise Israel and that an agreement on a Palestinian unity government does not change the movement's position.
Nizar Rayyan, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza, said on Friday: "We will never recognise Israel. There is nothing called Israel, neither in reality nor in the imagination."

His comments were endorsed by a Hamas spokesman...."

here's a link to the report if you're interesterd in reading it; http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/FCBCFEEA-B577-45AB-A4F7-670A4E6F92B8.htm