Patterico's Pontifications

1/26/2006

Question After the Hamas Victory

Filed under: General,Terrorism — Patterico @ 11:07 pm



So, I assume we’re not giving any more money to the Palestinians . . . right?

17 Responses to “Question After the Hamas Victory”

  1. Yes, no aid to the Palestinians. And it’s also important to keep Holocaust deniers out of the U.S. Congress, even though the Los Angeles Times has just endorsed one for a House seat, according to the Little Green Footballs blog.

    And don’t miss the links in Comment #4 in the LGF thread.

    Justice Frankfurter (2dcd84)

  2. You know what happens when you ass-u-me, don’t you?

    Dana (3e4784)

  3. We give but a tiny bit compared to what Europe provides. I hope that we do stop payments, but I doubt the Europeans will do anything beyond a gesture.

    So long as Hamas isn’t too loud about destroying Israel, they’ll get plenty of Euros.

    Perhaps Hamas will adopt the fiction of separate political and armed groups that worked so well for the IRA.

    After shaking my magic 8-ball, I see that the answer to the question: will Hamas will calm their rhetoric over the next few months?, is *signs point to yes*.

    They’re feeling their oats at the moment, so anything they say is likely to be bombastic. Give them time, let them get used to governing, and they’ll see the usefulness of dealing with Israel.

    Pigilito (ccd1d3)

  4. Pig wrote:

    They’re feeling their oats at the moment, so anything they say is likely to be bombastic. Give them time, let them get used to governing, and they’ll see the usefulness of dealing with Israel.

    Uhhh, Hamas has been very honest about their intentions; their charter states that no part of the Palestinian Waqf, by which they mean the entirety of Israel as well as Judea, Samaria and Gaza, may be surrendered or negotiated away. Considering that they have been willing to die for such beliefs, it seems to me that they must take them seriously.

    Hamas is not interested in a negotiated peace with Israel; they are interested in a victory over Israel, one that destroys Israel as a nation. Since that position of Hamas was certainly well known to the Palestinian people, that a significant majority of them voted for Hamas indicates that the majority of Palestinians are still seeking victory, not peace.

    Dana (3e4784)

  5. One clarification: It’s not that they seek “victory”; it’s that they seek annihilation.

    Attila (Pillage Idiot) (dfa1f1)

  6. Everyone remembers “Those that do not learn from history…”
    Remember also, Hitler was duly elected by the German people.

    Paul Albers (7494b1)

  7. “We give but a tiny bit compared to what Europe provides.”

    I hope we give but a tiny bit, however, I suspect it’s much more than most Americans would approve. And, I’m also unwilling to assume that Europe provides much at all. Does anyone have good numbers for comparison and analysis?

    Black Jack (71415b)

  8. Jack, 1¢ would be more than I would approve.

    Dana (3e4784)

  9. The EU gave some $600 million to Palestinians, while the US provided $20 million. More than the tiny amount I claimed, but still relatively small.

    My point about Hamas feeling their oats following their victory is valid. For some time prior to the election Hamas had toned down their rhetoric regarding Israel (I note they have not renounced their desire to obliterate Israel, but have lessened their public calls for the obliteration).

    Hamas must now take over a corrupt and bankrupt government. In order to justify the faith of those who voted for them they will have to put all their energies into rebuilding the collapsed infrastructure, etc.

    I certainly don’t expect any sudden change in rhetoric, but I do see a more pragmatic Hamas emerging. One that will see the utility of dealing with Israel.

    A somewhat analogous situation occurred recently in Malaysia. A hard core Islamic party won control of a state and immediately sought to put its convictions into practice. They didn’t get far before they saw it as a waste of time. Politicians being what they are, the party soon concentrated on governing well in order that they could be re-elected.

    The same will happen to Hamas. Moreover, the soft power wielded be the international community is considerable. Without the money they provide the PA simply doesn’t exist.

    This is not to say that Hamas won’t continue to support limited terrorism, but I do feel that their election is not the catastrophe it is being held out as.

    In any case, Israel will not stand idlely by. A few assinations of the newly public Hamas personel will effect a change in Hamas’ rhetoric and operations.

    Pigilito (b7f574)

  10. Pigilito wrote:

    In any case, Israel will not stand idlely by. A few assinations of the newly public Hamas personel will effect a change in Hamas’ rhetoric and operations.

    Uhhh, Israel has already been carrying out targeted assassinations against Hamas; I must have missed the “change in Hamas’ rhetoric and operations” that caused.

    This is not to say that Hamas won’t continue to support limited terrorism, but I do feel that their election is not the catastrophe it is being held out as.

    Oh, I never said it was a catastrophe! I see it as a clarifying event, telling everybody what was already known, at least was known by those who were willing to look at the situation clearly, rather than to be (mis)guided by their own wishful thinking.

    Dana (3e4784)

  11. We’ll keep giving it, but insist that the UN monitor it to avoid misuse.

    Kevin Murphy (9982dd)

  12. 9/11 took the measure of Palestine’s “Arab Street.” Recall the celebration of bloody death in America. As we watched NY’s Twin Towers come down, we also watched Palestinians dance in the streets, as they openly gloated at our suffering.

    Black Jack (9f37aa)

  13. Dana, please don’t think I was responding to you when I used the the catastrophe phrase. Our opinions are closer than you seem to think.

    Regarding the assassinations, you can’t have been paying much attention over the past few months as Hamas has clearly lowered its rhetoric level (not to mention their level of suicide bombings).

    Recall also that the PLO resisted for the longest time to remove the destroy Israel plank from their charter. Yet Israel still negotiated with them.

    In any case, time will tell if Hamas changes meaningfully.

    Pigilito (b7f574)

  14. Hamas can no more change itself into a legitimate governing organization than Osama bin Ladin can change himself into Little Red Riding Hood.

    Bloodthirsty mass murdering terrorists are exactly what they are, and no amount of wishful thinking or pretending is ever going to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.

    The painful reality is clearly before us. We can hope for the best, but we best prepare for the worst.

    Black Jack (9f37aa)

  15. Black Jack: I absolutely agree with your final comment. I hope neither you nor anyone reading the comments here assumes I think Hamas will make a complete turnaround and embrace Israel.

    I do think that Hamas, with the burden of governing and a suspension of EU and US money, will quickly come to the realization that talking with Israel is in its best interests.

    I’m old enough to remember the same sorts of comments (a leopard can’t change its spots, etc.) being directed at the PLO. Yet they manged to change enough to make some progress (albeit painfully slow).

    For whatever reason (could be due to Israel having made all Hamas operatives feel less secure) , Hamas has lowered its rhetoric, and level of suicide bombings.

    The newest Economist magazine mentions many of the same points.

    Pigilito (d8bc38)

  16. Pigilito wrote:

    I do think that Hamas, with the burden of governing and a suspension of EU and US money, will quickly come to the realization that talking with Israel is in its best interests.

    I’m old enough to remember the same sorts of comments (a leopard can’t change its spots, etc.) being directed at the PLO. Yet they manged to change enough to make some progress (albeit painfully slow).

    No, the PLO did not change away from being a terrorist organization: al Fatah, the “military wing,” is the home of the al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, the instigators of many terrorist attacks. The PLO has maintained a fiction, like the IRA has with it’s “military wing,” that it’s not entirely a terrorist organization, that it does some good things, too, like the ubiquitous “built schools and hospitals” bovine feces that gets spouted. The late Mr Arafat was directly in charge of al Fatah, and the al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, the entire time he was ostensibly talking peace!

    The PLO and the IRA have adopted the tactics of the Stalinist-era Communists, of telling people just how nice they are, hoping to persuade the idiots sympathetic liberals of how benign they are. Josef Stalin’s government built schools and hospitals, too, and instituted labor unions to boot.

    Dana (9f37aa)

  17. Dana,

    You again mischarachterize my writing–which is aggrevating. Please show exactly where I claim the PLO ceased being a terror organization. I claimed only that they changed enough. Here is proof: did Israel and the PLO negotiate, despite the PLO’s background and aims? The answer is yes. Why did they negotiate? Because the PLO changed enough to accept the existance of Israel.

    From your qoute of my post, it is clear that you think that I feel the PLO turned from terror. This is a serious misreading of my feelings. You should take more care in the future.

    As to Stalin-era Communists telling people how nice they are, what on earth is that supposed to mean? Examples, please. Although if you mean those groups have been two-faced in the past, I am in complete agreement.

    The IRA has the fiction of being two entirely separate wings. They maintain there is no official contact between the two wings; the PLO never made that claim. Arafat was always terroist in chief. Please check your statements more carefully.

    Pigilito (f75664)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0672 secs.