LeT replaces Al-Qaeda as biggest threat to US: Security experts

[S-2]

"You must have some feeling of injustice for the Palestinians, S-2. You can't be this one-sided."

Would you care to stretch yourself and specify, please? I know it can't be that I'd oppose a peace settlement. I don't. "settlement", of course, implies agreement. "agreement" requires no less than two parties. Two parties reaching agreement on a settlement provides all I could ask.

So what, exactly, suggests that I seek an unjust solution?

More to the point, that alone would indicate I have SOME feelings for the Palestinians.

Methinks thou protesteth to mucheth...

 

[DarkStar]

The Gazans could try voting for an organization who's charter isn't explicitly devoted to the destruction of Israel.

The charter is a red herring. The PLO charter has been the same for years after the camp david accords. Then, Israel and the USA said to the PLO, change your charter, and we will remove the settlements. The PLO changed its charter, yet Israeli intransigence remained.

Of course, they might also wear the uniform of an army and avoid booby trapping apartment buildings while using their citizens as human shields.

Oh great. So the Hamas police stations should be located outside town, in the open desert for the covenience of Israeli gunships, so as to stand out as better targets. We have a military barracks in the center of our city in Belgium, so I guess we europeans are also using are citizens as human shields? What impeccable rationale.

In fact, they are welcome to choose battlefields that don't include at all their citizens and valued ammunition resupply centers...errrh, sorry-mosques.

As if the militants have any shortage of houses/buildings to fortify.

You reap what you sow.

An addage you should be mindful of.

May the borders continue to stay closed until HAMAS learns of it's obligations as an elected power and the consequences to it's governed for failing those responsibilities.

What are you talking about. Where was the progress before Hamas entered power? When Arafat was alive, he was considered the problem. They told him to divide powers with his PM, he did that. Still no peace breaktrhough. After he was assasinated, the US/Israelis continued not to honour agreements. The Us/Israel had been procastinating for years, just until the election of Hamas, which gave them an excuse for not doing what they never wanted to do in the first place. Give the Palestians their rightful land.

Didn't Pakistan swear it would eat grass to afford a nuke? Well, if destroying Israel is as important to HAMAS as acquiring a nuke was for Pakistan similar sacrifices seem in order, wouldn't you agree?

Hamas does not want to destroy israel. The Hamas leadership has been on record saying that they are willing to accept a solution revolving around the 67 border.

Renounce the charter, make peace and get on with building what's left of Palestine.

The PLO renounced their charter, but to what avail? There will always be some new excuse brewing in Israeli/US minds.

 

[S-2]

To what avail? Why did the PLO renounce it? For tactical and temporal advantage and now rue doing so? Let's be clear that these issues of semantics aren't the only barriers to progress.

If you want 1967 borders, Dark Star, you'd best find a way to reassure Israel that it's existence is assured as a Jewish state. I've provided A.M. with some food for thought of which I'd encourage you to partake. Two articles that indicate current thinking in many corners.

Hang onto HAMAS charter in the meantime if it means so much. Removing the charter proves little. Keeping it proves a lot. I think every single word is sacred to HAMAS myself.

 

[S-2]

"We have a military barracks in the center of our city in Belgium, so I guess we europeans are also using are citizens as human shields?"

Maybe. Do you fire rockets on Luxemburg from those barracks? If so, I'd say yes.

 

[DarkStar]

The Palestinians strategy has been wrong. They should have demanded the 1948 borders, which seems more fair and legitimate, as the 1948 borders were carved out by the United Nations and European powers, plust a right to return for every single Palestinian to Israel proper.

The problem with the Palestinian negotiating position in demanding the 1967 borders is, that they have no manouvering room, and negotiaters always tend to get less than they first demand. If the Palestinian demand changed to resettlement to the original bordders of 48, the Israelis should climb down.

Another way to resolve this crisis, is for the Palestians to stop all armed and civil struggle, accept their lot, and accept the annexation of Palestine to Israel, as a fait acompli. They should instead start a civil rights movement, in order to get citizenship rights as other israeli arabs, and live in peace and harmony in a Greater Israel, something which Jewish extremists dream of. No need to divide jerusalem, and leave Hebron, just give the Palestians the vote.

 

[DarkStar]

To what avail? Why did the PLO renounce it? For tactical and temporal advantage and now rue doing so? Let's be clear that these issues of semantics aren't the only barriers to progress.

If you want 1967 borders, Dark Star, you'd best find a way to reassure Israel that it's existence is assured as a Jewish state. I've provided A.M. with some food for thought of which I'd encourage you to partake. Two articles that indicate current thinking in many corners.

Hang onto HAMAS charter in the meantime if it means so much. Removing the charter proves little. Keeping it proves a lot. I think every single word is sacred to HAMAS myself.

You have made my point for me. What's written in a charter is not important, what the leaders of the organisation are committing themselves to is what should be considered.

How does a charter threaten the existence of the State of Israel?

Is Hamas really an existential threat to Israel?

Or is this 'threat' exagerated by Israeli politicians in order to drag their feet in a peace process they were coerced to sign by the G. Bush Senior?

Sensible people would go for the latter.

 

[belarusian]

in order to have peace you have to negotiate.
in order to negotiate you have to have a definition of your national interests.

the palestinians never had any definition of their national interests. which means that they can never prioritize anything or compromise anything.

some things in life are more important than other things. everything is not equally important.
palestinians have to negotiate amongst themselves before they can negotiate with anyone else.

but they cant do that because debate itself is discouraged. obviously this applies to pakistan as well. what you have is politics without ideas.

there are absolutely no ideas at stake in the battle between zardari and sharif for example.

 

[S-2]

"Sensible people would go for the latter."

Ah, I see.

Thank you.

 

[S-2]

Do your words here matter? If not, do you enjoy dissemblance?

Words matter-particularly in diplomacy. HAMAS charter is a manifesto and connotes a creed to be followed. It promises the destruction of Israel. It is not renounced. It follows, therefore, that it is embraced.

It is the raison d'etre of HAMAS. It exceeds any obligations of governance and remains the foundation behind the most consistent flow of capital into Gaza.

"Is Hamas really an existential threat to Israel?

Or is this 'threat' exagerated by Israeli politicians in order to drag their feet in a peace process they were coerced to sign by the G. Bush Senior?"

Dark Star, I read it as some of the most vitriolic, poisonous manure spread by man. Were I living next to a government which espoused the values contained therein, I'd be scared sh!tless.

Where they to compound matters by kidnapping soldiers of my nation, send suicide bombers into my neighborhoods and on my buses while firing rockets and mortars for which they've no clue nor care where landing...just so they're fired-

I might want to go to war with them and eradicate their militias and all who'd support such a heinous mockery of civic responsibility and governance.

Because unlike Belgium, in Gaza they shoot from any neighborhood that's convenient into Israel and use hospital basements for military headquarters.

Not a damned thing which I admire about HAMAS. Not one. Not even their so-called mandate of good governance. They've only delivered war to Israel and Fatah. Too busy to do the work for which they were elected but then that's not what their Syrian and Iranian masters told the HAMAS elite hiding away in Damascus.

Nope. Their message to Gaza? Read the charter and you'll know.

 

[KnightRyder]

Do your words here matter? If not, do you enjoy dissemblance?

Words matter-particularly in diplomacy. HAMAS charter is a manifesto and connotes a creed to be followed. It promises the destruction of Israel. It is not renounced. It follows, therefore, that it is embraced.


It is the raison d'etre of HAMAS. It exceeds any obligations of governance and remains the foundation behind the most consistent flow of capital into Gaza.

When it comes to defending Israel is concerned, bias and hypocrisy runs through your lines like there's no tomorrow. Although your writing skills coupled with your ability to sugarcoat messages of hate must be commendable (giving credit where its due), yet your one-sided approach to the Palestine-Israel conflict is so glaring that it would make any sane reader irk.

Consider changing the words Hammas with Israel in your paras, your own writings would give you a sense of ground realities in Palestine today.



Don't mind me asking, is this your religious responsibility to defend Israel's policies?

Where they to compound matters by kidnapping soldiers of my nation, send suicide bombers into my neighborhoods and on my buses while firing rockets and mortars for which they've no clue nor care where landing...just so they're fired-

I might want to go to war with them and eradicate their militias and all who'd support such a heinous mockery of civic responsibility and governance.

Going by your logic and thought process, wouldn't you wanna go to war with zionist extremist settlers that espouse ideology of hatred towards Arabs and Muslims, and have plans of ''greater israel'' from niles to the euphrates. They do the exact same things as you described above but at a much larger scale: confiscate lands by uprooting families, burn Palestinian farms and kill livestock, threat and bully innocent women and children, kidnap civilians, bomb people based on mere suspicions, hijack palestinian cars and assets at whim, and fire and bomb civilians mercilessly?

Because unlike Belgium, in Gaza they shoot from any neighborhood that's convenient into Israel and use hospital basements for military headquarters.

Not a damned thing which I admire about HAMAS. Not one. Not even their so-called mandate of good governance. They've only delivered war to Israel and Fatah. Too busy to do the work for which they were elected but then that's not what their Syrian and Iranian masters told the HAMAS elite hiding away in Damascus.

Hamas has delivered war to Israel?

Utter nonsense.

BBC, Jerusalem Post, and Guardian.uk....and even your own CNN would like to disagree with you.
Check this out:

As funny as it sounds, you're just regurgitating George W. Bush's words. the more i read your posts, the more you remind me of him on foreign affairs issues. all of his tried, tested and failed policies.

But the good thing is that he's no longer in power. and what's better is that American media's and peoples attitude towards palestinians are changing for good.

Nope. Their message to Gaza? Read the charter and you'll know.

So according to your logic, a poorly equiped militia with no military hardware but a clause in their charter that seeks a state's destruction poses a far more dangerous threat to the region than a state equiped with new gen weaponry including nukes and that is actively involved in ethnic cleansing?

 

[S-2]

"your one-sided approach to the Palestine-Israel conflict is so glaring that it would make any sane reader irk."

You mean in favor of a peace settlement? Yes, one-sided in that regard. Please let me know when Israel has an adequate partner for peace in Gaza. They don't now.

"Consider changing the words Hammas with Israel in your paras, your own writings would give you a sense of ground realities in Palestine today."

Actually no, it wouldn't. One of the ground realities most obvious is that Israel AIMS it's weapons. That civilians die, I have little doubt. That they do so by the intent of the IDF, I categorically reject. I see no HINT of this as policy.

I know full well, however, that this policy of targeting civilians is EXACTLY that which drives HAMAS so-called "military operations". I hope you see this notable difference though I seriously question your abilities to recognize such nor it's particular virulence.

That's a ground reality that's totally absent from the muslim narrative here.

"Don't mind me asking, is this your religious responsibility to defend Israel's policies?"

Coming from a muslim, no doubt?

You can't be serious with that question?

"They do the exact same things as you described above but at a much larger scale

Suicide bombers and rocket attacks? Sure they do.

"BBC, Jerusalem Post, and Guardian.uk....and even your own CNN would like to disagree with you."

That wasn't a war. It was a punative operation. The "WAR" started decades ago. You lack perspective.

"But the good thing is that he's no longer in power. and what's better is that American media's and peoples attitude towards palestinians are changing for good."

Perhaps. Depends on your definition of "good". I look for elaboration from you but it really won't matter. Nothing about HAMAS ever changes. Least of all the charter by which they swear much less the leaders who'd be involved in such negotiations.

"So according to your logic, a poorly equiped militia with no military hardware but a clause in their charter that seeks a state's destruction poses a far more dangerous threat to the region than a state equiped with new gen weaponry including nukes and that is actively involved in ethnic cleansing?"

Cute "strawman" supposition. "no military hardware", eh? You lie, sir. They do indeed hold "a clause in their charter that seeks a state's destruction".

Clearly, that doesn't concern you.

Thanks for nothing of substance. You've now taken more of my time than deserved. Please stop with your inane thoughts. They've not yet matured to a useful stage and likely never shall.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The "WAR" started decades ago.

That is correct - through the occupation of Palestinian lands and the expulsion of hundred of thousands of Palestinians, who now live as refugees denied the right to return.

The war is perpetuated by the denial of that right to their homes and lands by the Israelis for racist reasons. It is perpetuated by the continuing occupation and the continued existence and construction of settlements.

When the Israelis can clearly articulate in their 'charter' that they agree to withdraw to 1967 and dismantle all settlements in exchange for peace and recognition is when they actually indicate sincerity towards peace - otherwise they are as DS said, merely perpetuating the conflict in order to avoid returning land and dismantling settlements that are illegal and in violation of UNSC resolutions. And no, a Prime Minister essentially on his way out of power making an statement that is not a State commitment or policy does not count.

Till then they are the same as Hamas - one fires rockets, the other forcible occupies millions in a ghetto prison with frequent military raids and collective punishment.