Hamas says to fight on after Israeli ceasefire (unilateral cease-fire, unilateral deja-vu?)

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mick on January 18, 2009 at 5:49am

There are things to be pessimistic about and things to be optimistic about in a rundown of today's newpaper reports. It seems from the above and this quote, that Hamas is prepared to fight to the last Palestinian civilian "We will continue the resistance operations for as long as there is one Zionist soldier in the Gaza Strip," Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said. "We will continue regardless of the price."

On the other hand, this excerpt from the "Australian" leaves room for some optimism: "But amid the gloom there are some signs of hope. Parts of the West Bank give cause for optimism. The town of Jenin, itself heavily damaged in 2002 after an Israeli attack, has become a possible model.
So safe has the town become that only recently US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited, something that would have been unthinkable two years ago. Jenin is run by the Palestinian Authority, and many of its police and security officers are being sent to Jordan for training. The stability they have brought has led to an expansion of commerce in a world economy in trouble. Jenin presents one of the few growing economies".

And perhaps the fighting is over, for this AP report indicates despite having tens of thousands of fighters, Hamas is fleeing Gaza city: "ISRAEL's cabinet was preparing to endorse a ceasefire to its 20-day offensive in the Gaza Strip this weekend amid reports Hamas defences had collapsed and the militants had fled from the centre of Gaza City".

Let's all hope that this can herald a beginning along the road to peace, as happened in Jenin.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron on January 18, 2009 at 7:29am

Mick; how many soldiers are sleeping in your living room tonight?

I don't agree with Hamas; but why don't people get that as long as Israel is going to have 18 and 19 year old males dictate how Palestinians can go about their lives; there is going to be war in Palestine?

Israel says they are not occupying Palestine But they say they are not taking their troops out of Gaza. So; which is it? Is Palestine occupied by IDF or not?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mick on January 18, 2009 at 8:48am

Ron for three years there wasn't a single "18 an 19 year male" in Gaza, for three years Gazans could do what thye liked in Gaza, for three years the Palestinian government had the possibility to show the world what a wonderful society Palestinians can buid if only given the chance. At the time the whole world said "here is the chance the Palestinians have been waiting for. But Hamas, the elected government began the missiles and mortars on the very day that Israel withdrew and hasn't stopped since. Money, aid, fuel ... all hijacked for the purpose of killing Israeli civilians.

It's not a chicken and egg theory, Ron. To say that Hamas provoked Israel doesn't put it strongly enough, Hamas deliberately made life unbearable for Israelis in the hope that the IDF would respond. My heart breaks when I see dead children and civilians, but where we differ is that I am furious at Hamas for these deaths and for forcing Israel's children, those "18 and 19 year old" boys you mentioned, to live with it for the rest of their lives. Israel had no more choices ... Hamas had them all, and chose this, and still does .... "We will continue the resistance operations for as long as there is one Zionist soldier in the Gaza Strip," Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said. "We will continue regardless of the price."

... regardless of the price, Ron, and there's the problem.

As to your questions, Israel will leave Gaza once the elements to stop weapons smuggling are in place. Israel has never wanted to be in Gaza. They tried to give it to the Egyptians as part of that peace deal, but the Egyptians refused. Israel will get out, and if the Palestinians truly want to build something of their own, they will vote Hamas out, and will start building Gaza ... and there will be peace, Ron, there will be peace.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron on January 18, 2009 at 6:02pm

I am furious with Hamas also. People who see one side completely evil and the other perfectly pure are not dealing with reality.

Anyone dealing with what was Palestine 3 years ago; or 70 years ago isn't dealing honestly with today.
Mick; research this quote for yourself. See who agreed with me that the past isn't the present. Then let's talk about Palestine of the NOW and what it should be next year at this time. Of course you want the Palestine of the past. Everyone sees that.

"One cannot and must not try to erase the past merely because it does not fit the present".

Of course Israel had more choices. Even David Sternlight said Israel has many choices. They chose
bombing Palestine when there were hundreds if not thousands of international tourists in Palestine
celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ. You don't think Ehud Barak forget it was Christmas do you? It was message to all the Christians in the world also.

The only choice Hamas had and more importantly has not is to accept occupation or fight it. If your neighbor took over your living room NOW; what would you do? Be honest; how would you feel about that neighbor?

Why is regardless of the price the problem? Are you also saying that because Israel is stronger and can outlast Hamas, might makes right and they might as roll over and accept the rape of Palestine as tolerable as possible?

Don't you really understand why Palestinians don't accept armed Israeli soldiers walking through the neighborhoods of Palestine? The soldiers of Israel in Palestine can enter the home of anyone they want, whenever they want, take anything from that house, destroy anything in that house and that is ok you you?

That's what has been done. That's the kind of thing most people find unacceptable.

Regarding weapons; I believe Palestine will agree not to arm itself the moment Israel agrees to surrender all it's weapons and not rearm itself. I'm sure you agree Palestinians have every much a right to protection as Israelis do.

Isn't it a father's right and duty to protect his children no matter the real estate they are living on?

There hasn't been peace in Palestine for years and years. Israel invaded Palestine decades before Hamas was created.

Give back what you took or compensate the people you took it from. Simple path to the beginning of peace. Isn't that what you'd want if someone stole your property? That's the modern history of Palestine.

A Just Peace. I'm sure you agree with that.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 18, 2009 at 6:56pm

Reply by Basil Keilani 1 second ago
Delete Well, for one the Jewish community from what I can see what's going on in America doesn't quite concur with the way things handled. Some do and some don't. More of them need to come on mepeace and present their perspectives like the people from Jstreet. Some of them are horrified by the onslaught, though many British and American Jews think Hamas, is rightfully, a nasty organization with a nasty record. Of course, some of those Jews have recently gotten assaulted in Britain including rabbis by those who didn't like them dissenting. Imagine, beating even rabbis. That's horrible.

Anyway, you do not build a state when you are occupied. Mick is talking about Palestinians should have shown they are capable of having a state and what have you i.e. to prove themselves all the while discounting that when you kill Hamas members in the West Bank during a cease-fire in Gaza and you make no real moves for a final settlement or make no real moves to dismantle settlements, then all this talk about Palestinians building a state when they are losing day by day is really illogical.
It makes no sense. What state? The people are occupied. Palestinians don't need to prove that they are not barbarians. That's the implication. It's this condescending orientalism type tone.
It is the occupier taking a higher tone with the occupied.

As far as Hamas, it is a terrorist organization, but it doesn't give Israel the right to engage in state sponsored war crimes and to terrorize the Palestinians. It puts itself on the level of Hamas if not lower in that way.

You can't simply ignore the Palestinian perspective and dismiss them as barbarians who are simply violent and decontextualize them from the occupation. Much of the world doesn't seem to quite buy it even though they don't like Hamas and nor do I. The occupation created Hamas, the settlements, the oppression, and again the occupation, the killing of thousands of Palestinians over the years, the imprisonment of thousands and the torture of thousands. People aren't born terrorists, and you never have an occupation without some terrorism, unfortunately. It is interesting that Livni's own father was enaged in a terrorist group. This talk about the other side being moral makes no sense. What about proving you can end the occupation, talk about a reasonable final settlement? Before people lecture about civility don't forget what happened to the Palestinians in establishing a state.

As far as the statement, no matter the price, it means that no matter the price, Palestinians do not want to be occupied, do not want to submit, and that a life with chains is not a life for them, and for Arabs and Palestinians there is no honor in being occupied, there is no life in being occupied, and building an economy withot control of your borders, the sea does not jive with logic. Seriously, this talk about building some kallipolis in a Gaza under occupation a shiny Beverly Hills is a joke. It's like a big cage, a big prison, and the occupation is a big prison for the Palestinians, and the Israelis are their jailers complaining about prison riots, while their prisoners are guilty for being in their way, in the wrong place and wrong time. Their jailers they are, and they use old arguments about the others being like heathens to justify "pacifying" them. This old colonial type talk has been heard before..... It doesn't work.

I am glad he feels bad that all those kids are dying, and I think Hamas's political platform is not what I support. At any rate, when the elections were forced on he Palestinians, Israeli intelligence knew it was quite possible Hamas would tie with FATAH. Hamas was becoming more popular.
The excuse for the elections was that there was no proper partner, because the Palestinians didn't have elections. Bush bought this from Sharon, and then we all got Hamas. So you can blame your government partially for this mess in Gaza. Don't forget that.

Thanks..

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on January 18, 2009 at 9:29am

Dear Ron,

There will be war as long as people do not want to live together with minimal civility. Firing rockets into Israel and attacking Israeli people is no indicator of minimal civility.

Israel has demonstrated its willingness and ability to exercise control over BOTH its extremists and its enemies. For things to change, the Palestinians and their allies must FIRST demonstrate their willingness and ability to exercise control over the Palestinian extremists.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 18, 2009 at 5:03pm

Paul, I cannot comment satisfactorily on your comment that Israel exercises control over its extremists and its enemies. I have a big question mark over that considering what many militant settlers do and have done, but that's another issue, and some of the soldiers sometimes get assaulted by Jewish militants.
From my reading of history and the Palestinian and Israeli leaders they have both used violence as political tools and restrained themselves whenever they felt it was good for whatever their political agenda was, and that's the reality, but that is way too deep for this thread.

I agree there has to be restraint on both sides and the includes the Palestinian side. I do not believe in firing rockets on civilians or bombing them. I am sure you know that.

It seems like here is what happened: Hamas is not a group with everyone thinking the same way and following one leader like the PLO. They have a shura council of 50 members, and they have different factions. After they said they would continue since Israel did not acknowledge them and didn't respond to any of their demands, they did an about face, because some of the factions didn't agree with that idea.
So, the moderate faction or pragmatic asked for a halt for strategic reasons, but they can't hold the other factions back without any gains. That's my take. Israel's Government (the politicians) and Hamas are playing political chess. Israel made a move, and Hamas was going to make a certain move and then changed its mind. That's all I can say about that.

The Palestinian side sees no reason to restrain themselves so much unless they feel Israel wants to reciprocate and actually reward them for not engaging in resistance as they view that resistance to be.
You may not believe that. It is up to you, but Palestinians are not simply people who love violence and blood. For them, honor and dignity is more important than living in some cases, and if they feel that is not honored, they will go into combat. So, if Israel's politicians are serious about peace (I don't mean about the Israeli people) they will acknowledge the needs of the other side. Israel is under pressure to stop the fighting, and Hamas within its factions has disagreements just as the Israeli Government does.
They are both wanting minimum political risks to themselves.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on January 18, 2009 at 9:36am

It may well be deja vu all over again, unless Egypt and the international community (as they promised) block Hamas's and other Palestinian extremist's access to arms.

My late father used to say: "We'll see!" said the blind man.

Hamas got the predictable martyr's it wanted. So I guess Hamas wonand the Palestinian people lose again...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Seth Levy on January 18, 2009 at 4:48pm

16 attacks (not including one stopped just before it occurred) fired from Gaza into Israel AFTER the one sided cease fire went into effect. Where is the condemnation of this from the crowd?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 18, 2009 at 5:19pm

Seth, Israel bombed Gaza like crazy just before voting on a unilateral cease-fire. I am against attacks from all sides whether Hamas or Israel. I want peace, not violence. If you are saying, Hamas should simply stop firing whenever Israel feels like stopping its machine, I am not sure if I think that unilateral actions are good when negotiated solutions are usually better. Perhaps, there is some kind of agreement between Egypt and Israel. You know behind closed doors there are things Israeli politicians, Hamas, and Egypt know that we don't know. Many things are not told to us by them. Don't forget that. We condemn this or that, but in reality we could condemn all the politicians on moral grounds. I posted this thread, because I didn't want Hamas, even if it didn't like a unilateral cease-fire, to attack. It makes no sense from a strategic point of view or a moral point of view. You need two-sided solutions if not three sided. People need to talk, negotiate, withdraw, be humane, not bomb or launch rockets.

▶ Reply to This