Also, as an aside, there are several nations that have civil wars before independence, and they've all ended badly. East Timor and Angola immediately spring to mind.
Of course that's one of their goals, but it's not their primary one, and they have shown signs of moderating it. Given the choice between destroying Israel and an independent Palestine, they will choose an independent Palestine.
Of course that's one of their goals, but it's not their primary one, and they have shown signs of moderating it. Given the choice between destroying Israel and an independent Palestine, they will choose an independent Palestine.
As I imagine you have fully read and understood posts 77 and 80, you must realize that your question requires more than just a yes or no. "Destruction" of the State of Israel implies only the Jewish state not the Jewish people. It is a change of govt. type from one which favours the Jewish religion to one which is truly multi-cultural and completely secular. As a goal that is perfectly reasonable but unlikely in the present circumstances. So the 2nd choice is the two-state solution. If Israel could make serious steps toward that I believe the vast majority of Hamas supporters could live with that outcome. None of this would result in the extinction of the Israelis as a people. Nor should it IMO.
Their ultimate goal is not the destruction of Israel, it is the creation of an independent Palestine. They were even willing to negotiate about such a while back. But, to answer your question;
You really think that an independent, democratic Palestine would throw all that away just to destroy Israel? Do you really think that such a state would even be capable of destroying Israel? Of course not. Eventually, Palestine will be independent, and when it is people will be interested in increasing their quality of life, in ensuring their rights are upheld, and in remaining free and independent. Eventually, hatred of Israel will die down, as hatred of Germany and Russia has died down - although hatred of both still exists, it is not the defining factor in most nations.
The danger would come from terrorist groups in a weak independent Palestine, much like the danger in Lebanon comes from terrorist groups. Create a strong, unified independent Palestine and Israel will be considerably safer than now, especially so long as it makes sure it is not a tempting target for any radical revanchists.
Also, as an aside, there are several nations that have civil wars before independence, and they've all ended badly. East Timor and Angola immediately spring to mind.
I agree. Its good to see a sensible contribution from a Muslim Arab point of view, being someone who lives in the culture and understands the subleties of the situation. I wonder what his take is on the discussion I had with the Israeli guy on the other thread where I suggested Marwan Barghouti as a possible secular West Bank leader who has popular support and isn't tarred with the brush of islamicist extremism?
If and only if that power is absolute, which it won't be. Hamas has fully committed itself to democratic politics--again, unlike Hitler, who used democracy with the more or less explicit intention of destroying it from the inside. Hamas, on the other hand, gets all of its legitimacy by embracing democracy: the Palestinians have been consistently let down by Fatah's secular socialism, so (like any electorate) they turned to the Opposition, which was Hamas. Hamas gets votes not because its constituents are Muslim extremists (some of them are, but there aren't nearly enough of those to give a parliamentary majority) but because it takes a harder nationalistic line and it has a reputation for efficiency, honesty, and social service in a region where those are rare indeed. The religious thing gives them extra approval: They're religious people, how can they be corrupt? is the reasoning.
I agree. Its good to see a sensible contribution from a Muslim Arab point of view, being someone who lives in the culture and understands the subleties of the situation. I wonder what his take is on the discussion I had with the Israeli guy on the other thread where I suggested Marwan Barghouti as a possible secular West Bank leader who has popular support and isn't tarred with the brush of islamicist extremism?
I'd like to see that conversation. I'm not quite sure about him; he has the populist credentials, but I fear that the general tenor of the Palestinian electorate leans to the Islamist end. Beyond that, while he personally has the "Nixon-in-China" hardline reputation, I'm not so sure about his party, however, since as of now it's just the anti-corruption bloc within Fatah. That's better than just plain old Fatah, but I suspect that only Hamas will do w/r/t being credible representatives to the Israelis (from the Palestinian perspective, of course; Hamas would need to do some serious restructuring if it wishes to be credible w/r/t Israel).
Completely independent. Like in the sense that, Israel doesn't mix in their politics more than any random country would in another's.
A combination of that, and prosperiety pretty much guarantees that the majority of the population would not support an invasion of Israel. So in other words, if Hamas were to still advocate that afterwards, they'd lose public support and fail miserably in the first following elections.
Also, I don't think anyone's offering Palestine more land, so I don't get the Sudetenland comparisons at all.
I'd like to see that conversation. I'm not quite sure about him; he has the populist credentials, but I fear that the general tenor of the Palestinian electorate leans to the Islamist end. Beyond that, while he personally has the "Nixon-in-China" hardline reputation, I'm not so sure about his party, however, since as of now it's just the anti-corruption bloc within Fatah. That's better than just plain old Fatah, but I suspect that only Hamas will do w/r/t being credible representatives to the Israelis (from the Palestinian perspective, of course; Hamas would need to do some serious restructuring if it wishes to be credible w/r/t Israel).
Thanks. I'm referring to "Hezbullah Attacks North Israel", Post 112 and after that. I've been keeping my eye on Barghouti as a likely player since his trial in 2004. His reputation as the key leader of the intafadas and his secularism seems to have made him kind of a folk hero with the Palestinian street.
And he topped the poll in the PA election. It may be that popular sentiment has shifted to the islamicist side for now, but it strikes me that only a guy like Barghouti has a chance to unite all factions within the PA. One contrast strikes me though. Shimon Peres was prepared to have him released on parole last year. Yet Hamas still has him on top of their list of prisoners they want released. Strange bedfellows or what?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Ask him, or PM him with a link to that thread.
