Matt Yglesias

56 Responses to “The Risk of Catastrophic Success In Gaza”

1. liberal Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:16 pm

   The high level of power that Hamas had achieved as of last week was, after all, precisely the result of a deliberate Israeli campaign to weaken Fatah. The hope was that this would bring some more accommodationist Palestinians to the fore, but instead the reverse happened.

   My impression is the opposite: they weakened Fatah because it was too moderate.

   The Israelis (and I’m sure lots of nations and groups before them) seem to have a strategy of attacking the moderates in the opposition, precisely because in the long run extremists are easier to defeat.

   Though it can backfire, as the folks who sent Lenin back to Russia discovered, though not for decades.

2. El Cid Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:17 pm

   I guess this is a bad time to suggest that maybe the Israeli militarists didn’t care much about the effects for Palestinian or Israeli civilians when they supported the emergence of Hamas as a way of splitting the Palestinian resistance movements on religious grounds.

   In 1977, newly elected prime minister and Likud (Herut) founder Menachem Begin decided drastic steps were needed to block Arafat’s return.

   A year later, seeking to undermine Arafat’s popularity in the Occupied Territories, Begin’s government approved an application from a 42-year old quadriplegic religious leader in the Gaza Strip, Sheik Ahmad Yassin, to license his humanitarian organization, the Islamic Association. Later, with the explosion of the first Intifada, the Islamic Association launched a military arm called Hamas.

   Begin’s successor was Yitzhak Shamir. Both Begin and Shamir were leaders of the first terrorist organizations that operated in Palestine in the 1940s.

   Under Begin and later Shamir, Israel created, funded and controlled the “Village Leagues,” a system of local councils managed by Palestinians who were hand-picked by Israel to run local city and village administrations.

   The plan was devised by Sharon, who was Israel’s Defense Minister. Sharon appointed Menahem Milson, a professor of Arabic literature and former Hebrew University Dean, as its first Civil Administration leader in November 1981. Less than one year later, the two broke over Sharon’s role in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres and Milson resigned.

   Over the objections of many Palestinian Islamic leaders including the Commissioner of the Muslim Waqf in the Gaza Strip, Rafat Abu Shaban, Israel registered the newly formed “Islamic Association” which Yassin founded.

   Yassin was willing to cooperate with the Likud government because he, too, shared the goal of undermining Arafat’s secular influence over the Palestinians. More importantly, and in line with Likud policies, he sought to block the creation of a Palestinian State based on land-for-peace.

   Israel’s Likud government permitted Yassin to launch a newspaper and to set up charitable fundraising organizations. With funding Yassin raised and with Israeli funds directed through the Village Leagues, the Islamic Association built new mosques, new schools, hospitals and medical clinics. The group established social service and humanitarian agencies and even job creation venues. Despite its later turn to armed struggle and suicide bombings, Hamas meticulously directed nearly 95 percent of the funds it raised to these worthy humanitarian projects.

   Yassin’s followers won significant influence over the Village Leagues system, another Israeli supported scheme intended to undermine the PLO’s influence and strengthen the hand of “local leaders” that Likud believed could be co-opted politically.

   Yassin was not initially involved with violence. Most of the violence was directed either by Arafat’s Al-Fatah organization, based in Lebanon, or by the other PLO umbrella partners like the Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Inside the occupied territories, another Islamic group called Islamic Jihad was struggling to gain support among Palestinians living under occupation.

   The “Islamic Association,” was a shadow organization and prodigy of the more radical Moslem Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Bana. The group created a Palestinian branch in the 1930s but waged a mainly rhetorical battle against oppression in the Arab World.

   Initially, the Moslem Brotherhood and Sheik Yassin’s Islamic Association were not supportive of armed struggle against Israel. Yassin adopted the Moslem Brotherhoods approach toward a slow Islamicization of the region.

   In 1984, Shamir was forced into a coalition government with Labor Party’s Shimon Peres. Under a shared-leadership agreement, Peres held the office for two years until 1986 before returning it to Shamir. During those two years, the Likud party leaders saw firsthand the seriousness of behind-the-scenes negotiations between Labor Party leaders and Arafat, who was exiled in Tunisia.

   Yassin and the Islamic Association benefited from a system of Israeli controlled “Village Leagues,” sometimes called Village Councils. The Village Leagues where largely funded by Israel. But the Islamic Association was allowed to raise tens of millions more each year from supportive Arab regimes angry with Arafat. The creation of the Village Leagues was Israel’s first effort to encourage an alternative to the PLO.

   Sheik Yassin used the money to operate a network of schools, medical clinics, social service agencies, religious institutions and provide direct services to the poverty stricken Palestinian population.

   Israel saw benefits in the leagues which became a breeding ground for Palestinian collaborators who were blackmailed or bribed into reporting on the activities of other Palestinians. Many of them held positions of leadership in the Village Leagues and were friendly to Israel.

   The Israeli military gave the League members protection and widespread powers. As many as 200 of the league members were given weapons training by Israel. Israel’s Shin Bet recruited paid informers from this network and Israeli sources estimated the number of informants were in the thousands.

   Israel Military Government employed as many as 19,000 Palestinians, with 11,000 of them working as teachers, clerks and administrators.

3. liberal Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:17 pm

   Added: congrats on having the cajones to address the Israel/Palestinian issue (unlike a lot of other center/left blogs).

4. Harry Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

   Well, this was a quick pivot. Yesterday we were talking about how ineffectual and doomed to failure Israel’s air campaign against Hamas was; today we are talking about “catastrophic success”. I suggest we prepare to move the goal posts even further back — how about how, once Israel achieves peace with Palestinian interlocutors who seek it, its Jewish identity will lapse in the absence of an existential threat.

5. liberal Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

   El Cid wrote,

   …when they supported the emergence of Hamas as a way of splitting the Palestinian resistance movements on religious grounds…

   Yeah, there’s that too.

6. southpaw Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

   The incentive structures on both sides of the conflict reward escalation. The flip side of the many opportunities for international terrorists in the Palestinian territories is a vanishing labor market for nonviolent political leadership. Just as there’s not much space for a dove party in Palestinian politics, no one appears to be rallying around a war opponent (cf. Obama) on the Israeli side.

   Even in the international community, the trifles that are supposedly reserved for leaders who make peace (the Nobel prize, Rose Garden ceremonies, etc.) are expended on Israeli and Palestinian leaders who fail to reach a meaningful settlement.

   Until we change those incentive structures, there’s no way out.

7. Fred Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:36 pm

   Peace comes when one side is utterly defeated. Let Hamas get completely defeated and there might be some progress. Fatah could be put back in power in Gaza.

8. liberal Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:36 pm

   Harry wrote,

   Yesterday we were talking about how ineffectual and doomed to failure Israel’s air campaign against Hamas was; today we are talking about “catastrophic success”.

   Except today we’re talking about a ground invasion.

9. Why oh why Says:
   January 4th, 2009 at 1:38 pm

   It seems that Hamas was hoping to bait Israel into launching a ground operation in Gaza, operating on the belief that they’d be able to fight a successful insurgent campaign against the Israelis along the lines of what Hezbollah’s been able to do in Southern Lebanon.

   “It seems”? What kind of pro-Israel propaganda is that? The Israeli army has been preparing this war on civilians for 6 months, including the ground invasion. And although Hamas should stop firing those rockets, the ratio of death is now 100-to-1.

   Repeating that Hamas is “baiting” Israel, and eager to get more Palestinians killed for political advantage, is disgusting and wrong. The Israeli war machine needs no baiting to perpetually kill, invade and colonize for 40 years.

10. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:39 pm

    southpaw wrote, Until we change those incentive structures, there’s no way out.

    One way to change Israel’s incentives is to stop giving them aid. There’s always an economic cost to militarism; our aid insulates them from that cost.

    (This is aside from the principles invoked by George Washington, which are the best reason to stop our involvement there.)

11. Harry Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    “Except today we’re talking about a ground invasion.”

    Yesterday we were talking about the dim prospects of Israeli military success, now we’re talking about “catastrophic” success. Spin it how you want, but you get my point.

    “Peace comes when one side is utterly defeated.”

    Fred has a point. Think Sherman’s March to the Sea, or Hiroshima. There hasn’t been any lingering guerrilla war with Japan over the last 60 years, as there been? Let Israel finish the job for a chance and we can all move on.

12. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:43 pm

    Why oh why wrote,

    “It seems”? What kind of pro-Israel propaganda is that? The Israeli army has been preparing this war on civilians for 6 months, including the ground invasion.

    It’s probably true, like it or not. “Domestic” politics is a big driver of “foreign policy” and military stuff, be it Israel, the US, or Hamas.

    Of course, speaking as an American, the pressing issue is why we should be involved there at all.

13. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:44 pm

    Harry wrote, Yesterday we were talking about the dim prospects of Israeli military success, now we’re talking about “catastrophic” success. Spin it how you want, but you get my point.

    I’m not spinning anything. I merely quoted you yourself, and pointed out that your argument was flawed.

14. Ed Marshall Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:45 pm

    Fred is a fucking idiot and so are you. Hint: rethink how Sherman’s March to the Sea ended terrorism in the South. Like the problem here is that no one has gone apeshit enough on Palestinians. If you are going to be wrong headed and stupid find subjects to do it about that don’t wind up killing people.

15. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:47 pm

    Harry wrote, There hasn’t been any lingering guerrilla war with Japan over the last 60 years, as there been? Let Israel finish the job for a chance and we can all move on.

    Come on. As a spoof of a bloodthirsty, thuggish position, you’d be more effective if you added more nuance.

16. Harry Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    “Hint: rethink how Sherman’s March to the Sea ended terrorism in the South.”

    Where was that terrorism directed? Not at the North. The analogy would be a situation where Palestinian terrorists continued to prey on their own in the West Bank and Gaza while leaving Israel alone.

17. Why oh why Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    (This is aside from the principles invoked by George Washington, which are the best reason to stop our involvement there.)

    OT, but do you think we should get out of NATO too? Washington’s speech is often quoted and his principles served the young USA well, but I think it doesn’t have as much relevance since WWI.

18. Ed Marshall Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:51 pm

    It’s the flypaper strategy of the Civil War!

    We fought the thing to get the KKK killing blacks and Jews and liberals so they would leave us alone! Damn, are you people stupid and illiterate.

19. Arnold Evans Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:54 pm

    Ed wins.

20. Rich in PA Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    The supplantation of Hamas by more extreme groups would be a plus for Israel, and for the prospects of peace more generally. Hamas is a maximalist party, but its effective real-world emphasis on social welfare makes its popularity a hard nut to crack: even when it fails, it succeeds because it’s doing things on a number of fronts. A more extreme successor would likely drop all of the social welfare and generically political stuff in favor of a military push, which would of course fail because Israel always defeats all comers (not so much because it’s Israel, just because it’s a state and the Palestinian groups aren’t), and then you’d have a generalized legitimation crisis and re-thinking of Palestinian politics. Well, at least you might.

21. southpaw Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    One way to change Israel’s incentives is to stop giving them aid. There’s always an economic cost to militarism; our aid insulates them from that cost.

    It’s hard for me to see how that could be done in the context of our politics. The newly elected president ran on the least Israel friendly line I’ve seen in my lifetime, and it was still pretty damn Israel friendly–more paying his tribute to AIPAC than questioning the strategic impact of our financial assistance. Is there any way we could elect a congress and a president that would even consider cutting off aid?

22. spike Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    Yeah, too bad the Israelis don’t watch the Wire.

    Fatah is the Barksdales, Hamas is Marlo…. who knows what’s next…

23. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 1:57 pm

    Why oh why wrote,

    OT, but do you think we should get out of NATO too?

    Yes. IIRC the purpose of NATO was as a bulwark against Soviet encroachment. That threat is gone.

    In fact, I would argue that while Washington’s warning’s first application would be to our aid to Israel, another item on the list would be NATO. God forbid Georgia had first become a NATO member and only then attacked South Ossetia.

    Washington’s speech is often quoted and his principles served the young USA well, but I think it doesn’t have as much relevance since WWI.

    I strongly disagree. While there’s lots of international trade and related ties, there was also lots of international trade in the latter part of the nineteenth century.

    I don’t mean to say we should withdraw ourselves from the world, but rathat that these alliances, so-called and otherwise, aren’t good for the national interest. We should have trade with as many nations as is practicable, and we should encourage good acts and faith between nations, but we should stay as uninvolved as possible. Of course, we’ll want to continue with, say, international efforts to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons, but as a truly good faith exercise, which doesn’t appear to be the case now.

    John Quincy Adams also had good words to say on this subject.

24. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    southpaw wrote,

    It’s hard for me to see how that could be done in the context of our politics.

    Yeah, that’s true, unfortunately. For me the point is to get people to think along the lines of my comments about George Washington. You’re right if you claim that that might be a long haul, but what else can we do?

25. liberal Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:06 pm

    Rich in PA wrote,

    The supplantation of Hamas by more extreme groups would be a plus for Israel, and for the prospects of peace more generally. … and then you’d have a generalized legitimation crisis and re-thinking of Palestinian politics. Well, at least you might.

    Maybe, maybe not. But IMHO the central problem for Israel is Israel’s own goals. The evidence is pretty overwhelming that Israel’s first interest isn’t peace but rather very slow yet methodical seizure of as much land in the West Bank as possible.

    Thus, the central obstacle to peace for Israel is its own policies. Note also that (a) Israel has much more control over its own policies than over the Palestinians’, and (b) Israel as the stronger power has much more control, period.

    Of course, as an American, my concern isn’t so much with Israel’s policies, but with America’s.

26. Fred Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:08 pm

    “We fought the thing to get the KKK killing blacks and Jews and liberals so they would leave us alone!”

    How many Jews did the KKK kill in a hundred years, three? And how many “liberals”? For a hundred years, the liberals were happy to have the KKK as a voting block.

27. Arnold Evans Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:11 pm

    I think it’s fairly likely that Israel will be able to create a situation whereby Hamas is dislodged from formal control over Gaza.

    I’m not sure. I can’t see who is going to be the police of Gaza if not Hamas.

    Israel would have to conquer all of the populated areas and then have a light presence that keeps order there. That light presence would be very vulnerable to guerilla attacks, snipers, hit and run, suicide attacks, etc.

    Egypt doesn’t strike me as willing to put Egyptian troops in explicitly on request from Israel, I don’t think Jordan or the PA can or will do that, if they do, they’ll be the ones vulnerable to guerilla attacks.

    Gaza doesn’t strike me as easy to hold. It is easier to win than hold, but if Israel isn’t willing to take the losses necessary to hold it, then it can’t dislodge Hamas.

    The US bought out the Sunnis and reduced anti-US guerilla attacks in Iraq. I don’t see Israel as able to do the same. The US paid Afghans to overthrow the Taliban. I don’t see anyone in Gaza willing and able to do that for Israel.

    This looks to me like a stalemate the ends with Hamas still in power – possibly, but not definitely losing an election to Fatah months after the military operation is over.

    I’d expect the Palestinian people to be radicalizing both in Gaza and the West Bank, and even if they are turning against Hamas, if there is another radical option the Palestinian people may well reject Fatah for a non-Hamas group that does not accept Israel’s legitimacy. Of course, polls beat my expectations. I’d love to see one.

    I’m sure Syria and Iran will be able to ensure that if Hamas has lost electability that there is another alternative for Palestinian voters so Fatah won’t win by default in later elections.

    I could be wrong, but I still see this as a mini-2006. Hamas, or at least groups ideologically closer to Hamas than to Abbas will be more powerful in Palestine than before.

    Then, if the right wing wins Israel’s elections, it’s game over for Abbas and the ideology of accommodation/negotiation with Israel in Palestine and the Arab world.

28. blowback Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

    Israel claims that it does not want to re-occupy Gaza and that it is only trying to stop rocket fire. The trouble is that they can only stop rocket fire by occupying Gaza. Hamas would be well advised to stop rocket fire for the moment while the IDF is in Gaza to preserve their assets, once Israel announces that they have been successful and the IDF withdraws, Hamas only needs to fire off a few missiles to prove Israel wrong and then the IDF will have to re-invade Gaza. Be prepared for a very very long war with lots of caualties that Israel will eventually lose.

    The only way that Israel might win is to go all Cromwellian on the population of Gaza and in the long run that doesn’t work either unless you are prepared to commit genocide. BTW, there are some Israelis and more Americans who would support genocide against the Palestinians but actually doing it would trump the Holocaust and Israel really can’t afford that.

29. Jay Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    A replacement of Hamas by a Salafist group linked to Al Quaeda might be the best thing that could happen for Israel’s long-term survival as a Jewish state.

    The greatest threat to Israel is demographics: Jews will be a clear minority in Greater Israel within a generation. Forced expulsion isn’t an option because no one will take in a large Arab population. A two-state solution is impossible because any Israeli government that tried to forcibly remove hundreds of thousands of settlers would fall to internal Jewish dissent. Permanent aparteid is expensive, violent, and subject to constant social disruption by the subordinate Palestinian population.

    However, if the Palestinians become seen in the global community as allies of Bin Laden and the global Salafist movement, they will be a universally despised people. Israel then could pursue a permanent solution to the demographic problem the Palestinans present. Few in the world would care if Israel were to reduce the Palestinian population by 80% or so if those Palestinians were all seen, not as nationalists seeking a homeland of their own, but as supporters and perpetrators of a global Islamic terrorist movement.

30. makkale Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    Even in the international community, the trifles that are supposedly reserved for leaders who make peace (the Nobel prize, Rose Garden ceremonies, etc.) are expended on Israeli and Palestinian leaders who fail to reach a meaningful settlement. but my home http://www.makkale.blogcu.com

31. Fred Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    “The greatest threat to Israel is demographics: Jews will be a clear minority in Greater Israel within a generation.”

    Just look at how Jordan disappeared under the sand once Palestinians became the majority there. Oh, wait…

32. Why oh why Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

    Israel then could pursue a permanent solution

    Some historical perspective makes this statement ironic, instead of just hateful.

33. Jay Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

    Fred, the situation is not at all analogous. Jordan is not a democracy. The royal family cannot be voted out of power by a Palestinian majority.

    Israel is a democracy, it is just one that the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, as a permanent subordinate class, are both ruled by and excluded from. This sort of exclusionary democracy just isn’t a very stable form of politcal system, especially once the excluded group comes to form the majority of the population.

34. Scott de B. Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

    For a hundred years, the liberals were happy to have the KKK as a voting block.

    No. You are mistakenly (though I expect deliberately) retrojecting current ideological divisions to the late 19th century. The Democratic Party couldn’t remotely be described as ‘liberal’ until the early 20th century. Of course, when they did begin moving leftward, they nominated Al Smith, a Catholic, who was hardly popular with the KKK.

35. El Cid Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    We all better be glad that the extreme right wing, white supremacist Democrats of the segregated South were in fact Democrats (and exceedingly greedy for federal development), otherwise they would have blocked the New Deal (and maybe even WWII), and the whole nation might have become what the South was in the 1920s.

36. JohnH Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

    There’s a deeply shameful lead article for the Times Week in Review on the “transformative” possibilities of success. One of those “if wishes were horses” moments.

37. El Cid Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 5:06 pm

    Juan Cole, also reminding us of the idiocies of militarist schemers who always think their covert ops are exceedingly clever:

    In the 1980s, when the secular, left-leaning Palestine Liberation Organization predominated as the Palestinian political force, Israeli intelligence funneled some aid to Hamas (descended from the Gaza branch of the Muslim Brotherhood), a fundamentalist group, in hopes of dividing and ruling the Palestinians. That part of the plan worked, but Israeli intelligence created a monster, since as Hamas grew in strength and popularity, it grew increasing vocal about its rejection of Israel and its ambition to see the state dismantled, allowing the emergence of a fundamentalist Muslim Palestinian state where Israel now stands.

38. pseudonymous in nc Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    You don’t even have to look that far back: Israel went through a period of “discrediting” Fatah, had a happy bombing campaign against its ragtag infrastructure (’dear America, we used all of your bombs, can we have some more kthxbai?’) then complained that Fatah couldn’t police the territory under its authority.

    On Jay’s point: there’s another demographic crack, namely the cultural splinter between West Bank settlers (large families, lots of kids, lots of IDF exemptions) and those in Israel proper. The ‘hilltop youth’ don’t recognise Israel in its current form either. It’s the Wild West Bank, and it’s understandable that sending the IDF into Gaza creates fewer moral issues in Israel than the prospect of secular Israeli conscripts in standoffs with the batshit brigades.

39. Skeptic Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 8:06 pm

    Hmmm. Wow. This Fred guy is a four star retard, probably inbreeding. Harry’s not too far behind.

    Basically, nearly as I can unwind from their muddled one handed thinking, is that total victory solves all problems: Case studies: Germany, Japan, Sherman’s March to the South.

    The trouble with these historical analogies is that the real deciding factor has not been victory in the battlefield, but post-Victory reconstruction. The success or failure of the venture is a factor of the success or failure of reconstruction.

    Let’s go look at Israel’s history: 1948 War -> Victory, 1953 War -> Victory, 1967 War -> Victory, 1973 War – > Victory, 1982 War -> Victory.

    So here’s the rub… Israel won every single goddammed war ever. Total victory. So how come Israel is still wrestling with the baggage? Guys like Fred don’t have the brain cells to get to this point. He subscribes to the Super-Nintendo school or armed conflict.

    Truth of the matter is that Israel’s only break came when Anwar Sadat stepped outside the box to go to Israel. Israel had won the last three wars, but they still sat down at the table and had to give Sadat what he wanted. Yeah, so much for total victory.

    Fred and Harry figure that all it takes is a few Steven Seagal moves and kapow, Hamas is out, and it’s puppy dogs and christmas all over, because, yowza, those guys were psycho crazy.

    Truth of the matter is that Hamas is only what Israel made it. That’s a hard fact to stomach, but ya gotta live with it. There’s 1.4 million people living in Gaza, being treated like dogs by Israel. Kill every member of Hamas, and tomorrow there’d just be a new bunch, ornier and meaner.

    The problem with Gaza, the West Banks and the Palestinian Refugees won’t go away until Israel actually does a reconstruction – builds something that they can live with. If all they leave are ruins, all they ever got are enemies.

    Let’s be serious here: Israel created four or five million refugees, then it stood back and said “these people are all someone else’s problem, not our issue, la la la.”

    What idiot thought that was going to work? Fred probably.

    Then Israel wound up conquering another five million in occupied territories in Gaza and the West Bank. And once again it stood back and said “these people are someone else’s problem, not our issue, la la la.”

    How’s that been working so far?

40. danceswithgoats Says:
    January 4th, 2009 at 11:13 pm

    Israel will have a hard time defeating these extremists because they are not willing to kill their enemies in a truly cold blooded fashion. Perhaps they have been pushed far enough but methinks not. I think Hamas misjudged the Israelis after the Israelis fumbled the ball against the Hezboh shitbirds. We will see how many checks the military can write on the national/political will bank.

41. Richard Steven Hack Says:
    January 5th, 2009 at 12:06 am

    This is just Matt picking up my points from yesterday about how Hamas isn’t Hizballah and then incorrectly extrapolating that Israel can somehow destroy Hamas.

    This is bullshit. Hamas has the support of the bulk of the Gazans, and what Gazans don’t support it now will support it tomorrow.

    Israel cannot hold Gaza forever anymore than it could hold Lebanon forever. Sooner or later the continual urban guerrilla war, modified by the new tactics learned from Hizballah and the Iraq insurgency, will force Israel to withdraw.

    Skeptic:

    “Let’s be serious here: Israel created four or five million refugees, then it stood back and said “these people are all someone else’s problem, not our issue, la la la.”

    What idiot thought that was going to work? Fred probably.”

    Absolutely correct. And not only Fred, but the ENTIRE ZIONIST ENTERPRISE is based on that level of thinking. “Gee, we’ll take over a stretch of land that used to be ours and only has, oh, several million people in it that we’ll kick out into the neighboring lands, who no doubt won’t care, and then we’ll build a fortress with nukes and then stretch out and take over the whole Middle East with all that OIL! And we’ll sucker the Big Dog, the USA, into underwriting all that.”

    Yeah, that’ll work.

    Until it doesn’t, of course.

    When you compare Zionist thinking to National Socialist thinking, you see one direct comparison after another.

    The only way to exterminate Hamas – or some other subsequent organization that forms in the wake of that – is to exterminate 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza, and then whatever Palestinians remain in the West Bank. And then to exterminate the 200 million Muslims that will protest. And then to exterminate the remaining eight hundred million Muslims who will protest.

    The preferred solution is to exterminate Zionists who are a tiny cadre of assholes residing mostly in Israel and Washington, D.C. and New York. Fuck them up and the Israel problem goes away.

    And it’s a lot easier.

42. Skeptic Says:
    January 5th, 2009 at 9:53 am

    Danceswithgoats writes:

    “Israel will have a hard time defeating these extremists because they are not willing to kill their enemies in a truly cold blooded fashion.”

    Well, they used a fighter jet to assassinate a wheelchair bound senior citizen in front of a mosque – that was Sheikh Yassin. Whatever we think of the dear departed, surely we can all admit that fighter jets versus cripples is pretty damned cold blooded. And cowardly.

    Israel has demonstrated it’s willing to run a bulldozer over an American protester, bomb other countries at will, and use fighter jets to blow up people in cars in front of schools, or to destroy apartment buildings to kill individuals.

    5000 Palestinians have died since 2000, 1000 of them children. Versus 800 Israelis. In the current Gaza ‘war’ the total has been 500 palestinians versus 5 Israeli’s dead.

    But apparently they’re not cold blooded enough for DanceswithGoats?

    Ain’t it always the way with ruthless maniacs. Atrocity piled on top of atrocity, and its just never enough. It’s all just a matter of will and brutality and sufficient ruthlessness. If only we’d bombed more, thrown more babies onto bonfires, mowed down more children, created more mass graves, demonstrated to ourselves and to the enemy our implacable ruthlessness….

    God help us all.

43. Fred Says:
    January 5th, 2009 at 3:23 pm

    “Well, they used a fighter jet to assassinate a wheelchair bound senior citizen in front of a mosque – that was Sheikh Yassin.”

    Actually, they used a helicopter firing a precision rocket to kill Yassin.

44. Skeptic Says:
    January 5th, 2009 at 7:55 pm

    Was he? Ah well then, the initial reports were inaccurate, so be it. Double checking on Wikipedia has it as a helicopter gunship on March 22, 2004.

    Interestingly, Israel did use an F16 firing several missiles at an apartment building on September 6, 2003, just a few months before.

    The gomer was paraplegic, nearly blind and sixty seven years old. So gee whiz, I can see how they needed to stand off all the way with a helicopter, because, you know, old fart’s like that are tough as nails.

    That ‘precision rocket’ was a hellfire missile. Hellfires deliver roughly 20 pounds of high explosive. Now, given that an average hand grenade contains two to four ounces of explosive, said missile is the impact version of 80 to 160 hand grenades and is used as an anti-tank weapon, this leaves me contemplating that we are looking at a radically new usage of the world ‘precision.’

    In addition to Yassin, it killed eleven people, nine of them innocent bystanders, and injured another twelve. That’s really gosh darned precise.

    Look Fred, this is not rocket science. The Israeli’s had the guy in jail up to 1997. He was under house arrest from time to time after that. The Israeli’s obviously knew where he lived, where he went to worship and who changed his colostomy bag.

    It was pretty much available to them to just make a few phone calls, have him swept up, popped into custody and bob’s your uncle. But no, seems that was too flipping scary for them. Tough old gomer like that, he probably et Navy Seals for breakfast.

    Failing that, one could always put someone up on top of a building with a sniperscope. Or just have someone walk up and bust a few caps in his ass. It’s not like the old fart was going to be getting up and running away, your had an Uzi concealed under his bottom. Hell, you could have even done it rough and noisy, sent some of those Israeli special forces guys to do an Entebbe style swat team raid, lots of thunder and bull.

    Nah, what it amounted to was helcopter gunships and hellfire missiles and F-16’s.

    It was a great moment in the annals of pussydom.

45. viagra Says:
    March 1st, 2009 at 5:47 am

    viagra
    Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

46. levitra Says:
    March 2nd, 2009 at 5:14 am

    levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

47. Barack Obama Says:
    March 8th, 2009 at 11:44 pm

    I REALLY liked your post and blog! It took me a little bit to find your site…but I book marked it. Would you mind if I but a link back to my site at whiterabbitcult.com?

48. Odette Santos Says:
    March 9th, 2009 at 1:03 am

    Found your site very interesting, full of informative articles, added to my favourites.

49. viagra Says:
    March 11th, 2009 at 4:45 am

    Great site. Good info

50. xanax Says:
    March 14th, 2009 at 5:29 am

    I want to say – thank you for this!
    xanax

51. tramadol Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 6:16 am

    tramadol
    I want to say – thank you for this!

52. buy viagra online Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 10:28 am

    buy viagra online
    It is the coolest site,keep so!

53. brand viagra Says:
    April 2nd, 2009 at 5:22 am

    Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
    buy cheap viagra

54. cheap viagra Says:
    April 9th, 2009 at 6:17 am

    I bookmarked this site, Thank you for good job! viagra