| 
		
			| Tyrone Slothrop | 01-11-2009 03:49 PM |  
 Re: interesting
 
	Quote: 
	
		| 
 
					Originally Posted by Diane_Keaton
					(Post 377006)
				 What would be interesting is if you would simply state what you think the problem is and the solution, and not pussyfoot around or hide behind blog entries.  And if you really must question someone's "goals", you might want to start with identifying and considering the wisdom of Hamas's goal behind lobbing rockets into Israel. 
 |  What do I think is "the" problem?  That's a nice trap.  "The" problem is that Jews and Palestinians both think they have the better claim to the same piece of land and neither is prepared to live with the other.  If there is a solution to this problem, it lies in two states that can trust and respect each other to the degree necessary to co-exist.  We are a long way from there.
 
With respect to Gaza, I've already said that I think Hamas was losing support in its efforts to run Gaza, not least because of the Israeli blockade.  I think it lobbed rockets into Israel to pick a fight, and it got one.  For Israel, the rockets are the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself, and have no good military solution.  If Gaza is ruled by a hostile government, more rockets will be lobbed, and invading Gaza makes it more hostile.  People there see an Israeli attack on Gaza, not an Israeli attack on Hamas.  So does most of the rest of the world.  I don't think this attack on Gaza is a good strategy for Israel, but rather than the pressures of the upcoming election, inter alia, have prompted its leaders to make a bad choice.
 
[eta: The blog post that I thought was interesting and which you seem to think I'm hiding behind said that Hamas faces a strategic defeat because Iran has other priorities.  That doesn't seem right to me, but I posted it because I did think it was interesting and because -- apparently unlike you -- I'm not possessed by the certainty that I am right about all of this.  OTOH, maybe Hamas will suffer a strategic defeat, and will be replaced by even more extreme leaders -- Al Qaeda, e.g. -- a situation that probably would not benefit Israel.]
 
Now, this is your cue to suggest I am blaming Israel for the unconscionable behavior of Hamas, or morally equating Hamas terrorists and Israeli children, or not properly appreciating the existential threats to Israel, or some such thing.  Go nuts.
 
The U.S. President who has done the most to improve Israel's strategic position is Jimmy Carter.  He is also the one lately most often criticized as being insufficiently supportive of Israel.  Go figure. |