We need to withdraw from these endless "peace talks" and let the so-called Palestinians swim in their own juices for a generation or two.

Posted by: Bingo at March 18, 2008 7:04 AM

This is because Israel hasn't been allowed to go into Gaza, to kill Hamas effectively and leave them without any testicles.

Instead, they withdrew from Gaza, have suffered rockets & terrorist attacks galore, have been impotent and unwilling to act, and thus, consequently, more Palestinians will want to join Hamas because their terrorist methods are working.

You can be sure that if Israel had gone in and wiped the floor with these guys, and that the world had supported them in their efforts to stamp out terrorists in their midst (fat chance of this happening anyway), then there would be zero support for Hamas.

Really, this poll unfortunately comes as no surprise and it merely reiterates the point that whenever Israel has been hard on terrorism, the threat has gone down, even if it be temporarily. It's only when they decide to not fight and try to please the international community that Islamic terrorism wins.

Posted by: S Perry at March 18, 2008 7:07 AM

"That effort, part of a strategy to stabilize the Middle East, includes diplomatic support and promises of economic aid to the West Bank."

Honestly. "Diplomatic support" doesn't count for anything when dealing with these guys. You can give all the diplomatic support you want to Fatah and Hamas will stick their noses up and keep firing rockets at Israel.

Economic aid to Fatah isn't guaranteed to reduce the threat of terrorism either. In fact, Arafat used international aid to fund terrorists and embezzle much more.

The only thing that could really stabilise the Middle East, at least in the West Bank and Gaza, is if terrorists are come down on strongly and Palestinians there are given a chance to live without the dictatorial rule of Hamas. Once they appreciate this and see that terrorism doesn't work then support for Hamas will drop.

It ain't rocket science.

Posted by: S Perry at March 18, 2008 7:14 AM

"The only thing that could really stabilise the Middle East, at least in the West Bank and Gaza, is if terrorists are come down on strongly and Palestinians there are given a chance to live without the dictatorial rule of Hamas. Once they appreciate this and see that terrorism doesn't work then support for Hamas will drop."

You really dont understand Islam, do you?

Posted by: Elric66 at March 18, 2008 7:27 AM

Point taken Elric66. Not sure what else to try then.

Posted by: S Perry at March 18, 2008 7:55 AM

S Perry,

Not many choices.I used to believe freedom was a universal desire. Not anymore. I do know one thing. We will never have peace with Islam and to pretend otherwise is suicidal.Israel would be best served to cut Gaza off and if attacked, bomb the crap out of them. Islam does respect force if anything else.

Posted by: Elric66 at March 18, 2008 8:01 AM

"...three characteristics of the future war [Israel-Arab conflict]: the belief in glorious death as a road to paradise, the opportunities of lust, and the Bedouin love of slaughter for its own sake" - Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League.

And people wonder why the barbaric Hamas is popular?

Posted by: Godefroi at March 18, 2008 8:05 AM

KIlling a lot of people does wonders for your popularity........

Posted by: tanstaafl at March 18, 2008 8:40 AM

Nothing positive will come of the Israeli, 'Palestinian' situation until everyone says bye-bye
to Bush/Condi/Olmert. Our new US President Obama will go to Hamas, sit down and 'talk' to them. Once Hamas sees what a wonderful man he is, they will drop their hostilities, turn in their weapons, and recognize Israels right to exist.
All we have to do is wait for Barack. Remember, 'We are the people we have been waiting for', whatever that means.
And while we wait...shut off the power. I day for one non lethal rocket, a week if anyone is injured, death by suicide bomber is good for a month...

Posted by: duh_swami at March 18, 2008 8:54 AM

"...three characteristics of the future war [Israel-Arab conflict]: the belief in glorious death as a road to paradise, the opportunities of lust, and the Bedouin love of slaughter for its own sake" - Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League.
-- from a posting above

Although it is fashionable to say that there has been a "return to Islam" in recent decades, and that the war against Israel was a war of competing nationalisms, Azzam Pasha's remarks before that war, predicting a "slaughter" greater than any "since the time of the Mongols," are imbued with straightforward Islam:

There is the promise of Paradise through death in Jihad:

"The belief in glorious death as a road to paradise"

There is the promise of booty, including the seizing of Infidel women to be raped and then kept as sex-slaves, just like those seized from the farmers at the Khaybar Oasis:

"The opportunities of lust"

The promise of endless killing of the Infidel enemy, always a delightful prospect for Muslims who take their Islam seriously:

"the Bedouin love of slaughter for its own sake"

Islam never went away. Islam was always there. It was the Western commentators who failed to notice it.

Oh, and one more thing. Azzam Pasha was not only Secretary General of the Arab League during the first major assault on Israel, beginning in mid-May 1948, but was also the great-uncle of Ayman Al-Zawahiri. There is more than a family resemblance: there is the ideological resemblance, sometimes just beneath the surface, that links Muslim to Muslim, across time and across space. It is this ideology, its depth and its durability, that non-Muslims can't quite believe, and so often, therefore, don't -- to their own great subsequent dismay and deepening recognition of danger, dismay and danger that might have been avoided, had they only understood.

Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 9:23 AM

Hugh -

I urge infidels everywhere to get a translation of the Qur'an and read it. If enough people had read "Mein Kampf", would World War II have occurred? (Just an aside - "Mein Kampf" is a best seller in the Middle East)

I will say this about the Islamofacist jihadist extremist Islamist leaders - they are honest about how the Qur'an justifies their actions. Apologists for Islam are merely practicing taquiyya and kittman.

Posted by: tanstaafl at March 18, 2008 10:18 AM

Isolate one terrorist entity to uplift another.

If Hamas is the red wine of terrorism then the PA is the rose. It might look more delicate and it might go better with some of your food but it has the same effect.

Posted by: PMK at March 18, 2008 10:58 AM

Yawn. What difference does it make who's in charge of the palestinians? They are all of the same mindset. A turd can be called many things but you can never change its odor.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 18, 2008 11:19 AM

Personally, as an Israeli, I prefer to stand against Hamas and not Fatah:
They both want "throwing Israel into the sea".
Fatah is smarter and wanna do it in two stepS (first the 67 borders and than into the sea). Hamas wants it all in one time.
They both use terror to promote that.
Hamas says the truth-
It is a global jihadist war,
Fatah uses national disguise for that cause.

Hamas admits he will never recognize Israel- Fatah is sneaky enough to talk about "as soon as they respect our "rights""

However Hamas is boycotted by the world, Fatah is supported!

HAMAS is better for us-

Yair-Jerusalem

Posted by: zion at March 18, 2008 11:52 AM

I love that Azzam Pasha quote! God-sanctioned mass gang rape. It IS in their 'holy' book. And it is explicitly being practiced NOW in Sweden, UK, Netherlands etc

Posted by: poetcomic1 at March 18, 2008 1:59 PM

Abbas has always been a weak leader, and he and his other Fatah warlords are seen, correctly, as willing to mouth certain phrases for the Americans -- "we choose peace" are the first words, and the only words that the credulous will-to-believe Americans hear, but never failing to add another phrase, which signals clearly to Arab audiences that Hudaibiyya is the model, Hudaibiyya the aim: "as a strategic option." (The Americans never understand what that phrase means, but they do now it is a little puzzling or troubling, so better for them, and for the "peace-process," not to think about it, much less discuss it).

He is essentially running a rival criminal gang, a gang that is willing to set a few not very significant limits on its behavior, but that still serve to distinguish it from the rival gang in the eyes of the police -- that is, of the outside world. Like a gang most interested in turning a profit and willing, temporarily, here and there, to tamp down violence, or to deal in cocaine and heroin but virtuously abjuring dealing in meth amphetamine, the warlords of Hamas are most interestedd in money, the money they get from the renewed Jizyah of the nearly eight billion dollars in foreign aid, and to keep that aid flowing, they occasionally have to give speeches suitable for Western ears.

Meanwhile, the Israeli government is run by a truly unusual -- even for Israel -- collection of fools of Chelm. These include, but are not limited to, the disgraced but still-in-office Olmert, the timid and confused Livni, the irrepressible Haim Ramon who thinks all kinds of things should be given up, and pronto, and of course the dreamer of dreams whose last twenty years have consisted of collecting awards from Jewish groups abroad, and continuing to prate at home about how history doesn't matter, facts don't matter, what counts are dreams -- his, Shimon Peres' -- dreams. And this collection of four stooges is unlikely ever to exhibit the kind of sobriety and ability to think things through, even very unpleasant things, such as the nature of Islam, the promptings of texts and tenets, that explain not only Arab behavior in the past, but Arab behavior now, and in the future. For if that sobriety and studiousness were exhibited, the conclusions would be different, and there would be no faith at all put in peace-processing, and no reliance, none, on those in Fatah who are merely Slow Jihadists when compared to the Fast Jihadists of Hamas. They all share -- they must share -- the same goals, of removing the Infidel nation-state of Israel from land once possessed by Muslims. On the To-Do List of Muslims, re-taking land that was once possessed by Muslims is given priority, although now, with the new instruments of Jihad other than the use of military force -- the Money Weapon, Da'wa, demographic conquest -- that make more likely that other areas, as in parts of Western Europe or sub-Saharan Africa, may possibly yield even before all areas once held by Muslims are recaptured, it may be that the traditional prioritizing on that To-Do list will be less rigidly adhered to than it might once have been.

Why, despite all that aid money, that nearly eight billion dollars, is Abbas losing out? As stated above, it is in the first place because his hold was always that of a racketeer paying out money to obtain most temporary allegiance. But since that money has been promised in such abundance, and apparently will come anyway, to be distributed to everyone no matter whom they support, or what they think (in Gaza as in the "West Bank"), no real change in behavior is required from the "Palestinians" as long as Abbas (or his usefully technocratic accountant Fayyad, whom the Westerners all love, failing to realize that he is not quite what they take him to be, and in any case has no following at all, and no political power, but is merely a useful employee with reassuring eyeshades). It would be far better to deny any Western aid to the "Palestinians" and ask them to go, hat in hand, to the rich Arabs. If they get money, they will at least not be getting it from Infidels whose generosity they will not be grateful for, but which will merely reinforce their sense of aggrievement, that the money is given to them by Infidels because it is their do, because “Infidels” allowed Israel to come into existence (actually, no one allowed Israel to come into existence; it was fought for by Jews, and constructed by Jews in Israel with some help from others outside of Israel, but until after the second successful defense of the country, in 1967, no military or other aid came from the United States, or any significant aid arrived from anywhere else) and, furthermore, because “Palestinians” are Muslims and Infidels owe them a living, just as Infidels in Western Europe and North America owe Muslims in countries without oil wealth aid, or owe Muslims living in Infidel lands all kinds of benefits, including those that support monstrously large Muslim families, and even polygamous arrangements, by those who are keenly aware of the use of demographic increase as an instrument of domination and conquest. It is important to stop all acts that reinforce the historic relationship of dhimmi to Muslim overlord, and the best way to do so is to stop transferring more Infidel funds and other aid to Muslims, including the “Palestinian” Arabs who are the shock troops of the wider Jihad, the Lesser Jihad, conducted by Muslim Arabs (and seconded by non-Arab Muslims who take bpth t Islam, and Arab supremacism, deeply to heart).

There is still no recognition of why it is that decades of peace-processing have led, and always will lead, essentially nowhere. Or at least, nowhere if the goal is a true and permanent peace between Israel and those who wish to see it removed from the face of the earth. Occasionally one reads someone recognizing that this is a long conflict, and that is when someone says something like “it has been going on for a hundred years.” No, not a hundred years. The inadmissibility of an Infidel nation-state within Dar al-Islam (and ultimately, anywhere in the world) is a doctrine that goes back not one hundred years, but 1350 years. It comes out of the texts and tenets of Islam. One can pretend otherwise. One can try now this, and now that. One can fly about, conducting “shuttle diplomacy.” One can force this tangible concession out of the Israelis, and now that one, in exchange, as always, for promises, only promises, and the statement – deeply disturbing – that “we have chosen peace as a strategic option.”

Or one can do something else. One can look steadily and whole at those texts and tenets of Islam, and read what the scholars say about treaty-making between Muslims and non-Muslims. The indispensable understanding of the relevant doctrines can be found in Majid Khadduri’s “War and Peace in Islam,” , but if one wishes, one can find dozens or hundreds of other authoritative texts that will all say the same – how is it these books and articles never make it into the hands of those who make our policies in the Middle East? What keeps them from ever being consulted, or read by those who advise those who make policy?

And if one were to do that, one would have to conclude that peace and a peace treaty are not the same. A durable peace can be maintained between Israel and those who do not wish it well, who wish it very ill, if Israel does not yield any further, and is seen by its enemies not merely as powerful, but as obviously, overwhelmingly more powerful. That, and that alone, will allow Arab and other Muslim leaders to explain to their own aggressive and permanently unsettled populuations that “Darura” or the principle of necessity, requires that they wait, and wait, and wait. To do otherwise, to further reduce Israel’s size and therefore to place that country into conditions where self-defense goes from being fantastically difficult to being hellishly difficult, is to encourage attacks and encourage war.

Deterrence worked for the United States during the Cold War. It can be made to work again, especially as it is clear that the rest of the Western world, nolens-volens, is slowly waking up to the meaning, and menace, of Islam. Even those who try to appease Muslims, by for example preventing the showing of the film by Geert Wilders, demonstrate unwittingly that they know what that meaning, and that menace, must be. Such awareness, and such a sharing of the threat, will only increase. The Israelis need only hold on. The cavalry is coming – in the shape of greater knowledge – and that will make the rest of the West more sympathetic to Israel’s permanent plight.

Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 2:33 PM

Deterrence worked for the United States during the Cold War. It can be made to work again, especially as it is clear that the rest of the Western world, nolens-volens, is slowly waking up to the meaning, and menace, of Islam.
by Hugh

Deterrence worked during the Cold War because our enemy wasn't obsessed to the point where it would destroy itself. Khrushchev boasted they would bury us but they weren't prepared to kill themselves in the process. Both sides stepped back from the brink of Armageddon.
How to deter a foe who worships death and who is willing to die and whose leaders believe the death of their nation, if it brings on the 12th imam, will be glorious?
They aren't satisfied even to maintain a status quo. They want it all. Death is no punishment. The only thing they seem to value is Mecca. Are they prepared to see it vaporized? If that doesn't give them pause then what will?

Posted by: PMK at March 18, 2008 5:37 PM