I am truly sorry that civilians were killed by the suicide bombers in Jerusalem. At the same time, I am more than a little angered by the Israeli demands that Arafat keep Hamas from continuing there terrorists attacks. It must be borne in mind that Israel helped nuture Hamas in the Gaza Strip in an attempt to undermine the PLO’s power base in the aftermath of Israeli invasion of Lebanon. That when Arafat was in exile in Tunisia, Shin Bet was funding Hamas in order to pursue a divide and conquer policy against the Palestinians. Much as the United States nurtured the Taliban as a proxy agent against the Soviets, Israel nurtured Hamas as a proxy agent against the PLO’s attempts to establish a secular Palestinian state.
When you act as the midwife in the birth of groups like the Taliban or Hamas, don’t expect uncritical support from everyone else when these groups attack your civilian population.
Israel has systematically tried to stop any attempts to organize a secular Palestinian state. It is highly unrealistic that they demand the main proponents of such an idea to effectively control groups who were groomed to destabilize them.
No, go out and read some history for yourself. I am not interested in getting into dueling quotes. I would suggest searching under Edward Said or Noam Chomsky if you really want to find some outside info. Not endorsing their arguments, but they are usually extremely well foot-noted.
Bagkitty, please. If you would just read a few newspapers, you would find out that the Taliban didn’t exist until after the Soviet Union was already history.
Yes, we aided various guerillas to fight against the Soviets, and yes many of those were Islamist. But the Taliban didn’t exist then. The Taliban was started with the help of PAKISTANI intelligence, and took over Afghanistan after the Soviets had left and the various mujahadeen factions that the US had supported were engaged in a bloody civil war. The Taliban succeeded in taking over the country because everyone was sick of the warlords. Except many of the warlords defected to the Taliban, just like today many of the “Taliban” are suddenly no longer Taliban.
The US didn’t create the Taliban, or fund the Taliban, or support the Taliban.
Now that we’ve disposed of that mistaken bit of information, please provide some evidence that Israel actually created Hamas. You do understand that we might feel less inclined to simply believe you, since we know you’ve been seriously wrong about other things.
Nope, sorry, can’t find even that anywhere, Bagkitty, and I’ve been sitting here looking.
Google, “shin bet funding hamas”. Zilch. “Shin bet fund hamas”. Zilch, except for the fact that Cat Stevens denies sending them any money. “Hamas funding”, it’s mostly from other Arab nations, especially Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Apparently this is Mr. Said’s own private little conspiracy theory, not found on websites that don’t refer to him. And, BTW, here’s his agenda.
So, it’s all the fault of the various Israeli, Repressive Arab, and American Power Structures, who really run the world, and incidentally brainwash nice middle-class guys into flying jets into the World Trade Center.
We don’t excuse ignorance quite so easily 'round here, especially when it’s accompanied by idignant rudeness. And you’re still wrong–the U.S. didn’t even fund the precursors of the Taliban.
Edward Said and Noam Chomsky? Those are the sources of your wisdom?
Edward “I was born in Jerusalem! No, really!” Said? Edward “Let’s throw rocks at Israeli soldiers obeying UN decisions, because if they respond it would be a war crime!” Said? Edward Said, who thinks that YASSER ARAFAT is a moderate, bleeding-heart wimp? Here’s an offer - you don’t quote Edward Said, and I won’t quote Meir Kahane.
As for Noam Chomsky: as political analysts go, he’s a brilliant linguist.
Oh, and the OP: I sincerely doubt it, but we may have some cpm[licency in the founding of Hamas. After we destoy it, we’ll review our past decisions, and atone for our mistakes.
Does anyone think one partisan is going to change the mind of another?
Why are ‘cites’ (short for ‘citations’, I assume) demanded from only those with whom one disagrees? And, must every bit of human knowledge be on the web in order to be considered valid?
For the self-evident reason that one does not need to be convinced of that which one already believes. In Great Debates, “cite, please” is a means of indicating that a poster has failed to demonstrate his or her case. The OP offers no evidence whatsoever for a ridiculous–and, in one regard, demonstrably incorrect–proposition. In such circumstances, it would be the height of folly to discuss that proposition.
It doesn’t. Web sites are preferred because it makes an Internet discussion much easier, but alternative sources are generally acceptable. Ignorance, on the other hand, is not acceptable.
We’re not debating obscure arcana here, Happy. It’s not like we’re discussing “19th Century Oriental and Ottoman Influences on the Works of Alfred, Lord Tennyson”. We’re discussing “general human knowledge”, and yes, it’s reasonable to expect that the kind of “general human knowledge” we’re discussing (namely, whether the Israelis have been supporting Hamas all these years) would be mentioned on the Web. The fact that it isn’t, is telling in itself.