But it was this individual that made the statement. Again, if you think he really wants Obama to win, you have to assume that he had no idea of the effect of his endorsement. To me, that assumption is very weak assumption. But like you said, YMMV.
No, I could assume he possibly made the statement as a matter of policy that was dictated to him. Or, I could assume that, despite how sophisticated he (and you) may THINK he understand the US political process, his grasp of the intricacies aren’t as good as they could be. Or, if he is REALLY sophisticated in his understanding of US politics, perhaps he knows that only voters already pre-disposed to voting for McCain would be affected by his statement, while he could have some non-zero impact on Muslim voters or voters who support Hamas and Palestine.
I think your assertion of double and triple think is frankly weak. Do you have some plausible reason why Hamas would want McCain to win?
-XT
Isn’t it more likely that Hamas just figures Obama would be better for Hamas than McCain, both because:
- The Democrats are perceived as more pro-Palestinian than the Republicans
and
- The Bush administration has been really hostile to Hamas, designating them as a terrorist organization, restricting their funding, stopping aid to the PLA after Hamas got elected, etc. An Obama victory would be a much more a repudiation of the Bush administration than a McCain victory.
And, btw, as to the OP, Hamas has nothing to do with Iraq, and I don’t know that our presence there is directly either good or bad for them.
Exactly. Further, it’s hard to say what he really meant, but I would certainly discount his (and Hamas’) sophistication and knowledge of U.S. politics, a man who was once director of United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), an Islamic think-tank that promotes the ideology of the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas, based in Virginia.
“Revealing that UASR served as the base for the political command of Hamas in the United States, he identified Hamas official Ahmed Yousef as UASR’s Director”
If anyone doesn’t think such a person and such an orgination was/is not interesting in (also) studying, and perhaps influencing, the dynamics of politics in the United States, then perhaps the lack of sophistication should not be assigned to Yousef and Hamas.
Certainly it can be considered (as above stated) that the candidate who has commented that he wouldn’t mind continued U.S. military engagement in Iraq and Middle East would be favored by an organization that has and will benefit from turmoil and conflict in that region.
You know how it is, all Muslims are the same, unless they’re “our” Muslims.
Sure. The US presence in Iraq has been very good for them. It has helped their recruiting. They may also believe that our aggressiveness toward Iran is the only thing keeping Ahmadinejad in power given the economic circumstances he’s facing at home. Or any one of a half-dozen other reasons why they might prefer McCain.
I don’t think it’s much of stretch at all that they would want to effect the outcomes of US elections by openly endorsing the candidate they want to lose. It’s a pretty basic tactic, actually.
It has been quite good for them. They’ve pointed to the US occupation as part of the US-Zionist alliance to oppress Muslims. They rode this to victory in the Palestinian elections. It has also been a distraction and hinderance to the road map peace process, which Hamas basically opposed.
To say they have nothing to do with Iraq is incredibly short-sighted.
Precisely.
They rode PLO corruption, the security barrier and internal splits in the PLO to victory in the elections. I think you’re overthinking this.
Hamas clearly thinks that an Obama victory would be good for Hamas, and Hamas also clearly thinks that their endorsement will help him, and Hamas is clearly right-thinking and honest and forthright about most things, so they should be trusted on those two things- Wait. Well, come to think of it, there are some things that Hamas is very wrong about.
The key here is, would taking them at their word in this particular issue make the Democratic candidate look bad? If the answer is yes, then we should accept what they say at face value.
Would you deny that the US occupation is one significant factor?
And you base this entire conjecture on what exactly? Quantitatively, how much has Iraq helped recruiting for Hamas…and how much of that is associated with Republican rule exactly? I find it incredibly hard to believe that anyone in that region would want 4-8 more years of Republican rule if it means more of what Bush has given them. While I doubt Iran is shaking in it’s shoes I seriously doubt they are or have been delighted at the direction the US has taken toward the region in general and Iran specifically during the course of Bush’s administration…certainly not enough to attempt some convoluted, backhanded way to get McCain in the drivers seat.
My own Occam’s Razor seems to be indicating the the simplest explanation here is simply that Hamas favors Obama as president. It’s really as simple as that.
-XT
Yes, I would. I don’t think the US occupation of Iraq was a significant factor to Hamas’ electoral victory.
What I’m trying to figure out, more generally, is why it’s particularly relevant who people in Hamas want to win the election. I’m not going to choose the candidate I vote for based on who they support or who they don’t, and I can’t see many Americans doing so?
Mightn’t Hamas favor Obama because they dislike both McCain & the Clintons? The Clintons & McCain have long histories in the US gov’t &/or Congress; both are known to oppose Hamas. Obama is new, & while he might oppose Hamas, at least they’re not favoring someone they know is against them.
In this way, wouldn’t Hamas’s favoring of Obama simply be like most Americans’ favoring of Obama? It could be a projection on possible lesser evil from the devil they don’t know; or at least a willingness to take a chance instead of settling for the devil they do; or a simply desire to see those who have been against them replaced until they get someone more to their liking.
Certainly the USA has supported dubious opposition groups in other countries on that logic: “Maybe this guy will be worse for us than who’s in power now, but we want to see who’s in power now punished for being insufficiently for us.”
…
Or maybe they just like that Barry’s middle name is Hussein. 
So you don’t see many Americans who are influenced by lapel pins (or lack thereof), purportedly shrill laughs, allegations of being Muslim and a sleeper agent, fake tears, or judgments about people they knew for 20 minutes, once, in 1960?
I have to say while it is possible that Hamas is playing with reverse psychology, I find it unlikely. As pointed out, they have no real reason to think that a Republican administration would help them advance their goals, beyond perhaps the uncited and unsubstantiated claim that Iraq fueled their recruiting. It seems to be a bit of a stretch that, as pointed out, Hamas is quite familiar with using American media institutions to their own ends, and that they really try to convince America of their point of view in 99.9% of their public announcement, but on Obama they’re really trying to trick us.
It just doesn’t make sense. Remember, most of those PR op-eds and such are designed to cast Hamas in a good light and win them American acceptance. In order for a ‘reverse psychology’ maneuver to work wrt Obama, they’d have to be counting on all of their propaganda having failed spectacularly. Else, why would Americans who are ‘supposed’ to think that Hamas are valiant freedom fighters, think that their endorsement was a bad thing?
Perhaps (perhaps), if Hamas really was trying to torpedo Obama, the lie would have been, instead of that they support him, that in private communications he’s supported them.
All that being the case, I still view it as a non-issue. No matter what Hamas’ end goal was, it doesn’t matter. We can analyze Obama and McCain’s ME policies in their own light, I don’t think we need to care what Hamas thinks about 'em.
Why not ? The Republicans have eliminated their old enemy Saddam, done serious damage to their enemy America, largely destroyed Iraqi secularism, helped unify Iran behind it’s leadership, and discredited democracy in the region. Iran has plenty of reasons to want Republicans in office.
Well, hyperbole aside…define ‘many Americans’…
-XT
And if McCain is elected he’ll eliminate Saddam again? I’ll leave aside the rest of the hyperbole and your own skewed perspective which I doubt Hamas and or Iran look at in exactly the same light. For that matter, based on other threads I’ve seen you in wrt Iran I don’t think you are entirely consistent in your stance there either.
-XT
That’s an interesting point. Occam’s razor being wielded already anyway, perhaps the goal of such an “endorsement” is just to get a little of that Obama magic on their ownselves.
I myself endorse Obama to score with chicks.
No, but he will keep America weak, will keep Iran’s government in a strong position, and will keep secularism and democracy crushed in the ME. And the Republicans have a lot of fundamental agreement with the Islamists on how the world should be run.