First off, thank you very much.
I’m surprised that none of Carter’s defenders have engaged in a rational analysis of his motives, and it takes someone who is critical of Carter to meet me half way. My hat is off to you.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
I think Carter has rounded the bend of “dangerously naive” and is headed deep into “willful ignorance” territory. But I bet he is sincere in his belief that Israel’s concerns for her safety are exaggerated, and that Hamas would make nice if Israel stopped ‘provoking’ her by, well, refusing to participate in Carter’s folie a dieux and acting to secure her own safety.
[/quote]
Perhaps… I can see how that argument would be made. But I really can’t fully wrap my mind around just how deep a well of willful ignorance Carter would have to be drawing on, especially since he’s been there.
I mean, for instance, take the “no Israelis killed by Hamas since 2004” claim. Only a few things are possible, as I see it.
-Carter doesn’t care about the truth, at all, and so doesn’t even take the time to learn the facts, just makes them up. This, I think, would be even worse than him knowing the facts and deliberately getting them wrong.
-Carter knew that there had been attacks, but felt his story and his agenda would better be served by claiming that there were no attacks, and thus casting the Israeli government as irrational, warmongering rejectionists.
-Carter vaguely remembered something, and instead of taking 30 seconds to google, just went with his ‘gut’. And I do mean 30 seconds, a google search for “Hamas takes responsibility 2004” has thisas the third hit.
-Jimmy Carter is senile, and has no clue what the fuck is going on.
I can’t help but find the second of the four possibilities to be far more persuasive, although I can accept that others find other possibilities more likely (although, of course, I still think that they’re wrong 
).
Have I missed any possibilities?
[QUOTE=Shodan]
Although I wonder if Carter (based on his Sunday School quotes and what he said to Meir) actually harbors some notion that Israel is being punished by God by being subject to terrorist attacks and the intifada, because they have not “turned again to the Lord” as the Old Testament says. It may even be possible that Carter sees himself as a quasi-prophetic figure in preaching to the Jews what he sees as the will of God. I don’t know that he even would have a clear idea of what Israel should do, apart from accepting his ideas wholesale and damn the consequences.
[/quote]
I’d say that is a possible, and maybe even a plausible analysis… but again, I’m not quite sure what he really thinks and what the contents of his mind are when he’s alone with his soul at 3:00 a.m. on sleepless nights.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
I think all he wants is a peace treaty, regardless of the subsequent consequences. The Camp David accords are pretty much the only undoubted achievement of Carter’s rather ineffectual tenure, and thus Carter would seize on the notion of a treaty as vindication for his ideas.
[/quote]
See, I can certainly agree with that (with the caveat that he believes that a peace treaty can be reached by hamstringing Israel). However, I’d also hasten to add that supporting a peace treaty does not mean you actually support peace, especially since all facts point to such a treaty being a sham unless groups like Hamas actually wanted an end to violence, or were successfully marginalized and defanged.
That, in a nutshell, is my point about not taking him at his word. As I said above, I simply cannot wrap my mind around the degree of willful ignorance it would take for Carter to be quite that clueless. I think that supporting a “peace treaty” which would be more observed in the breach, puts paid to any claims of being an advocate for peace. I simply cannot credit Carter, unless he’s senile, with actually being so unaware of the situation that he thinks a peace treaty with Hamas as it currently exists, would be anything but a sham.
It’s one thing for people on a message board who don’t know a lot about the situation to talk about how misunderstood Hamas is. It’s quite another for Carter, who’s actually been there, and would have seen Hamas recruiting, and glorification of suicide bombers, and incitement to genocide, and spewing blatant anti-Semitism. The most convincing analysis, to me, is that Carter knows what Hamas is, knows that a peace treaty wouldn’t bring peace, but is prepared to then go and blame Israel for the peace treaty failing. Perhaps, as you’ve said, thinking that he’s securing his legacy in the process.
