jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Can you cite to any long truces? All accounts show a consistent barrage of rockets since 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Israel–Hamas_ceasefire

There were others that I don't have time to track down.

I would not call a 6 month ceasefire that apparently neither party held to a "long truce."

I would love nothing more than to have the Palestinians have a thriving society in Gaza but I just dont believe that it can happen, even if Israel completely lifts the blockade, given the culture of hatred, the teaching of children to hate, and the glorification of violence.

The currently use what aid they do get for weapons and tunnels, not for schools and hospitals. How and why would that change?

I'm not sure the bolded is true, but regardless, Israel uses it's aid for weapons. Moreover, that aid comes from the US.

Maybe you don't trust Hamas. What do you propose? Do you really think Israel can solve this militarily? If so, what makes this different from all the other times? History has shown that Israel can't win militarily. Every time the conflict reaches the point where Israel sees that containing it will only make things worse. At that point, the US steps in and negotiates a cease fire. Then, both Israel and Hamas accuse each other of violating the cease fire and the shooting starts again. Rinse and repeat. If this pattern only leads to more rockets, why not try another tactic? If it also results in more rockets, you are just back to the same place.

I wish I knew. But to allow Hamas the opportunity to continue building the tunnels that have been found leading to Israeli cities and villages for the sole purpose of committing terrorist attacks is simply not an option.

Do you think Hamas would allow an international peacekeeping troops - either US or otherwise to see to the destruction of those tunnels and to monitor the rockets?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I would not call a 6 month ceasefire that apparently neither party held to a "long truce."

I would love nothing more than to have the Palestinians have a thriving society in Gaza but I just dont believe that it can happen, even if Israel completely lifts the blockade, given the culture of hatred, the teaching of children to hate, and the glorification of violence.

The currently use what aid they do get for weapons and tunnels, not for schools and hospitals. How and why would that change?

Gaza does not have access to electricity approximately 12 hours of the day. Israel controls their access to electricity and water. Israel prohibits construction materials from entering Gaza. Israel will not permit Gaza to have an airport or a seaport. Israel limits the freedom of movement of people in Gaza. Israel dictates to Gaza's fishermen where they can and cannot fish.

How do you propose that Gazans build anything under these conditions? They literally cannot build schools and hospitals if they wanted to, because Israel does not allow construction materials in legally! The "culture of hatred" is not the problem here. It's a good red herring, but it's not the problem.

Given the extensive tunnel system and the extensive weapons and missiles, they clearly have access to some materials, even if Israel is not providing them with this access.

Anonymous wrote:

I would not call a 6 month ceasefire that apparently neither party held to a "long truce."

I would love nothing more than to have the Palestinians have a thriving society in Gaza but I just dont believe that it can happen, even if Israel completely lifts the blockade, given the culture of hatred, the teaching of children to hate, and the glorification of violence.

The currently use what aid they do get for weapons and tunnels, not for schools and hospitals. How and why would that change?

Gaza does not have access to electricity approximately 12 hours of the day. Israel controls their access to electricity and water. Israel prohibits construction materials from entering Gaza. Israel will not permit Gaza to have an airport or a seaport. Israel limits the freedom of movement of people in Gaza. Israel dictates to Gaza's fishermen where they can and cannot fish.

How do you propose that Gazans build anything under these conditions? They literally cannot build schools and hospitals if they wanted to, because Israel does not allow construction materials in legally! The "culture of hatred" is not the problem here. It's a good red herring, but it's not the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Can you cite to any long truces? All accounts show a consistent barrage of rockets since 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Israel–Hamas_ceasefire

There were others that I don't have time to track down.

I would not call a 6 month ceasefire that apparently neither party held to a "long truce."

I would love nothing more than to have the Palestinians have a thriving society in Gaza but I just dont believe that it can happen, even if Israel completely lifts the blockade, given the culture of hatred, the teaching of children to hate, and the glorification of violence.

The currently use what aid they do get for weapons and tunnels, not for schools and hospitals. How and why would that change?

I'm not sure the bolded is true, but regardless, Israel uses it's aid for weapons. Moreover, that aid comes from the US.

Maybe you don't trust Hamas. What do you propose? Do you really think Israel can solve this militarily? If so, what makes this different from all the other times? History has shown that Israel can't win militarily. Every time the conflict reaches the point where Israel sees that containing it will only make things worse. At that point, the US steps in and negotiates a cease fire. Then, both Israel and Hamas accuse each other of violating the cease fire and the shooting starts again. Rinse and repeat. If this pattern only leads to more rockets, why not try another tactic? If it also results in more rockets, you are just back to the same place.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Can you cite to any long truces? All accounts show a consistent barrage of rockets since 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Israel–Hamas_ceasefire

There were others that I don't have time to track down.

I would not call a 6 month ceasefire that apparently neither party held to a "long truce."

I would love nothing more than to have the Palestinians have a thriving society in Gaza but I just dont believe that it can happen, even if Israel completely lifts the blockade, given the culture of hatred, the teaching of children to hate, and the glorification of violence.

The currently use what aid they do get for weapons and tunnels, not for schools and hospitals. How and why would that change?

Let's remember that Israel does not act in good faith, either.

Hours before Hamas strongman Ahmed Jabari was assassinated, he received the draft of a permanent truce agreement with Israel, which included mechanisms for maintaining the cease-fire in the case of a flare-up between Israel and the factions in the Gaza Strip. This, according to Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin, who helped mediate between Israel and Hamas in the deal to release Gilad Shalit and has since then maintained a relationship with Hamas leaders.

Baskin told Haaretz on Thursday that senior officials in Israel knew about his contacts with Hamas and Egyptian intelligence aimed at formulating the permanent truce, but nevertheless approved the assassination.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israeli-peace-activist-hamas-leader-jabari-killed-amid-talks-on-long-term-truce.premium-1.478085

Maybe leaders in Hamas wonder whether they will be assassinated if they negotiate with Israel?

http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/press-releases/unrwa-condemns-placement-rockets-second-time-one-its-schools

Rockets found in vacant school in Gaza. UN not allowed to stay long enough to count the number.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Can you cite to any long truces? All accounts show a consistent barrage of rockets since 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Israel–Hamas_ceasefire

There were others that I don't have time to track down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

This sentence presupposes that Hamas cannot abide by an agreement, or that they are some sort of irrational actor. What is *your* basis for that?

1. Having a charter that lists the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews as their primary goal.
2. Starting a war that they cannot win and knowingly puts their own civilians in danger
3. The fact that Hamas continued to shoot rockets and dig tunnels after the last 2 ceasefires.

Hamas does not have a charter that lists the murder of Jews as a primary goal. This sort of hyperbole -- regardless of which side of the debate uses it -- does nothing to advance the conversation. As I have said previously, the Hamas charter proposes border of a future state that exactly match those proposed by the Likud Party's charter. Likud is currently Israel's ruling party. Charter amendment should be addressed consistently.

Hamas didn't agree to the Egyptian ceasefire and it is not known who violated the shorter ceasefires.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Can you cite to any long truces? All accounts show a consistent barrage of rockets since 2007.

Anonymous wrote:Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

Yes, i believe that. Hamas has observed long truces with Israel. It seems accepted among most that Hamas is always the aggressor. But, Hamas generally sees itself as responding to Israeli aggression. It generally can make a decent case for it as well. If Israel agreed to Hamas' terms, it would cause a huge increase in Hamas' popularity and, more importantly, immediate improvement in the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. If Hamas were to do anything to reverse that, its popularity would be very negatively impacted.

Israel is unlikely to agree to any of Hamas' demands, however. Doing so would cause Hamas' popularity to increase so that it would easily displace Fateh in the West Bank. Then, Israel would have to deal with Hamas on two sides.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

This sentence presupposes that Hamas cannot abide by an agreement, or that they are some sort of irrational actor. What is *your* basis for that?

1. Having a charter that lists the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews as their primary goal.
2. Starting a war that they cannot win and knowingly puts their own civilians in danger
3. The fact that Hamas continued to shoot rockets and dig tunnels after the last 2 ceasefires.

Anonymous wrote:
Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

This sentence presupposes that Hamas cannot abide by an agreement, or that they are some sort of irrational actor. What is *your* basis for that?

Israel let Gaza have construction materials, water, food, etc. Hamas used those materials to build tunnels so they can murder Jews. Why on earth should Israel let Hamas have building materials? To let them build more tunnels of terror? You people are deluded.

The international community needs to demilitarize the Palestinians. The Palestinians need to oust Hamas. Then, and only then can things begin to happen for the Palestinians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way this question is phrased is telling. Is it really for Israel to decide what to "do" with others?

What an arrogant country and what arrogant supporters it has.

Because that's reality. Might makes right. Historically anyway.

Might doesn't always make right, but it may lead to further boycotts of Israel and draw more countries into a conflict that wipes Israel off the map in the not too distant future.