Tag Archives: Hamas

Opinion: Remove the Causefire before a Ceasefire

Posted on by
9

Egypt, one of two Israeli allies in the Arab world, has suggested a ceasefire in the current hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza. US President Obama was encouraged about the development and said: “We are encouraged that Egypt has made a proposal to accomplish this goal that we hope can restore the calm that we are seeking.”

A ceasefire at this time would be a mistake.

Israel has already had two engagements in Gaza since it left the area in 2005: Operation Cast Lead in 2008 and Operation Pillar of Defense in 2012. Both of those ceasefires failed to grant any long-term peace to Israeli citizens because they did not address the fundamental cause of the Hamas rocket fire.

Hamas wants Israel destroyed. All ceasefires that Hamas agrees to are simply hiatuses between battles.

There are two basic actions that must occur that world bodies can help facilitate that will ensure a long-term cessation of hostilities:

  1. the destruction of all missiles in Gaza;
  2. the dismantling of Hamas

Removing and Destroying all Missiles in Gaza

Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu and Acting Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas spent much of the past year in a fruitless exercise of “Peace Negotiations” which had no chance of success. Much of the reason that talks were D.O.A. when they began, was because Abbas had no control (and still has no control) of Gaza. For Netanyahu, negotiating with a party who could not deliver the peace he sought was a fool’s errand – as the world witnessed.

All of the two-state peace negotiations over the years discussed a demilitarized Palestinian state. The action of removing all of the missiles now, would advance a major goal (and remove a major stumbling block) in moving towards a two-state solution. The removal itself would serve as the impetus for bringing the parties back to negotiations.

President Obama recently touted his accomplishment in ridding Syria of all chemical weapons in a peaceful manner. He said: “The fact that we didn’t have to fire a missile to get that accomplished is not a failure to uphold international norms, it’s a success.” Now would be the ideal time to follow that format and identify, remove and destroy all of the missiles in Gaza. It would save the people of Gaza and the soldiers in the Israeli Defense Forces many casualties.

Dismantling Hamas

Hamas is not simply a political party. It is a rabidly anti-Semitic terrorist organization. It should not be allowed to exist in its current form under any circumstances. It cannot solely give up its weapons nor can it merely modify its charter. The entire entity is a cancer and must be dismantled.

The Hamas charter is beyond an obstacle to peace; it is an instrument of war. While former President Jimmy Carter may have tried to overlook a passing phrase of animosity towards Israel and Jews, the basic fact is that the founding document is an unambiguous call to kill Jews and to destroy the Jewish State again and again.

As echoed by its leaders, the essence of the Hamas philosophy is to kill Jews and destroy Israel. No peace will ever come between the Palestinians and Israel as long as the party exists. The time is now for all world bodies to effectively terminate this vile entity.

Sources:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/obama-welcomes-egypt-s/1264372.html

http://time.com/75043/obama-syria-chemical-weapons-removed/

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4300.htm

 

Around the Country in 80 Miles

Posted on by
1

In 1873, the science fiction writer Jules Verne imagined a world where a person could circumnavigate the globe in just 80 days. He understood that technology had developed to a point where the assumed correlation between distance and time was no longer part of the here and now.

In 2014, the civil war in Israel-Palestine entered its 78th year. The Arab riots that began in 1936 that sought an end to Jewish immigration, neighbors and nation, entered a new stage. The Arabs’ means of attempting to enforce their xenophobic demand moved from rocks to rockets; from stabbings to missiles.

The Palestinians have launched crude rockets against Israeli towns since 2006. While the Qassam rockets were not very accurate and did not have a particularly long range, Arab terrorists rejoiced as they fired thousands of these rockets at Israeli cities and towns.

In 2006, 2007 and 2008 Arabs from Gaza fired 1777, 2807 and 3716 rockets into Israel, killing 34 people and injuring over 1500. In retaliation, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead in December 2008 to stop the rocket fire. “Relative” calm was restored with “only” 858 and 365 rockets launched against Israel in 2009 and 2010, respectively. But the attacks ramped up again in the following years with 680 and 2273 rockets against Israel in 2011 and 2012. In response, in November 2012, Israel needed to launch Operation Pillar of Defense to protect its citizens. In 2013, rocket fired dropped 95%.

Most of the rockets were the rudimentary Gazan-made Qassam rockets. In recent years, both Syria and Iran have supplied Hamas, which runs Gaza, more sophisticated and longer-range weaponry. The Iranian-made Fajr-5 has a range up to 47 miles and the recent Gazan arrival of the Syria-made M-302s have a range of 93 miles. In just the past few days, the Palestinians have used these new rockets to fire as far north as Haifa, a city of 260,000 about 80 miles north of the Gaza Strip.

Israel’s action to stop the latest rocket fire, Operation Protective Edge, uses advanced technology to both destroy the Palestinians’ ability to fire missiles, and to intercept and destroy incoming missiles with its Iron Dome defense system. In the skies, technology’s reach and technology’s shield clash, while on the ground, Israel considers whether to deploy troops to root out the threat.

While technology has enabled Arab terrorists to claw further into the clouds, it has done nothing to help them modify their positions. Their hatred, xenophobia and goals remain fixed.

As a practical matter, the advance of technology and time without progress towards peace leads to a few conclusion for Israelis:

  1. Control of Borders is Essential. The Gaza blockade has minimized the influx of advanced weaponry.  Israel must similarly always enforce border control over Judea & Samaria.  This new Palestinian weaponry in both J&S and Gaza could cover the entire country.
  2. Intelligence in addition to technology.  While technology is essential to protect citizens, intelligence enables it to be used effectively with reduced collateral damage.
  3. Hamas must be dismantled. No terrorist entity may be permitted to exist, let alone participate in elections and govern.  Destructive ideology must be destroyed.

Today, just as in 1873, technology can be used to arrive at places once considered out-of-reach, and one can get there faster than ever imagined.  However, it cannot always modify primitive human emotions and reach places within our psyches.  Until a people can conquer primeval aggression, it cannot be allowed to control advanced technologies.

Source:

WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-and-palestinian-militants-exchange-fire-as-confrontation-continues-1404908708

 

US Hypocrisy – “Reasonableness and Restraint”

Posted on by
12

Thirteen years ago, on 9/11/01, 2,977 innocent civilians were murdered in the United States by terrorists armed with nothing more than pilot licenses. Since that time, the US has deployed over 1 million troops and waged two wars in countries thousands of miles from its shores. Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians were estimated to have been killed in the US-led war in Iraq, over 30 times the number of civilians killed on 9/11.

President Obama was critical of that war and pulled the US out of Iraq as he thought the US went to war with the wrong enemy. But when it came to Afghanistan, he engaged fully.

By the time Obama became president in 2009, an estimated 8,500 civilians had been killed in Afghanistan. Under his watch, from January 2009 until June 30, 2014, an additional 15,487 civilians were murdered, including 1,995 children. These totals were a fraction of the number of militants killed over those years.

Why has the Obama administration waged a war for so long? Why has it continued to fight – even though it knows of the terrible collateral damage – years after Osama bin Laden was killed?

The US continues to fight because the enemy still exists and intends to do harm.

President Obama was clear that the destruction of the terrorist infrastructure was one of the goals of his war. In November 2012 he said: “Thanks to sacrifice and service of our brave men and women in uniform, the war in Iraq is over, the war in Afghanistan is winding down, al Qaeda has been decimated, Osama bin Laden is dead.”

Obama clearly articulated his war goals: to get the US out of a war which did not have an enemy threat; destroy the enemy (al Qaeda); and take revenge on the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

However, Obama seemingly does not feel that such priorities relate to Israel. For him, the goal in the region is limited to one thing – stability (which is laughable considering the total instability of Syria, Iraq, Egypt…). Israel, in his mind, is strong enough to take a few murdered teenagers and qassam rockets. Israel’s stability is secondary to that of the region generally.

Witness Secretary of State John Kerry’s prepared remarks towards Israel after the murder of three Israeli teenagers coming home from school: “the perpetrators must be brought to justice. This is a time for all to work towards that goal without destabilizing the situation.”

Obama himself added: “At this dangerous moment, all parties must protect the innocent and act with reasonableness and restraint, not vengeance and retribution,”

America has been fighting with “vengeance and retribution” for 13 years (and counting), even when the collateral damage meant thousands of civilians murdered. Obama is actively seeking to defeat an enemy, even one thousands of miles away, that poses no existential threat to the USA.

So, how can Obama chide Israel, which has an enemy on its borders that is sworn to the country’s destruction, which fires missiles that can attack 80% of the population? How can he not understand Israel’s need to “decimate” its enemy?

The appropriate “reasonableness and restraint” may be limited to a polite response from the civilized world to Obama’s comment, while Israel actively engages Hamas and protects its citizens.

Sources:

http://www.unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/human%20rights/PoC-Civilian-Casualties-report-2007.pdf

http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/human%20rights/Protection%20of%20Civilian%202009%20report%20English.pdf

http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/Documents/UNAMA%20POC%202011%20Report_Final_Feb%202012.pdf

http://unama.unmissions.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=K0B5RL2XYcU%3D

http://www.unama.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=12254&ctl=Details&mid=15756&ItemID=37692&language=en-US

http://unama.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=12254&ctl=Details&mid=15756&ItemID=38134&language=en-US

Differentiating Hamas

Posted on by
11

It is with confusion that I watch the press try to present different sides of Hamas.  While the press may say that some Hamas members belong to the “political wing” and others the “military wing”, the simple fact is that Hamas is:

  1. a terrorist group;
  2. the most anti-Semitic ruling party in the world;
  3. a group of Holocaust deniers;
  4. committed to destroying ALL of Israel;
  5. the leading democratically elected party (winning 58% of the Palestinian parliament in their last election in 2006)

To put it another way, splicing Hamas is like differentiating between the Nazi Party, the SS and the Gestapo.  While there were differences in their roles, each was evil and guilty of genocide.

Do not kid yourselves. Hitler was democratically elected and a politician too.

Political music video on Hamas Theme Song (CSNY): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF2fcaSPB6M

The New York Times wants the military to defeat terrorists (but not Hamas)

Posted on by
17

NYT 6/9/14: “Pakistan’s Latest Crisis” was a call to action for the military to defeat terrorists. What about Israel defeating Hamas? Not so much.

The Pakistan editorial led with a strong statement about the Taliban: “In its increasingly violent effort to destroy the Pakistani state”, the NYT made the Taliban’s ultimate goal clear. It continued with a call for the Pakistani government to wake up: “Will this be the crisis that finally persuades Pakistan’s government and its powerful military to acknowledge the Taliban’s pernicious threat and confront it in a comprehensive way? It should be.” The NYT editorial board clearly spelled out its desire for a military strike to defeat the terrorist entity that attacked civilians in Pakistan.

It is distressing to compare these statements with the 11/20/12 editorial about Gaza firing nearly 1000 rockets into Israel. The NYT did not describe Hamas as a terrorist entity (labeled so by the US, Canada, EU, Japan, Jordan, Egypt and Israel). It did not state that Hamas seeks the destruction of Israel – which it has made clear throughout its charter, and the statements and actions of its leadership for many years. Rather, the NYT stated that Hamas “resorted to violence” in a statement that is either evil or laughable in its ignoring the calls for death and destruction of Jews and the Jewish State.

The Times then went on to blame Israel: “Israel also has a responsibility for the current crisis,” Is the Times suggesting that if all the Jews would just leave the Middle East and dissolve Israel the way Hamas desires, they wouldn’t have to “resort to violence”?

The NYT was loath to suggest that Israel stamp out the terrorist entity bent on its destruction stating: “But military action is no long-term answer.”

The difference between the Taliban and Hamas is that Hamas is an elected government, having won 58% of the Palestinian vote in 2006. It governs a territory, Gaza, since 2007. But its desire to destroy all of Israel and kill civilians is not an iota less than the Taliban’s goals in Pakistan and the response from the government and military should similarly be supported. The links to the two editorials are below:

 

Pakistan-Taliban editorial:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/opinion/pakistans-latest-crisis.html

“given recent events, one has to assume the militants will stop at nothing until the state is utterly destabilized and they have taken control. Pakistani political and military leaders need to be honest about the militant threat that they and their people are facing”

 

Israel-Hamas editorial

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/opinion/hamass-illegitimacy.html?_r=0

“If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel had pursued serious negotiations on a two-state solution with the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinians could have hope in a different future”

Strange difference of opinion on Boko Haram and Hamas in New York Times

Posted on by
5

What do Boko Haram and Hamas have in common? Not the concern of the New York Times.

Compare the NYT editorials of May 6, 2014 on Boko Haram, and of December 28, 2009 on Hamas:
1. Boko Haram is described as a “ruthless Islamist group“, while Hamas is described as “militant Palestinian group“- not ruthless; not driven by religious zeal

2. NYT describes the “horrifying abduction” of Nigerian girls; it simply states that Hamas is responsible for the “barrage of rocket attacks into Israeli territory” without any negative imagery

3. NYT is disgusted by Nigeria’s “shockingly slow and inept” response to Boko Haram, but NYT says “we fear that Israel’s response“- blaming the victim

4. NYT claims that Boko Haram’s goal “is to destabilize and ultimately overthrow the government.” (which BH does not claim even though the NYT assumes so). Meanwhile, Hamas clearly and publicly declares that its goal is the destruction of lsrael, but NYT fails to mention it

5. NYT correctly describes the violent history of BH with “It is not the first time Boko Haram has attacked“, but fails to mention the history of attacks by Hamas against Israel.

6. NYT wants Nigeria to “contain a virulent insurgency” but prefers to blame BOTH Israel and Hamas for Israel’s situation, ignoring that the terrorist group actively and constantly calls for the complete destruction of the country

Sources: