Hamas Founder KILLED

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
does this action make Israelis safer in either the short or long term? Personsally I doubt it highly. Hence I fail to see the use of this attack. It is not justice (that would be arresting and putting him on trial), it is vengence.

The grand strategy, IIUC is to get out of Gaza, which will economize on military resources. It will also open up a new political dynamic in the territories, given that Mohammed Dahlan, who was in the Abu Mazen govt and defied arafat over control of PA security forces, is strong in Gaza.

There are two big problems with this strategy
1. Hamas is also strong on the ground in Gaza. Arafat may be so afraid of Dahlan he will ally with Hamas against Dahlan.
2. As with Lebanon in 1999, an Israeli strategic withdrawl will be spun as a victory for terror.

Killing Yassin certainly deals with 2, and in the apparent view of Israeli strategists deals with 1. By killing Yassin no one can claim that the withdrawl from Gaza is simply a retreat after defeat. And it weakens Hamas POLITICALLY on the ground in Gaza, during its death struggle with Dahlan. It also sends a not so subtle message to Arafat, should he decide to openly ally with Hamas. Weighing that, and Yassins real value as an inciter, versus some marginal impact on recruitment, it was decided this was a "go"

A counter argument would have to come from a detailed analysis of Gaza politics, not the usual handwringing.

[Whaleboy]

I don't think these targetted killings are a good way to achieve anything, except the further escalation of violence which I think we can all agree is not desireable. Needless to say, they enjoy support (though waning iirc) at home, meaning it works in a democracy, and little international condemnation, or at least, far less than I would like.

Israel should capture these people. Killing them merely martyrs them, making the situation worse. Capture them, don't let them die in custody, and then subject them to a FAIR trial.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Killing Yassin certainly deals with 2, and in the apparent view of Israeli strategists deals with 1. By killing Yassin no one can claim that the withdrawl from Gaza is simply a retreat after defeat. And it weakens Hamas POLITICALLY on the ground in Gaza, during its death struggle with Dahlan. It also sends a not so subtle message to Arafat, should he decide to openly ally with Hamas. Weighing that, and Yassins real value as an inciter, versus some marginal impact on recruitment, it was decided this was a "go"

A counter argument would have to come from a detailed analysis of Gaza politics, not the usual handwringing.

How does this weaken Hamas politically? It just got the biggest possible martyr. Do you think the Palestinians don;t go throught the whole images game? If Dahlan were to move against Hamas, would he not be seen as bein Isreal's toddy by following up?

That is the problem-Yassin might be worth more as a giant poster gazing from above than as a man.

[The diplomat]

I don't understand this argument that killing a terrorist leader will only provoke more terrorist attacks. These groups like Hamas and Al Queda consider westerners to be "godless infidels" that in their minds deserve death. They don't need us to attack them, to want to kill us. They already hate us enough to want to destroy us! So, isn't it better to take out of their leaders so that those leaders cannot continue to plot against us? If we don't kill them, they will only continue to plot against us.

[GePap]

Originally posted by The diplomat
If we don't kill them, they will only continue to plot against us.

So arrest them and place them on trial instead.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by The diplomat
I don't understand this argument that killing a terrorist leader will only provoke more terrorist attacks. These groups like Hamas and Al Queda consider westerners to be "godless infidels" that in their minds deserve death. They don't need us to attack them, to want to kill us. They already hate us enough to want to destroy us! So, isn't it better to take out of their leaders so that those leaders cannot continue to plot against us? If we don't kill them, they will only continue to plot against us.

yes standing far away in europe trying desperately to not be the target of terror attacks it becomes easier to yell at the good guys for getting their boots muddy. afterall, it doesn't rain in europe.

[chequita guevara]

I don't care about Yassin or his bodyguards. It's just that Israel has a nasty and frequent habit of killing innocent bystanders along with their targets. Nothing boils the blood like dead kids.

[Edan]

Originally posted by GePap
could they be put to death given that Israel does not have a DP?

Uhh, IIRC, Israel does have the death penalty, although it's only been used once.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


NOt really. While it was the Arabs who first resorted to armed violence, it is not like there was "peaceful" coexistance- think why most Brit. whitepapers writen during their mandate (and all the time as they prepared to create a Jewish homeland) were not very positive about the zionists. For exmaple, the zionist labor movement boycotted any Jewish business that dared employ Arabs "with jewish money", sop as more efficient modern industry built with foreing investment drove the arab artisans out of work, they could not find work at these new factories becuase the owners were bullied into employing only jews, not arabs. As you may guess, this created mass resentment among the ranks of the now unemployed or impoverished.

Did arab incomes actually drop during the mandate period??? My impression was that the overall demand for labor increased, and wage levels with it, leading to in-migration to Palestine from Egypt, etc.

The Labour movement did NOT want a society of Jewish Landowners and Factory owners relying on arab labor. IE they did not want a South Africa. To remake the Jew as laborer, it was necessary that Jews work as laborers.

In any case, the main policy demand the arabs made of the british under the mandate, and which they advocated for with violence, was NOT enforcement of fair labor codes, it was the reduction and finally the elimination of ALL jewish immigration. Economic concerns could have been negotiated. At a time when the Jews of Europe faced extermination, eliminating immigration was not something the Labour Zionist leadership could accept. As it was the Revisionists were criticising them, with some reason, for accepting limits on immigration, and not pushing for unlimited immigration.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by GePap
So arrest them and place them on trial instead.

yeah, I am sure if Israel had just asked Yassin politely to surrender, he would have.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


How does this weaken Hamas politically? It just got the biggest possible martyr. Do you think the Palestinians don;t go throught the whole images game? If Dahlan were to move against Hamas, would he not be seen as bein Isreal's toddy by following up?

That is the problem-Yassin might be worth more as a giant poster gazing from above than as a man.

Depends on what he was doing as man, which is why I said that whats required is detailed analysis of Gaza politics.

Surely Dahlan wont move against Hamas this week. In fact first he has to consolidate his own power vis a vis the residual Arafat loyal forces. Its not clear how an enraged Hamas effects this. Its also not clear to me that everyone in Gaza suddenly rises up in sympathy for Hamas now. They all know who Yassin was, and why Israel targeted him. The folks who attend his funeral, etc are largely ones who supported Hamas to begin with.

[Az]

Israel should capture these people. Killing them merely martyrs them, making the situation worse. Capture them, don't let them die in custody, and then subject them to a FAIR trial.

Why should we? we're at war against them.

How would you propose to capture them, anyway?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
On the notion that raids are impossible- Israel launches raids in the extreemly densely populated refugee camps all the time to arrest militants-if the IDF will risk soldiers lives, and the lives of Pal. civilians to get low level militants, all of sudden this is utterly impossible with high level ones?

I would expect that Yassin is better protected than low and midlevel Hamasniks. In particular he was apparently constantly on the move, so that info on where he is goes cold very fast, something probably not true for the guys lower down, how dont command the number of safe house, the comm networks, etc. Basically if you here hes at point X and send in a raid, he'll be gone before the commandos finish fighting there way through to where hes at, if not well before.

Look at whats happening in Wazirstan, where it appears Ayman al-Zawahiri has escaped a cordon of 7,000 Pakistani troops.

[Ned]

I haven't read through this whole thread, but just let me say that I think Israel waited far to long to deal with this monster.

I am also surprised with the British and French condemnations.

This morning Condi Rice call this evil killer a terrorist. Hopefully the US administration will issue a statement to that effect and block the Brits and the Frogs from condemning Israel in the UN. If Bush issues any condemnation of this, he will lose a lot of points with me.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Did arab incomes actually drop during the mandate period??? My impression was that the overall demand for labor increased, and wage levels with it, leading to in-migration to Palestine from Egypt, etc.

We need to find the numbers for this to continue

The Labour movement did NOT want a society of Jewish Landowners and Factory owners relying on arab labor. IE they did not want a South Africa. To remake the Jew as laborer, it was necessary that Jews work as laborers.

Fine notion-of course, this is likely to have real life consequences.

In any case, the main policy demand the arabs made of the british under the mandate, and which they advocated for with violence, was NOT enforcement of fair labor codes, it was the reduction and finally the elimination of ALL jewish immigration. Economic concerns could have been negotiated. At a time when the Jews of Europe faced extermination, eliminating immigration was not something the Labour Zionist leadership could accept. As it was the Revisionists were criticising them, with some reason, for accepting limits on immigration, and not pushing for unlimited immigration.

To begin, the violence begun in the late 20's, before Nazism, so the whole part about Jews facing extermination was not in the cards when the violence begun.

My basic question is this- can anyone here think they would have behaved differently form the Palestinians? We have seen before how anti-immigrant violence springs up-people in conservative societies all of a sudden see things change radically as new immigrants sweep in. New people with new ideas and languages and cultures are a great shock to the system even in liberal pro-immigrant places like the US. But the situation for the pals. was even more radical for a few reasons- One, of course, is the Pals had no self-rule. IN the 1920's the US put very tight and strict limits on immigration-most states in Europe were even more stingy-and no one blames them. I am sure if the pals had had self-rule, they would have also shut the doors-but you could no more fault them than the uS and every other state in which nativist policies win out-but the problem was the pals did not have that choice- think of it, you see all these immigrants come in and you have no says in whether they can come. Does anyone expect people in this situation to be happy about it? Add on top of this that the immigrant are not coming to join their society, but to create a new one, their OWN, on what you consider your land-so not only did they have no political control over immigration into the mandate (someone in London did), but the immigrants are not coming to become part of their society, but to create a brand new separate one which happens to be in the same parcel of land.

I doubt most highly that ANY people would be willing to let such a situation develop.