Hamas Founder KILLED

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz 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.

Chegitz, could you go to the Middle East yourself and tell the terrorists to stop using civilians as human shields, and stop training impressionable, naive teenagers to carry out bombings??

[Az]

You say that the jews antagonized the proto-palestinians by siding with the Europeans against the Hashemites. I say that this is doubtful, since the proto-palestinians didn't like the desert-dwellers themselves. Reminder: Abdullah the 1st was killed by a palestinian.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Azazel
You say that the jews antagonized the proto-palestinians by siding with the Europeans against the Hashemites. I say that this is doubtful, since the proto-palestinians didn't like the desert-dwellers themselves. Reminder: Abdullah the 1st was killed by a palestinian.

Yes he was, in 1952, after he had been friendly to the new state of Israel. What i said was that the zionist backed foreign European rule as opposed to local rule, whether that be Hashemite or another group opf locals- they allied with the foreign imperialists-is this supposed to make locals happy?

[Az]

So you don't think that the fact that this is a different group of locals has any meaning?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


I would say the people who would "understand" why israel did it (as in, not only know Israels claims but also willing to see those claims as valid) are a much smaller group than the inbuilt Hamas supporters. I think for the mayority as a whole, they are not out becuase they are hidding indoors.

When i said "understand" i did not mean approve of, but people who would be clear enough on what was going on not to be surprised, and not to become any more sympathetic to Hamas then they already were.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Azazel
So you don't think that the fact that this is a different group of locals has any meaning?

Well, since after 1925 the Hashemites were out of the picture (in that the nomads now had thier own land not slated to become part of a Jewish Homeland), I think the effect is not as great as you may think. If that difference has any great bearing, it bears on the fiction that all Arabs are the same, so why should, as the Israeli right always says, the Arabs have 20 ood states and the Jews none? Obviously you agree that all Arabs are not the same.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Yes he was, in 1952, after he had been friendly to the new state of Israel. What i said was that the zionist backed foreign European rule as opposed to local rule, whether that be Hashemite or another group opf locals- they allied with the foreign imperialists-is this supposed to make locals happy?

Im sure there were locals as well who didnt support the 1922(?) rebellion - in a situation like that everyone has to predict winners and make political judgements of interest - my point was that the rejection of the Zionists at least on the part of much of the Arab leadership, was conditioned on the political struggles of the time, not an inevitable rejection of Zionist claims as you seem to indicate here and elsewhere. Lebanese Maronites also sided with the Europeans, and also earned enmity. Unfortunately neither Lebanese Maronites nor Zionists could avoid making a choice, and made the choices that were most rational at the time.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
When i said "understand" i did not mean approve of, but people who would be clear enough on what was going on not to be surprised, and not to become any more sympathetic to Hamas then they already were.

That group is most likely very small. As for ebing surprised, why would they not be? I think many of them may not have thought the Israelis foolish enough to kill him-fearing what it would bring.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Well, since after 1925 the Hashemites were out of the picture (in that the nomads now had thier own land not slated to become part of a Jewish Homeland), I think the effect is not as great as you may think. If that difference has any great bearing, it bears on the fiction that all Arabs are the same, so why should, as the Israeli right always says, the Arabs have 20 ood states and the Jews none? Obviously you agree that all Arabs are not the same.

I dont think theyre say the Arabs should have only one state, but rather that the Jews SHOULD have one. Just to clarify.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


That group is most likely very small. As for ebing surprised, why would they not be? I think many of them may not have thought the Israelis foolish enough to kill him-fearing what it would bring.

I suspect it is larger than you think. Certainly there are many in Gaza who WERE commited supporters of Hamas, before the assasination. OTOH i doubt very much that Mohammed Dahlan and his followers will suddenly switch sides - my impression is that Pal politics simply isnt THAT fluid. People make choices based on interests, ideologies, clan loyalties, etc - not based on rage at the days events, any more than people elsewhere in the world.

As for whether they were surprised, given "what it would bring" clearly we're in circular territory here. IF it would bring alot than lots of Pals would be surprised, and be more likely to be influenced by the event. BUT how much "it would bring" is precisely a function of how surprised Pals are by it.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Im sure there were locals as well who didnt support the 1922(?) rebellion - in a situation like that everyone has to predict winners and make political judgements of interest - my point was that the rejection of the Zionists at least on the part of much of the Arab leadership, was conditioned on the political struggles of the time, not an inevitable rejection of Zionist claims as you seem to indicate here and elsewhere. Lebanese Maronites also sided with the Europeans, and also earned enmity. Unfortunately neither Lebanese Maronites nor Zionists could avoid making a choice, and made the choices that were most rational at the time.

One: this goies beyond political leadeships- I am talking about the inherent xenophobic and nativist attititudes most likely held in the basic palestinian farming village-an attitute that is more human than I care it to be. For example, the Hebron massacre- IIRC, that was a riot more than directed violence by any Arab political leaders. A riot based on the feelings on the ground.

You also seem to argue that this leadership would have had support on the ground-it is fine for a family coming out of Mecca to claim they should be kings of the Arabs due to some deal they struck with the UK-that does not mean in 1921 and 22 when these negotiations were going on that these folks had done much to get support from the actual people they now claimed to rule. I asusme there were plenty of local Arab nationalist who would not have been happy with a bunch of Mecca ingrates now ruling them as kings, as opposed to some other government.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I suspect it is larger than you think. Certainly there are many in Gaza who WERE commited supporters of Hamas, before the assasination. OTOH i doubt very much that Mohammed Dahlan and his followers will suddenly switch sides - my impression is that Pal politics simply isnt THAT fluid. People make choices based on interests, ideologies, clan loyalties, etc - not based on rage at the days events, any more than people elsewhere in the world.

If Dahlan were to be shot tommorrow by some Hamas man, do you think the grieving crowds in Gaza would be even half as big? I personally doubt it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


One: this goies beyond political leadeships- I am talking about the inherent xenophobic and nativist attititudes most likely held in the basic palestinian farming village-an attitute that is more human than I care it to be.

But of course the Jews werent settling in Pal farming villages - they were for the most part either developing underutilized land, or settling in the cities (which would have been exposed to all kinds of outside influences)

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Chegitz, could you go to the Middle East yourself and tell the terrorists to stop using civilians as human shields, and stop training impressionable, naive teenagers to carry out bombings??

Oh wow, do you think that will really work?

Israel is not blameless. It chooses to shoot guns at children with rocks, drop bombs on sleeping families, and fire missiles into crowds. They are every bit as much of terrorists as Hamas. The only differnce is that Israel isn't targetting non-combatants. They just don't care if they hit them anyway.

Maybe if you educated yourself about the Palestinian situation you might not be such an ignorant smart-ass. You might realize that both sides are the bad guys and that the innocent on either side are trapped in the middle.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


If Dahlan were to be shot tommorrow by some Hamas man, do you think the grieving crowds in Gaza would be even half as big? I personally doubt it.

Precisely my point. If Dahlan were shot tomorrow by the Israelis, the grieving crowd wouldnt be half as big either. Hamas already had extensive support in Gaza, and has for years. The question is whether assasinating Yassin adds significantly to this support. I see no empiral evidence that it is, just the usual a priori belief in blowback.