U.S. Army War College says Hamas has been ‘villainized’

by on January 5, 2009 15
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

and must be talked to, Tom Ricks reports in his new Foreign Policy blog. This is an Iraq war lesson. Imagine trying to destroy the Sunni militias… And Obama can't open his mouth.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Gaza, Iraq, US Policy in the Middle East

{ 15 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Richard Witty says:
    January 5, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    If you read the article, it was NOT an apology for Hamas, as much as an insistence that both parties be willing to negotiate with the other.

    Hamas has consistently refused that, with the presumption that it accepts that Israel is a legitimate state.

    So, maybe it sounds nice to blame Israel for the impasse, but Hamas is a party to the impasse (even a controlling party).

    It only takes one veto, and Hamas is it.

  2. Colin Murray says:
    January 5, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    Colin:
    It is untrue that Hamas has shown no willingness to negotiate. It is Israel that has consistently refused to engage in good-faith negotiations with ANY Arab entity. Readers should take nothing at face value, and do their own research.

  4. anonn says:
    January 5, 2009 at 9:08 pm

    Witty: It only takes one veto, and Hamas is it.

    No, Witless, it only takes one veto and the US has it.

  5. rabbi kook says:
    January 5, 2009 at 9:17 pm

    The US War College says: "HAMAS' political and strategic development has been both ignored and misreported in Israeli and Western sources which villainize the group" and concludes that the US should negotiate and maintain contact with HAMAS. So why does Witty say that "If you read the article, it was NOT an apology for Hamas, as much as an insistence that both parties be willing to negotiate with the other?"

    Read the article. You will see that Witty is an insane Zionist apologist with no respect at all for the written word or the health of the nation
    he sucks off of.

  6. Richard Witty says:
    January 5, 2009 at 9:36 pm

    Please demonstrate a SINGLE instance of Hamas willing to negotiate with Israel as Israel.

    And not from a dissenting "source".

  7. Richard Witty says:
    January 5, 2009 at 9:48 pm

    Kook,
    You throw so much rhetoric around that it hinders discussion.

    I seek some inkling that Hamas intends to reconcile, is even willing to reconcile.

    Periodically, comments like its stated willingness to accept the will of the Palestinian people are hopeful, then they agitate to influence the will of the Palestinian people to "take back their land" and reaffirm their commitment to their original charter.

    I'm looking for a basis of trust, and don't find one, short of wishful thinking.

    I expect that there are many in Hamas circles that are fundamentally pragmatic, that the change from excluded from the political process to responsible within it, actually changed their attitude.

    Most of those that are willing to coexist are the more elderly, the wise ones, the ones that are concerned about the state of their society, more than the adrenaline driven self-gratifying fist flying.

  8. delia says:
    January 5, 2009 at 10:26 pm

    The report quotes the following:

    If there is any attack on the Israelis, they speak of terrorism and terrorism, and more terrorism. If Hamas and Islamic Jihad and all of these armed groups [such as Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade] cease attacking Israel, then Israel will say: “Look, they’ve lost their power; and they can do nothing against us, so we are not going to give them anything.”

    So by which means will Israel give our land back to us? If we are fully sovereign and we can attack the Israelis, then they identify us as we are terrorists and the whole world is supposed to side with them against us. And if we talk about peace, they said, “look they aren’t able to do anything, so look let us give them nothing.” So which language do they understand?

    — Dr. Naser El-Din Al-Shaer,
    former Dean of the Islamic University
    and Minister of Education (before Abu Masen fired all the winners of the 2006 election)

    Talking peace gets them nowhere; doing violence gets them labeled terrorists. What Israel wants is for all of them to just shut up and behave like apartheid blacks.

  9. Paul Malfara says:
    January 5, 2009 at 10:38 pm

    Witty,

    Please respond to the allegations. You deliberately misrepresented the article, and your legitimacy as an honest debater on this topic has long since been reduced to zero. You are a spin-meister, an agent of Hasbara, and you follow the Hasbara rulebook, attacking rabbi kook instead of doing the right thing, which woud be to admit your error and apologize.

    I'm also looking for a basis of trust in which to deal with Hasbara Zionists like yourself, but the conclusion I've come to is that it is impossible.

    PM

  10. jim byers says:
    January 5, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    HEY WITTY, As I recall, the IDF has either assassinated or kidnapped all the senior Hamas representatives. That's really pretty shrewd, then you have no one to negotiate with.

  11. rabbi kook says:
    January 6, 2009 at 7:03 am

    Richard "Hasbara" Witty demands: And not from a dissenting "source".

    Res ipso loquitur (sic?)

    The thing speaks for itself.

    Richard, I hate to break it to you, but some of us Americans do not stock kosher food.

  12. stevieb says:
    January 6, 2009 at 12:52 pm

    Well how about this source?

    Israel rejects Hamas offer of a cease-fire(demonstrating it's desire to stop the rockets are typically nonsense).

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/world/middleeast/24mideast.html

  13. stevieb says:
    January 6, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0531-23.htm

    "It looks like the topelected officials in the Palestinian Hamas party are signaling that they accept Israel's right to exist. Last week the highest-ranking Hamas leader, Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, told Israel's most prestigious newspaper, Ha'aretz: "If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, peace will prevail and we will implement a cease-fire [hudna] for many years."

    A hudna is more than just a "cease-fire." An erudite article in the Encyclopedia of Islam tells us that "hudna in Islamic law is equivalent to 'international treaty' in modern terminology. Its object is to suspend the legal effects of hostilities and to provide the prerequisite conditions of peace between Muslims and non-Muslims, without the latter's territory becoming part of dar al-Islam.'"

  14. stevieb says:
    January 6, 2009 at 1:02 pm

    If you don't mind, Richard, I would sincerely appreciate it if you could refrain from consistently posting false claims (lies).

    It's not very nice when you do that.

    Thanks.

  15. stevieb says:
    January 6, 2009 at 1:05 pm

    The article about Hamas offering peace in exchange for Israel doing what it is required to do under international law is from 2 years ago.

Leave a Reply