Juanita, let's speak hypothetically here, beginning with the classic phrase, "what if?"
What if five years ago, HAMAS had called a ceasefire and had actually carried it out. What if, during the hypothetical ceasefire, a few extra-lunatic loonies, had carried out a handful of bombings but HAMAS was putting forth a serious effort to end such bombings. What if HAMAS changed its charter, its ideology and its goal during that time so that it was no longer demanding the end of Israel?
Would any of that make a difference now? Would it change how Israelis/Jews view the organization? If so, how?
>>What if HAMAS changed its charter, its ideology and its goal during that time so that it was no longer demanding the end of Israel?
In the case of HAMAS, there is not much built-up trust. Remember that Israel does not usually attack Palestinians anyway unless they are known and wanted criminals and they almost always go in with the intention to arrest someone first. The exception is people like Sheik Yassin who had promised a bloodbath if they went in after him.
I see now that you are trying to draw a comparison with the PKK and Turkey, but I think the comparison is not a workable one. In point of fact the Palestinians have complete freedom to do virtually anything they like as long as they are not killing Israelis. They can speak and write their own language, go to their own schools, their own religious institutions etc, whatever. Israel - in the past- helped them with infrastructure, utilities, etc. The trouble with Hamas is that they want it all! They want the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state and to replace it with another Arab state.
If my understanding of PKK is correct, they never had those goals! The PKK was not agitating so much for the destruction of Turkey, but for the human and civil rights of the Kurdish people. Had Turkey granted the Kurdish area some independence and/or autonomy along with basic civil and human rights, I think there would have been no PKK.
3 comments:
Masterful cartoon. The commentary is excellent also, and of course, very troubling, as it should be.
Juanita, let's speak hypothetically here, beginning with the classic phrase, "what if?"
What if five years ago, HAMAS had called a ceasefire and had actually carried it out. What if, during the hypothetical ceasefire, a few extra-lunatic loonies, had carried out a handful of bombings but HAMAS was putting forth a serious effort to end such bombings. What if HAMAS changed its charter, its ideology and its goal during that time so that it was no longer demanding the end of Israel?
Would any of that make a difference now? Would it change how Israelis/Jews view the organization? If so, how?
Mizgin wrote:
>>What if HAMAS changed its charter, its ideology and its goal during that time so that it was no longer demanding the end of Israel?
In the case of HAMAS, there is not much built-up trust. Remember that Israel does not usually attack Palestinians anyway unless they are known and wanted criminals and they almost always go in with the intention to arrest someone first. The exception is people like Sheik Yassin who had promised a bloodbath if they went in after him.
I see now that you are trying to draw a comparison with the PKK and Turkey, but I think the comparison is not a workable one. In point of fact the Palestinians have complete freedom to do virtually anything they like as long as they are not killing Israelis. They can speak and write their own language, go to their own schools, their own religious institutions etc, whatever. Israel - in the past- helped them with infrastructure, utilities, etc. The trouble with Hamas is that they want it all! They want the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state and to replace it with another Arab state.
If my understanding of PKK is correct, they never had those goals! The PKK was not agitating so much for the destruction of Turkey, but for the human and civil rights of the Kurdish people. Had Turkey granted the Kurdish area some independence and/or autonomy along with basic civil and human rights, I think there would have been no PKK.
So frankly, I think the analogy is faulty. :>)
Post a Comment