for the last few years, the Palestinians have been fractured by conflict between Fatah and Hamas. this is an internal struggle. in essence, the Gaza strip is now controlled by Hamas and the West Bank by Fatah. keep in mind that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. now, since Hamas actually won an election they should receive some credence in talks with Israel . . . but how do you hold peace talks when your charter calls for you to destroy Israel? and because of that charter, Israel considers Hamas to be a terrorist organization. i can only imagine what George Bush would do to a group that he considers to be terrorists. oh wait, i don't have to imagine.

i would love to see peace, but i just don't know if Hamas and Israel can ever see each other in that light. until they can imagine it, our efforts will likely not materialize any better now than in the history of this conflict.

That's their problem - basically sit around a table and discuss everything.


Open up a concentration camp and then expect Britain and everyone else to get him off the hook when it turns out all the'yre all innocent?

To be honest blaming Hamas when they've been in power for only 18 months of the 60 years that Israel and the US have failed to get to a settlement is a bit rich. Fatah recognised Israel's right to exist under Yasser Arafat and it made not the slightest bit of difference.

km

i clearly see Hamas as standing for something contrary to peace. but please don't jump to conclusions and give me the position that i think Israel or Fatah could achieve peace were it not for Hamas. i think the people of Palestine have indicated by electing Hamas that even the citizens don't want to achieve peace at this time. none of us think Israel is trying to achieve peace given their heavy handed tactics currently being employed. when i said it sucks all around, i meant it. i am sorry you continue to want to create a straw man to battle here.

Okay Irish Republicans didn't want peace electing members of Sinn Fein, black South Africans didn't want peace electing members of the ANC and Palestinians don't want peace electing members of Hamas - they prefer being slaughtered in their homes, let's leave it at that.

km

The problem in that comparison is that both the political arm of the IRA and the AMC were able to accept living peaceably with the opposition -- and in time came to come to terms with them. Hamas has indicated so such predilection. To be honest, neither has that hard-line Israelis.

Back to square one.

Noope - the problem with that is that both the IRA and the ANC specifically rejected any such commitment prior to talks. Fatah under Yasser Arafat made such a commitment and it got him nowhere.


Not really, I'm on square two.

km

Garbage. It's an acceptance of reality.

I'm not thrilled of our nation's blanket support of Israel. But to say that to recognize both sides' complicity in continuing this conflict is equivalent to support of one side or the other is ridiculous. The situation simply isn't that simple.

I'm sorry, but the history of this conflict is rife with examples of both sides' determination not to live with each other. To demonize one side while absolving the atrocities of the other simply plays into the dynamics of both parties -- which is to continue the conflict until their side "wins" -- which is the main reason this has gone on for so long.

Yes,it does make one sick. But until *both* sides determine that it is in their best interests to coexist with each other not much is going to happen to resolve the situation peaceably ...

Unfortunately, the responsibility cannot be pinned to just one side of the issue ...

As for Obama: he may end up to disappoint, but he regardless represents the best hope for a more even-handed approach in US policy that has come along for decades. It may not be a great hope, but a hope nonetheless. At least give him a chance to do the right thing before writing him off ...

To the contrary, if neither had expressed such an interest, no progress would have been made. Or are you saying that "we reject ever living with you in peace" is a viable bargaining position? Certainly the resolutions in Ireland and South Africa would have gone nowhere if that were the case.

Shoot. Too late. For some reason some masochistic side of me just refuses to stay away from the debate ...

Masochist to the Sadist: "Hit me! Hit me!"
Sadist to the Masochist: "No ... no ..."

;-)

Call it something like the "middle east atrocities tribunal" and hold all those accountable on both sides to trial and I'll agree with you wholeheartedly ... or better yet, just call in an "international tribunal" and have done with -- why politicize the process with a biased name?