I intended to say that Hamas has the power to stop the violence. First step, stop firing rockets into Israel. Second, cease amassing arms. Third, stop calling for the abolition of Israel. Expecting all three is probably too much to ask, but taking the first step would cause Israel to cease hostilities.

Which was it, Steve?…

I just don’t see the relevance of your slam of Bush…

Much as I might dislike the result, I respect the outcome of democratic elections. And I would argue that others should do the same.

Does this mean no civilians have died as a result of Bush policies? Good God, no…WAY too many have died…but untold thousands have died in Iraq at the hands of militants and suicide bombers. You can argue that under Saddam, the bloodshed would not have been as severe (terrorized populations tend to be docile), but you can’t argue that we target civilians as a matter of policy…nor do we espouse a hateful anti-Semitic, genocidal ideology.

I just don’t see the relevance of your slam of Bush…

The Palestinian people in Gaza have the power to end this, their government, such as it is with Hamas in the leadership position, could easily facilitate that end.

For many years, people around the world have been saying the same about the Bush Administration. We’ll see if the Palestinian people can rid themselves of Hamas before 2015.

The Palestinian people in Gaza have the power to end this, their government, such as it is with Hamas in the leadership position, could easily facilitate that end. I have little hope they will do so.

Hizbullah is an Iranian creation. Hamas is not. But it has drawn itself increasingly into Iran’s orbit.

Much of its imported weaponry, and the expertise with which it now produces and refines its own rockets, have been provided by Iran.

Dozens of its commanders have been trained in Iran in recent years, coming home and disseminating that “education” as Hamas has built an army in Gaza.

And, increasingly too, Hamas has come to act in the service of Iran’s aims.

Hamas, with their close ties to Iran

That’s something I don’t understand.

Hezbollah has close ties to Iran (and to Syria). But Hamas?

Hamas was founded in the ’80s, as a branch of the Moslem Brotherhood. And my understanding was that there was no love lost between them and the Shia of Iran.

(As an aside, the Moslem Brotherhood connection is the source of the oft-repeated claim by Israeli spokesmen, during this crisis, that Arab goverments, like the Egyptians and the Saudis, are “secretly cheering on” the Israeli offensive. Those governments — particularly the Egyptians — have their own long-standing troubles with the Moslem Brotherhood.)

It’s a crappy situation

I’m afraid that you are right. That the end result will be a return to the status quo ante, but with

1) both Kadima and Hamas more popular, with their respective populations, than they were going in
2) a lot of needless death and destruction along the way

I sure hope there’s somebody who thinks 1) was worth 2).

I just have a hard time condemning a nation that is defending itself from rocket attacks on its cities…

I agree, which is why I say all of the above with a heavy heart.

Nor do I think that Israel is against the Gaza area being economically developed – they just don’t want to strengthen Hamas – which is admittedly a little tricky for Israel, given that Hamas is manifestly more popular with the Palestinian people than Fatah.

In any event, Israel will be forced into a ceasefire soon enough…and yes, Hamas will come out still kicking and strengthened. It’s a crappy situation…and electoral politics in Israel are surely playing their part, as well.

I just have a hard time condemning a nation that is defending itself from rocket attacks on its cities…

That doesn’t change the fact that Israel is really out of options.

That strikes me as ridiculously melodramatic.

1) Hamas’s rockets did not, and do not, pose an existential threat to Israel. (That’s not to diminish the fact that those rockets must stop.)
2) There were no rocket attacks for 6 months*, until the Egyptian-brokered cease-fire broke down on Dec. 19.
3) Opinions may differ, but Hamas says that the instigating event for the breakdown of the cease-fire was the Israeli bombing of the supply tunnels under the Gaza/Sinai border.

Whether you take 3) at face value (and I can certainly understand if you don’t), the fact remains that the 1.5 million people of Gaza has been under an Israeli economic blockade since June 2007. In that time, no goods (except for a few shipments of humanitarian relief supplies, when the Israelis deigned to let them through) have entered Gaza, except via those tunnels.

Hamas complains that one of the provisions of the cease-fire agreement was the lifting of the economic blockade, which the Israelis manifestly failed to deliver.

I have a hard time believing that all options were exhausted (or even tried) in the week between the end of the cease-fire and the start of full-scale military operations.

Finally, and this is the real crux of the matter, the 18-month long economic blockade has ensured the absence of economic development in Gaza. Perhaps Krauthammer’s right that the Palestinians are shiftless and lazy, and would not have developed their economy, even absent the blockade.

But the whole point of withdrawing from Gaza was that the Palestinian there would establish a stable civil society. The blockade seems to have been designed to ensure that doesn’t happen.

Which, in no small measure is why we are where we are today …

* Well, OK, not strictly true. There were various cease-fire violations, from both sides during its six month duration. But, each time, the cease-fire was quickly re-established, which just goes to show that such was possible this time, too.