I would argue that even one is too many.

There are currently 166 remaining detainees at Guantanamo, although 6 of those do face charges you could count it as 160 detained without pending charges.

Membership of Falun Gong is illegal in China, just like being a member of Hamas is illegal in the U.S., and as far as I know it is membership of the organisation (or, more specifically, activism) that is likely to get you sent to a re-education through labour camp.

Both China and the U.S. have lists of prohibited organisations, and in both cases cite public order as the rationale.

In any case, is it really worse to discriminate on the basis of beliefs than to discriminate on the basis of skin colour, bank balance, proficiency in English, intelligence, or any of the other things typically discriminated against?

p.s. Just to make clear, I'm not endorsing either type of discrimination.

I chose the year 1946 to elicit opinions about when Hamas or Palestinians at large might stop fighting, not because it's a feasible item on the table.

I love VS for these kinds of debates, but I see some straw-man arguments going on here.

First, not every Palestinian belongs to Hamas. In fact, the majority of the population does not belong to Hamas. Similarly, very few Germans were actually members of the Nazi party. German citizens backed the Nazis because they felt they were the best hope for getting Germany's economy out of the toilet, getting Germany out of what the citizens perceived as the unfair terms of the Versailles Treaty, and protecting Germany from (Nazi manufactured) external threats. Again, similarly, Palestinians back Hamas because they see Hamas as the best hope of dealing with Israeli oppression.

For 45 years the world (read: United States) has shown little interest in stopping the Israelis--who are supplied with arms and training by the United States-- from forcibly displacing people from their homes and relocating them to what Chomsky calls "the world's largest open-air prison."

How could the Palestinian people possibly expect to defend themselves against Israel in an open and conventional conflict? The Palestinian people back terrorism because it works--it forces Israel to the negotiating table. Consistently, these Israeli "flexing our big muscles" incursions and retaliations by the military have failed completely to stop rocket attacks, suicide bombs, etc. and at some point they must always go to the negotiating table. A side benefit is that the terrorist attacks and subsequent negotiations get the world's media eye focused on the region and what Israel is doing there.

So this talk about whether Hamas are terrorists or freedom fighters is besides the point. They're terrorists to Israelis and they're freedom fighters to the Palestinians. Israel and the U.S. are just as much terrorists as Hamas if not more so. You can watch Chomsky clearly explain why on this Sift: http://videosift.com/video/noam-chomsky-is-america-a-leading-terrorist-state

Second, let's look at the casualties from this latest conflict:
Israel: 3 Israeli's dead, 60 injured from shrapnel (all adults according to latest reports)
Palestine: 100s dead, including 26 children

Yet, Israel tries to spin its military campaign as one of self-defense. The balance of power is so skewed here it's comical.

If there is any hope for peace in this region, it will only come after the U.S. not only stops actively supporting Israel but openly condemns them as well. But that can't possibly happen without the U.S. looking supremely hypocritical about the actions it takes globally (for instance in Afghanistan) in the name of the "War on Terror."

From there, as others have mentioned, you have to stop the occupation and bring both sides together on equal terms. Yes, there will still be fanatics who will fight to the end. But they won't be finding the sympathy and support of the majority of the populace if that populace is no longer oppressed and instead is living in free and safe conditions. Without that popular support, those fanatics will be much easier to deal with than they are now. It's not going to be an easy road to peace because hatred has been bred into both sides so deeply. But I do think it is possible if only the U.S. government will get its head out of its ass.

My 2 cents, anyways.

EDIT: Please don't take this post to mean that I support terrorism in any form or think that it is justified by the Israeli occupation. I am only pointing out the historical fact that terrorism gives the Palestinians pretty much their ONLY bargaining chip at the negotiating table--the Palestinian leadership (whoever is in charge at the time, though it is currently Hamas) agrees to reign in the terror attacks in exchange for humanitarian aid such as food, building supplies, etc. In other words, it "works" in achieving short-term goals but clearly doesn't help achieve lasting peace in the region--which as others have pointed out Hamas doesn't really want anyway.

I agree with you that Israel has taken away the freedoms of the people in Palestine, however I feel that that freedom was lost by the people because of their continued backing of Hamas and Hamas's continued attacks against Israel.
I think that both parties are at fault to some degree, but I also believe the burden of the blame rests with Hamas and their continued requests for the destruction of Israel. To answer your questions directly:
1b. Do you disagree with any of, "The core Hamas themselves are (generally speaking) just haters like WBC or the KKK and they get support now from the citizens because they're all collectively being severely oppressed by Israel." ?
I agree that Hamas are just hater racists. I believe that they have integrated themselves into the Palestinian people with a hate and blame based marketing campaign that has the Palestinian children learning how to kill Jews in class. This campaign is reinforced by some of the policies of the Israeli government as an unintended consequence. I have consistently seen any positive developments towards peace wind up being corrupted by the outrageous demands of Hamas that they will not settle for anything but the complete elimination of Israel and the refusal to recognize the Israeli state.

"2b. Do you think, if a free Palestinian state were created with the 1946 borders, that Hamas would retain enough support from the people to continue fighting with Israel, which would keep their lives constantly under threat, just as is the case in Israel now? Personally, if the citizens weren't being oppressed, I don't think they would favour killing anybody, and would choose a live-and-let-live policy so they could raise a family in peace and seek success in the world."
Perhaps, but Hamas has stated many times that their goal is not just reverting back to the 1946 borders, but the elimination of Israel. They've ingrained that into the people of Palestine and as we are discussing this I fear that this may be a situation where peace can not be brokered because of the constantly reinforced hatred towards the Jewish people. I pray it doesn't revert to a situation like that of WW2 where entire cities were eliminated in order to get Germany to eventually collapse. (We didn't just do it to the Japanese, although the comparison may be more accurate) Besides reverting back to the 1946 borders isn't really feasible, or justified, but that is a WHOLE different discussion. (There weren't borders in 1946 as all of Palestine was under British control from WW1)

"Can you substantiate that? Celebration alone makes someone a terrorist? And "blight on humankind" doesn't even have meaning. They ARE humankind. They're not an affliction."

I can actually, celebration of an innocents death in my opinion shows a lack of a soul and a lack of sympathy towards other human beings. Celebrating the death of a child is about the most evil thing I can think of, yet Islamic extremists do it on a regular basis. It makes you a monster and puts you outside of humankind. So yes it makes you very much an affliction on humankind. Unfortunately it is very likely a symptom of humankind as well, but like an infection is a symptom of being alive, sometimes it must be abraded and removed completely.
As humans we have to value life and celebrate life, not death. I feel the same way about the KKK or any other organization that divides the human species into groups and has devalued one of those groups to the point where the death of one of them is something to be celebrated. That is hate and it is evil. Evil, real evil, exists in this world and it can be seen in the video above.

Celebrating the death of innocents isn't in and of itself something that makes a person a terrorist, it merely reinforces the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

All this yet I still like to play FPS. Huh...gonna have to dwell on that.

I've interacted with sb a hell of a lot on VS, and he has a habit of avoiding questions. He's also one of maybe three people on the Sift mature enough to actually accept criticism, agree with it, and change. There's a significant chance that he'll agree and answer my questions.

As for your answers, thanks for them. I think you're mostly right in your answers, and where we differ is inconsequential (but I'm assuming you agree that Israel has taken away the freedom of Palestinians in Gaza). There's all sorts of assumptions in my mind that clearly didn't make it to the screen, and I also conflated groups of people that should remain distinct. I think Hamas are probably, at their heart, a group of hateful war-like bigots who have found popular support against a clearly-defined enemy in a fight for freedom. So:

1b. Do you disagree with any of, "The core Hamas themselves are (generally speaking) just haters like WBC or the KKK and they get support now from the citizens because they're all collectively being severely oppressed by Israel." ?

2b. Do you think, if a free Palestinian state were created with the 1946 borders, that Hamas would retain enough support from the people to continue fighting with Israel, which would keep their lives constantly under threat, just as is the case in Israel now? Personally, if the citizens weren't being oppressed, I don't think they would favour killing anybody, and would choose a live-and-let-live policy so they could raise a family in peace and seek success in the world.

3. Point conceded to you and BRM.

4,5. Those were directed only at sb's justification for his position based on a video of a journalist celebrating dead bodies. I don't take great issue with anything you said there, except one place:

celebrating the killing of an innocent makes you a terrorist and a blight on humankind

Can you substantiate that? Celebration alone makes someone a terrorist? And "blight on humankind" doesn't even have meaning. They ARE humankind. They're not an affliction.

@Kofi Did you find any yet?
Oh and I think Shineyblurry was more just trying to educate you Messenger, not just answer your questions. So here's my answers for you:

"1) Which part of, "Palestinians in Gaza are the prisoners of Israel, and Hamas is fighting against Israel because Israel has taken away the freedom of Palestinians in Gaza," do you disagree with?"
All of it. Hamas is a globally recognized terrorist group. Hamas has done more to take away the freedom of it's people than it has good. By continuing to push an antisemitic world view and continually calling for the outright destruction of Israel they have done nothing for their people over the last 40 years. If Hamas would actually accept one of the many peace agreements that have been laid forth over that time, we would not be having this discussion. Instead they kill civilians and place launch pads next to playgrounds.
"2. Do you think that Hamas would continue fighting Israel if Palestine returned to its 1946 borders?"
Absolutely. like Bicyclerepairman said, even if the borders went back to the 1946 borders the goal isn't borders it is the elimination of Israel entirely and the death of Jews worldwide.
"3. Do you think Hamas would stop fighting if all Israelis in the world were killed, but some other country kept Palestinians confined in Gaza and continued the embargo?"
Bicyclerepairman hit the nail on the head here. But I think that if all the Jews were dead and France ran Israel and kept Palestinians in Gaza they would have a much more difficult battle as it is a lot harder to identify "French" as a race and that diffuses their Nazi themed marketing machine of "BLAME THE JEWS". But I'm sure they would find a way, or slowly push Muslim and Islamic law to become the law of the land in France (Or other European countries for that matter). Something you can not do in Israel currently.
"4. Are there any rules against celebrating after killing your enemy?
5. Is killing someone worse than celebrating the killing?"
These were civilians. Not enemies. Where we can celebrate the death of Osama Bin Laden in the United States, we morn when innocents die. Especially children. And if a US soldier kills civilians while in active duty he is prosecuted and sent to jail or possibly even executed. So killing is worse than celebrating, but celebrating the killing of an innocent makes you a terrorist and a blight on humankind. That's not to say that killing of innocents is off the table, lord knows plenty of it happened during World War 1 & 2 and as a measure of war, while I personally find it a disgusting tactic and something to be avoided you can reach a point where drastic actions must be taken.
For example, North Korea. If they should ever get aggressive, with the overwhelming amount of brainwashing that goes on in that country it is very likely that many of the civilians will wind up being killed in any conflict.
But Israel and Palestine should NOT be at that point.

I'll answer some of messengers questions:

"1. Which part of, "Palestinians in Gaza are the prisoners of Israel, and Hamas is fighting against Israel because Israel has taken away the freedom of Palestinians in Gaza," do you disagree with?"

Gaza is now basically a prison camp, and yes, Israel is behind that, but thats not why Islamic totalitarian terrorists are fighting. They are not seeking freedom, they are seeking islamic totalism and the extermination of jews.

"2. Do you think that Hamas would continue fighting Israel if Palestine returned to its 1946 borders?"
Yes, probably.

"3. Do you think Hamas would stop fighting if all Israelis in the world were killed, but some other country kept Palestinians confined in Gaza and continued the embargo?"

If the occupiers were muslims, imprisoning and ruling Gaza with an islamic iron fist, then yes, probably. It is a strange and sad fact that Islamic societies are rabidly anti-semitic and anti-everything-not-islam, and at war with any neighbour that doesnt conform to islam, while being strangely content and silent if oppressed by fellow muslims, as is the case in so many islamic countries, where were the islamic suicide bombers fighting the oppression of Saddam?, The taliban, kohmeini? Muslims, especially women, are suffering every day all over the place, and most of the suffering is NOT caused by Israel or the west, but by islamic or muslim thugs at the helm of an oppressed people. I'd love for the palestinians to have freedom, but not just from Israel, but also from the violent ideology of the terrorists claiming to fight for them.

"4. Are there any rules against celebrating after killing your enemy?

5. Is killing someone worse than celebrating the killing?"

Firstly, The enemy is not israeli civilians, secondly this question sets up a false dichotomy: obviously killing is worse than celebration, but celebrating the death of innocent people doesnt exactly show that you are ready for peace or reconcilliation.It shows that Hamas' tactics are not simply last-resort, desparate actions from an imprisoned people, but something they at some level rejoice in doing. If Hamas were the peace-loving hippie freedom fighters you seem to think they are, they surely would not celebrate like this?

Yes and no. But I have to get rid of your loaded terms and misleading juxtapositions. First, nobody here is a murderer. They are at war with Israel, and they killed people on the other side, just as Israel does to Palestinians.

Second, the guy clamouring to see bodies is a broadcaster. This means he is not one of the killers himself. It also means he's a paid propagandist, maybe some loudmouth like Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck.

Third. That's not even "the cause". The cause is Palestinian freedom, and part of that includes killing Israelis because they are the enemy of Palestine. If the celebrate the deaths, that has nothing to do with the cause itself.

The only difference you're showing me between Israel and Palestine is that Palestinians publicly celebrate the deaths of their enemies while Israel is more Western, so they don't. That's not enough of a distinction to claim that their cause of freedom isn't noble, so don't conflate the two.

That's the "No" part. The "Yes" part is, the cause, which is their own freedom, is a noble cause.

There. I've actually answered your questions. You've avoided answering mine by asking misleading questions.

Here are my questions (some repeated):

1. Which part of, "Palestinians in Gaza are the prisoners of Israel, and Hamas is fighting against Israel because Israel has taken away the freedom of Palestinians in Gaza," do you disagree with?

2. Do you think that Hamas would continue fighting Israel if Palestine returned to its 1946 borders?

3. Do you think Hamas would stop fighting if all Israelis in the world were killed, but some other country kept Palestinians confined in Gaza and continued the embargo?

4. Are there any rules against celebrating after killing your enemy?

5. Is killing someone worse than celebrating the killing?

Answer my questions straight without dodging.

Hamas is a terrorist organization which denies Israels right to exist and has pledged to annihilate Israel. To defend them is madness.

So you're saying that there is trouble in the Middle East again?

Seriously though, what is expected of either side in all of this? Israel initiated it by killing Hamas military leader. You know, the leader sworn to removing Israel from existence and directly responsible for planning and preparing direct attacks on Israel with that goal. Still, Israel can be faulted for being too aggressive in that. But what followed was hundreds of volleys of rockets aimed at Israeli civilians, only killing very few, but reaching further into Israel than ever before. Including claims, later verified, by the militants that the rockets where Iranian in origin. So Israel's worries and concerns about Hamas being armed and used as a proxy by Israels enemies is proven, again.

If you are fair, it is easy to see both side's reasons for outrage, anger and retaliation. The answer isn't to blame one side or the other. Israel has legitimate security concerns from Hamas, and all the regional nations arming them. The Gaza people are legitimately living in decrepit conditions and it is no surprise a group like Hamas has an easy time recruiting there. It's hard to blame the people of Israel and Gaza for supporting those acting in their own defense.

Why do I say this? Simply to observe that if it was as simple minded a problem as your statement, things would've been resolved ages ago. The answer, regrettably, isn't as simple as simply demanding Israel passively sit there and ignore every threat, attack and act of aggression against it.

>> ^Kofi:

Every bomb equals people being killed, injured or maimed. Innocent and guilty alike. Remember, as Biden said "Israel is our closest ally". Now wonder why the Arab world is dubious if not hostile to America's claims of being a force force for good in the world. Can you blame them for being skeptical?

>> ^criticalthud:

ummm, from a propaganda standpoint, there are some corollaries for sure.
But, let's look at some geopolitics.
In a world of diminishing resources, Iran is sitting on some of the largest oil reserves.
Israel, on the other hand, is sitting on a piece of worthless desert called the holy land and depends on foreign oil imports and American Aid. That American aid is also highly dependent on the US continuing to essentially control the oil trade. Oil is traded in dollars, and it is that massive circulation that helps keep the American dollar afloat (each dollar is HIGHLY leveraged (ie: debt)).
So who wants what? Religious crazies aside, from a geo-political standpoint Israel has very little to offer Iran, but control or influence over Iran's oil reserves has quite a bit to offer Israel.
Now...why would Iran want to have a nuclear energy program when it has vast oil reserves?
-- just like Venezuela, who is limiting the amount they produce, if they can use less of their oil now, in a world of diminishing energy resources, it means that in the future they wield more and more geo-political power. And energy is wealth. The more they control their own resources, the more they can control price points of resources, which is a large part of how the world powers have become world powers.


Your armchair analysis is pretty thin.

One of your main premises is about how Israel occupies a bunch of 'worthless desert'? And you then believe that is a strong driver in Israel's interest in Iranian oil reserves?

Middle East politics goes a lot deeper than that. The 'worthless desert' Israel occupies is BAR NONE the most sought after and fought over piece of land in the entire middle east over the last century. You can not ignore the importance of the cultural and religious pressures in the region that make up the complex relationship between Israel-Iran-Saudi-Syria-Egypt-... and on and on.

Survival is still Israel's driving focus. Iran openly and proudly supports Hezbollah and Hamas and their attacks on Israel. If Israel even suspects that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, that is a very short path to a very legitimate concern for Israel to be taking very seriously. Sure, it's 90% likely that Iran isn't foolish enough to give a nuclear weapon to Hamas or Hezbollah, but that remaining 10% is still understandable enough cause for Israel to be nervous and considering their options.

This is a 40 second soundbite. What's the story? I heard the words, Hamas, Israel, bomb, and then someone showed a picture of an espresso machine.

Someone needs to do their job as a reporter.

@gcglorf. Your argument, on the face of it, is absurd.
How could the syrian government be responsible for the snipers, but nobody knows how the syrian government is responsible for the snipers?

Why would the syrian government use snipers?
How could the syrian government convince anyone that they weren't behind the snipers?

Located some 210 km north of the capital Damascus, Hama, a city of 800,000 people and with a history of dissent, has fallen out of government control in June. But the Syrian army entered the city on July 31 to fight the "terrorist groups" and withdrew on Aug. 7.

1 more question, if there's really a mass movement against the syrian government, then how could the army completely pacify a city in less than a week? Impossible, no?

It's your position @bcglorf that isn't supported by facts. Where are they? And just because syria doesn't allow Western media around isn't evidence that there is a civil war in progress. Sorry but that doesn't fly.

>> ^gwiz665:

This is all true. Islam is worse than most major religions around right now. It actively promotes war and terrorism, like Christianity did 500 years ago, and parts of Christianity still does. Islam is the worst, but Christianity isn't far behind.
Religion in general is still a blight on mankind. Getting rid of it is like getting rid of cancer - hard!


I know arguing on the Internet is pointless in most cases, but most people here on the Sift seem at least willing to consider other ideas, so here goes:

Don't you think it's possible that it's not Islam that is promoting war and terrorism but particular political groups (Taliban, Hamas, Al-Querida, Sunni/Shiite militant groups struggling for power in Iraq, etc.) that have decided on an interpretation of Islam that most suits their aims?

Isn't it at all possible that the reason violence in some Islamic countries is similar to that perpetrated by not just Christians but all peoples 500+ years ago has something to do with the fact that the majority of people in those countries live in socioeconomic conditions and with educations comparable to people from 500+ years ago?

Aren't these things in fact more plausible than Islam causing violence considering that the overwhelming majority of Muslim people never engage in jihad or terrorism or stone their daughters or any of the other things that Islam is often blamed for?

>> ^raverman:

You're right: If only the Palestinians would put down their weapons, accept their imposed poverty, accept the god given superiority of god's choosen people, and graciously move off their land and into the sea so more settlements could be built... there would be no more violence.>> ^skinnydaddy1:
Oh, right. Its sad because if the Arab Nations had allowed the 2 state system there never would of been a problem to begin with but no. They had to attack to push the Jews in to the sea.
The real truth?
If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel’ – Benjamin Netanyahu
And thats sums it all up.



Imposed Poverty? So they are not spending millions and millions of cash on rockets, guns, explosives and bullets. Those things just appear? Maybe they should not of let Yasser Arafat pocket so much money? Claiming poverty while being able to launch hundreds and hundreds of rockets and firing thousand and thousands of bullets seems to be, I don't know.. Full of shit? Billions have been given to the Palestinians, they did not use this money to improve their lives. They used it to try and kill people.
The Arab nations started this mess. They attacked first and continued to keep trying to start wars. They used the Palestinians as a tool and Israel keeps taking the blame. And for what? Self Defense? You claim truth while screaming propaganda bullshit and for what I've seen it may be working but at some point someone is going to find out the real truth and it will be a sad day. It will be the day Hamas kicks in their door and comes for them. Palestinian TV teaches children hate and murder. Funny how you do not find that on Israeli Tv but the Israeli children are learning the lesson also. Every time a rocket is fired at them and their schools. Every time they have to run and hide when the sirens screams. Every time some brainwashed idiot blows him self up in a mall or when their Olympic athletes are murdered.

The Beginning of all this started with the Arab Countries they do not seem to want to take the responsibility to end it. So the beginning of the end must start with the Palestinians.