Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Middle East Friendship Chart

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 100 posts

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#91

Post by scaramanga »

politician wrote: post #60
waps wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly the distinction I wanted to make. Iran is a theocracy, with a population that has at least a significant secular fraction.

Is your purpose in drawing this distinction to claim that the secular tendencies of the population of Iran is an effective counterweight to the ambitions of its theocracy?

US ambitions keep the theocracy powerful. Since they overthrew the US backed dictator which had overthrown the secular, progressive democratically elected government of Mossadegh.

Every time the US threatens Iran or imposes sanctions, or funds and arms a terrible dictator in Iraq so he can bomb Iranian cities and drop poison gas on them killing hundreds of thousands of people. The theocracy steps up to the plate the only force powerful enough to stand up to the US.

Any more liberal voices get drowned out by the need for security from the US and its interests.

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#92

Post by dannypgh »

EGreg wrote: post #76
dannypgh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hamas won free and fair elections. Peace must come from negotiations with Hamas; it can't be predicated on their destruction.

Ummm how about the part where after these fair and free elections they eliminated the rest of the government through killing them or running them out of town? Would you mind addressing what part of legitimate democracy that is?

I didn't say that there was a legitimate democracy in the OPT- I said they won elections.

By the 4th Geneva Conventions the security of Palestinian civilians rests with the occupying power. Gaza is similar to Area A - the PA has policing powers but the Israeli military retains ultimate control, as evidenced by control of borders, airspace, and shipping routes. By international law Gaza is still occupied, so the occupying power has at least as much responsibility for protection of civilians as any other entity.

The PA has little if any practical influence over areas B and none over area C. So in very real terms the OPT is occupied, and I wouldn't call any occupied state a free democracy, because occupying militaries aren't elected by their subjects.

I mention the elections because they do represent a poll if not a census of popular opinion in the OPT. If you want to maintain legitimacy and support for any accord, it makes sense to include them. Otherwise you're just gearing up for an agreement between the occupying power and their puppets, which is pretty meaningless.

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#94

Post by known »

shortsightedsid wrote: post #41
waps wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If cultures interact a lot, they often end up with the same religion anyway. This is what people always seem to forget. "Diversity" within a culture does not bring diversity, ironically, but merely causes one side to be assimilated into the other, losing it's distinct identity.

Not necessarily. India for example was ruled primarily by Muslim rulers for over a thousand years but still ended up with a huge Hindu population and a significant Muslim population. If you consider the whole of South Asia, that "Diversity" in religion is even more stark. Since this region has almost 2 Billion people living, it can't be considered as different. At the same time, you do have a good point. When you con…

http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-is-india-...

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#95

Post by nl »

sam88 wrote: post #74
nl wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this chart reflects the position of county's government. The Saudi government doesn't support Al Qaeda and has a careful relationship with Wahhabism (as they see both as potential threats to their powerbase). Al Qaeda (the core part anyway) has never really had an anti-Shia bent (or, interestingly, anti-Israel) and Iran did tolerate some movement of Al Qaeda and Taliban through their territories. Iran did hav…

Your "The Saudi government doesn't support Al Qaeda" sounds like a joke in bad taste, I mean come on? the CIA confirmed the majority of ISIS are Saudis, 9/11 had many Saudi terrorists, Bin Laden was Saudi, ISIS is being funded by Saudi and Qatar, to mention Saddam in the current situation sounds like an intentional misleading propaganda to say the least.

Again, government position vs private citizens in that country. Not sure how to make that clearer?

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#96

Post by EGreg »

dannypgh wrote: post #92
EGreg wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummm how about the part where after these fair and free elections they eliminated the rest of the government through killing them or running them out of town? Would you mind addressing what part of legitimate democracy that is?

I didn't say that there was a legitimate democracy in the OPT- I said they won elections. By the 4th Geneva Conventions the security of Palestinian civilians rests with the occupying power. Gaza is similar to Area A - the PA has policing powers but the Israeli military retains ultimate control, as evidenced by control of borders, airspace, and shipping routes. By international law Gaza is still occupied, so the occup…

Hamas was elected in 2006 because they had better social programs than Fatah. This was a more major factor than their position regarding the elimination of a Jewish state.

Almost immediately upon coming into power they destroyed the rest of the government, killed people, ran Fatah out of town and proceeded to impose growing Talibanization efforts in Gaza, restricting freedom of women, gays, etc. They also trained kids to become fighters, etc. It is against the Geneva conventions to fire rockets from civilian areas, and against many international laws to use civilians as human shields. So no, Hamas is not a legitimate government, and they commit international war crimes. I am not sure how you support the idea that "Peace can't be predicated on their destruction".

That said, if the international community cares as much about Gaza as it now seems from the rhetoric, I say they should form a coalition to go into Gaza and help them build a real, independent sovereign state there. When the UN inspectors can confirm that the smuggling tunnels have been closed and there are no more Qassam rockets, scud missiles, or whatever else they've got lying around, then Israel and Egypt can lift the blockade and Gaza can have freer trade. Note that all this can be done without Israel's involvement.

But the international community would have to find willing partners in Gaza, and I doubt the semi-theocratic, ideological Hamas regime would make for good partners. But after Israel takes out Hamas, maybe the international community can form a plan to step in there. Here's hoping. But then again, let's face the sad truth: no states really care enough to help the Gaza people. The Arab League states deny Palestinian refugees citizenship -- even the ones fleeing Syria. And the same NATO countries that went into Iraq to nation-build are not likely to do it in Gaza, even though it's much more readily possible to build something there. There's no oil or other stuff to support "American interests".

Other people that international coalition didn't really try to help get their own state or avoid genocide: Kurds, Tutsis, Black Sudanese in Darfur. So how do we get them to actually stop talking and start helping provide security and nation build?

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#97

Post by EGreg »

dannypgh wrote: post #82
victorhooi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yeah, except for the slight part about how they're a terrorist organisation? I mean, the Quarter (the Quartet (United States, Russia, United Nations, and European Union) basically said, we can recognise you, but you have to commit to non-violence etc. And Hamas was like, no, screw you guys, we're going to keep rocketing and bombing all the civilians we like...I mean, Israel's going to cave eventually, if we kee…

"[The other side is] going to cave eventually, if we keep shooting rockets at their citizens" is exactly the logic Bibi is using with the current campaign in Gaza. It's absurd and insanely biased to pressure only one side of an armed conflict to adopt non-violence. Take a look at the death toll of the conflict: the fact that more pressure is on Hamas than Israel to "commit to non-violence etc." from various actors li…

All I know is that if Hamas didn't fire rockets into Israel, Israel's army would never come in or bomb anything in there. In fact the IDF would protect them if they were attacked.

As for the blockade -- we need international inspectors to come in and make sure all the tunnels are closed and qassam rockets are gone. Then Egypt and israel should lft the blockade.

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#98

Post by dannypgh »

EGreg wrote: post #96
dannypgh wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say that there was a legitimate democracy in the OPT- I said they won elections. By the 4th Geneva Conventions the security of Palestinian civilians rests with the occupying power. Gaza is similar to Area A - the PA has policing powers but the Israeli military retains ultimate control, as evidenced by control of borders, airspace, and shipping routes. By international law Gaza is still occupied, so the occup…

Hamas was elected in 2006 because they had better social programs than Fatah. This was a more major factor than their position regarding the elimination of a Jewish state. Almost immediately upon coming into power they destroyed the rest of the government, killed people, ran Fatah out of town and proceeded to impose growing Talibanization efforts in Gaza, restricting freedom of women, gays, etc. They also trained kid…

I didn't say they were a government. They are a resistance movement in an occupied territory. I suppose you could consider then a stateless government, but they most certainly aren't running a state. They're running something closer to a semi-autonomous reservation. Yes, they've violated international law, repeatedly, and so has Israel.

Negotiations take place between two or more parties and they result in changes to what they're all both doing. If you predicate negotiations on capitulation, you aren't negotiating - you're demanding. Israel refusing to talk to Hamas until Hamas has managed to stop all the rocket fire (I'll point out one of the early targets in this round of Gaza shelling was the Gaza police chief, so the idea that the political wing of Hamas even could stop the rockets requires quite a bit of faith in their wartime occupation political integrity!) would be just as boneheaded as Hamas refusing to talk to Israel until Israel agrees that refugees can return and not live as second class citizens in the land of their ancestors.

Hamas has put forward proposals for medium to long-term cease fires and/or peace agreements before, and has agreed in principle to focusing on the creation of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders. Meanwhile, Israel proclaimed East Jerusalem as annexed and routinely states that Jerusalem will remain an undivided and eternal capital of their state, all while expanding settlement construction in the West Bank.

"We have no-one to talk to because the other side is doing bad things" is a position both sides could take on reasonable moral grounds, but practically, it's stupid to think that any sort of peace could come from a refusal to talk.

Talking isn't the last step, it's the first, and Israel certainly has no less blame for the absence of talks than Hamas.

Also, re: use of human shields, despicable behavior, and not unique to a side. http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/israeli-sol...

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#99

Post by EGreg »

dannypgh wrote: post #98
EGreg wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hamas was elected in 2006 because they had better social programs than Fatah. This was a more major factor than their position regarding the elimination of a Jewish state. Almost immediately upon coming into power they destroyed the rest of the government, killed people, ran Fatah out of town and proceeded to impose growing Talibanization efforts in Gaza, restricting freedom of women, gays, etc. They also trained kid…

I didn't say they were a government. They are a resistance movement in an occupied territory. I suppose you could consider then a stateless government, but they most certainly aren't running a state. They're running something closer to a semi-autonomous reservation. Yes, they've violated international law, repeatedly, and so has Israel. Negotiations take place between two or more parties and they result in changes to…

While I agree with the sentiment, I think for whatever your proposals are worth Hamas has in fact been the party that refused to participate in an egyptian brokered ceasefire and talk to Israel:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/egypt-no-negoti...

It seems like they'd rather have their last stand "to the last human shield", because they are "hard liners".

During this time Israel had enforced a ceasefire and invited Hamas to do the same while they talk, but nothing changed on the other side.

Are you seriously advocating that Israel live under hundreds of rockets being fired into their cities because they now have enough bomb shelters and anti missile defenses (where each anti missile is like $50k) that its population can endlessly run to shelters and pray no one gets hurt? And just wait until Hamas happens to feel like talking?

For any real peace agreement to occur, both sides should be able to enforce it. For a couple years Hamas was able to restrain the other groups from firing rockets. I personally think this is not good enough. When you have terror groups right on your country's border able to fire in at any time, who try to dig tunnels for the sole reason to attack you, and when your country is 25 miles wide around that area, wouldnt you have an obligation to protect your people?

By the way the critics of Israel did far worse intheir day. USA committed genocide against native americans who are lucky to live reservations after their brethren have been exterminated. That great new critic Erdogan denies the Kurds an independent state TODAY, besides having to live down the massacres of Armenians, Greeks and others by the Turks. These are real genocides and massacres. What we have at this point is as you said a "reservation" which COULD become an independent state if they only renounced violent methods, recognized its neighbor as a state, and focused on using their money to help build up their own people with international help. They knew exactly what would happen when they fired into Israel.

I agree with Bill Clinton's statements on this: http://www.jpost.com/Operation-Protective-Edge/Bill-Clinton-...

For what it's worh I also agree with Clinton's remarks to Israel regarding letting the west bank be its own state: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/18/so-what-did-bill-...

But when it comes to Gaza literally ALL THEIR LEADERS HAVE TO DO IS CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF GAZA more than their ideology. You mentioned refusing to talk - yes, they have been doing that for years.

Hamas didnt agree to this ceasefire because it was brokered with the Palestinian Authority but also refuses to participate in talks during the ceasefire!

Four years ago during the settlement freeE in the west bank Hamas and Hezbollah actively undermined the peace process by threatening to unleash violence if any agreement was reached!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_negotiations_between_I...

During the direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, Hamas and Hezbollah reaffirmed to threat peace talks if both sides were matriculated towards any possible agreement. A Hamas-led coalition of 13 Palestinian militant groups initiated a violent campaign to disrupt peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. A series of attacks killed and wounded eight Israelis, including two pregnant women, between August and September 2010. Israeli and Palestinian Authority security forces responded with raids that resulted in the deaths and arrests of militants involved in the attacks. Rocket and mortar attacks from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip also increased in September.

Reas what you wrote and tell me how it applies to Hamas.

Hamas doesnt recognize Israel and wouldnt talk to it. They engage in http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_diplomacy but their previous partners hate them also (Egypt). Egypt participates in the blockade of Gaza!

Hamas are hardliners who still think along the lines of http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution

2008: They refused to recognize Israel as a state and honor any previous agreements and said they could generously offer a 10-year truce if Israel goes back to pre 1967 borders. Although they refuse to stop calling for the elimination of the Jewish state: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24235665/ns/world_news-mideast_n_a...

2012: Hamas says it will recognize and talk with Israel if Israel withdraws completely to pre 1967 borders with no swaps and gives a full right of return to ALL Palestinians. Asked whether this will lead Hamas to have peace with Israel, they refused to state. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2008/04/20086150983...

In short: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3471/hamas-moderation

I am not even sure how anyone can seriously argue in favor of a Hamas regime without also being in favor of the elimination of a Jewish state because that's pretty much what they are after. Just because it sounds crazy doesnt mean they arent.

Re: The Middle East Friendship Chart

#100

Post by the_watcher »

Basic takeaway - the relationships between players in the Middle East is much more complicated than state-state relations, and stated positions of the players are not necessarily comprehensive in summing up the relations. Also - this chart seems like it could change incredibly frequently (Iran's friendship with Iraq is relatively recent, 6 months ago ISIS would have far more friends, etc.)
Post reply on HN