Free Republic

I respect your decision to end our "lively debate," but I would argue that you might learn something as well from those who challenge you to think about things differently. Consider that conditions in which those who support Hamas and Hezbollah find themselves. Desperate situations create desperate people who choose desperate tactics. I am not condoning, nor saying these are tactics I could ever see myself pursuing, but I do understand how/why someone might be pushed to that point. When ignored for so long, one does anything he feels will get him noticed.

FYI: Because I am asked this a lot given my stance on this particular issue (and related ones), I am not a Muslim. I am Christian and have spent my whole life in the South (somewhat the opposite of what many might think given my statements). I do, however, have an appreciation and understanding of many cultures that are not my own (which should not be taken to be unpatriotic).

Again, thank you for the discussion. Maybe we'll have another sometime on another issue. Maybe we'll even share similar viewpoints.

I figured you might think I was Russian or Russian-American, but why did you think I might be a teacher? Just curious.

I understand that you do not support the goals of Hamas. More specifically, I would suspect you do not support their methods. While I would never profess to be an adamant supporter of Hamas' goals or methods, I do respect their right to have certain goals defined according to their values and to pursue them by what they consider to be acceptable methods given their means. This is what the US (and any other government in the world) does. The difference is that recognized states in the world have greater means due to a greater ability to extract from their populations (taxation). Need I remind you of things such as secret CIA prisons or Abu Ghraib, even Hiroshima and Nagasaki (in the eyes of some)? It is not like the means of the US have always been condoned by the world either.

Maybe you should investigate the social welfare networks established by groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in the occupied territories. They do not focus all of their efforts and funding on what has so conveniently been labeled as terrorism. Until the state of Israel can combat the parallel social welfare state, it will never end the efforts of Hamas and others like them. Fortunately, the Israelis have realized this and have, over the last few years, been exploring options for counteracting this. The biggest problem is that they propose doing it with European funding, not Israeli funding which often furthers the idea that Palestinians will never receive respect and fair treatment from the state of Israel.

Additionally, maybe one should examine history a bit more closely to see that Hamas, Hezbollah, and the state of Israel (along with Western allies) did not really engage one another as enemies until the British made two promises (The Hussein letters to the Palestinians and The Balfour Declaration to the Jewish population) for the territory that is now in dispute. While many like to say that this is an historic battle over claims to territory, it really is not. Much like the Balkan wars, people cite historic grievances to incite more hatred, but there were centuries of peace in this territory also.

Back to the issue of the Russians funding Hamas.....They feel (and I would tend to agree) that whether or not you like what Hamas is doing, you have little choice but to recognize them as the legitimate, legal voice of the Palestinians at this point. They control the Palestinian Legislative Council. Ignoring them and refusing negotiation with them would be extremely hypocritical of a state like the US which professes to want to see a democratic world. Recognition of their newly won political power and status in the region also provides the opportunity to "bring them to the table" on somewhat equal footing to the Israelis in order to work out some compromises. Whether you feel they deserve to have that status or not, it psychologically works to demonstrate they have your respect and to convince them, as a result, that they do not necessarily have to be combative. They no longer have to fight for recognition and respect. Failing to give them this status almost guarantees a more militant stance. Of course, if you favor a war of attrition in Israel, by all means, continue to argue that Hamas should be ignored and that war will come, but it most certainly will not come without large portions of the world being drawn into it. It will also not come without severe disruptions to Western, oil-dependent economies who have not been farsighted enough to pursue alternative means of energy.

(Thanks for the opportunity to participate in a bit of lively debate.)

No, I am not Russian. I am American. My ancestors are American by birth for at least the last 1 1/2 centuries (that's as far as I have researched at this point). I am actually a political science student, working on my Ph.D. and teaching undergraduate courses.

Just some thoughts for consideration.......Unfortunately, it seems to me that many of you have been rather shortsighted and politically selective in your criticism of US presidential administrations for funding and supporting currently unfriendly regimes in the world. Need I remind you all of our support for Saddam, the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan (which produced Al-Qaeda), others in Latin America like Pinochet, African leaders such as Mubarak. It's not like the US hasn't made it's fair share of bad choices when supporting certain leaders in the world. We act out of self interest at the time and fail to see what might be produced out of our actions. Then those who oppose a particular administration or party selectively choose which ones to criticize as "one of the greatest mistakes in US foreign policy history." I think it is incredibly unfair, uninformed, and frankly, un-American to not try to see the "big picture" of our country's actions. If we don't try to do this as citizens, we will be aiding what many see as the destruction of our country's current world power status. From how many of you write, it does not seem that you either believe this is possible, or want it to happen.

Additionally, regarding the criticism I continue to see regarding Putin, I argue that this is ill-informed as well. How many of you have talked to the Russians to find out what they think of him? Americans don't like him because he creates his own foreign policies and refuses to be used as a puppet of our government. What's wrong with that and acting in what he sees as the best interest of his country? Maybe before criticizing other leaders, we should be putting ourselves in their shoes to determine if their actions are rational. I'd argue his are. The comparisons to the former communist leasers is simply ridiculous. Russians support Putin, his strong central government, and the stability it brings them. Putin is much better than the chaos created by Yeltsin. At least under Putin inflation is under control; Russia is experiencing economic growth, and Russians don't worry about whether or not they can afford to eat today. Will Americans not stop with the criticism until every country in the world adopts American-style democracy?!? For once, it might be nice for citizens to realize that we only support democracy when it's convenient to us (because we believe we can influence the new leadership). We support dictators as long as they side with us. Hypocrisy is almost inherent in US foreign policy (as with the foreign policy of almost any other country in the world). Citizens should critique and analyze the rhetoric rather than consuming it in one big gulp like the Kool-Aid others have used. Exercise your democratic rights and duties to be critical of your government and its actions, regardless of your party affiliation or the party affiliations of government leaders.

I know that this has been somewhat of a tirade. For that I apologize. For my statements, however, I do not.