http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060126/ap_on_...inians_election

 

Can't say I'm too surprised.

They sure did.

 

From Israel's point of view this may be what they were looking for though. With Hamas as a major party they can say they won't talk peace, since even the US says they won't do that with Hamas.

o sh*t this cant be good at all, i am going to israel with my temple this summer! sh*t o well ill have to kill some palestinians on my own lol

There will never be eternal peace...That's a given.

 

But sometimes it seems like people don't even want to try.

good work Palestinians. :plain

I am waiting on Mollusk to give some political correctness crap. Please. You put the people in the office knowing their ideology, than you support it.

 

 

 

Goodbye peace process.

Every world leader has condemned the the results, and then I read this:

 

U.N. Secretary-General

Kofi Annan congratulated the Palestinian people on the peaceful legislative elections, which he said was an important step toward a Palestinian state.

How absurd.

Absurd is right. That is why I hate the UN. And if the peace process was so peaceful, than why was their fighting amongst Fatah supporters and Hamas supporters?

U.N. Secretary-General

Kofi Annan congratulated the Palestinian people on the peaceful legislative elections, which he said was an important step toward a Palestinian state.

He just confirmed his status as an idiot.

I thought this was funny...

 

Hamas supporters raised their flag over the Palestinian parliament and rushed into the building amid clashes with Fatah loyalists a day after winning parliamentary elections.

 

The two camps threw stones at each other, breaking windows in the building, as Fatah supporters briefly tried to lower the green Hamas banners. The crowd of about 3,000 Hamas backers cheered and whistled as activists on the roof of the parliament raised the Hamas banner again.

 

It was the first confrontation between Hamas and Fatah since the Islamic militant group won parliamentary elections on Wednesday.

 

They can't even transition peacefully :lol .

I am waiting on Mollusk to give some political correctness crap. Please. You put the people in the office knowing their ideology, than you support it.

 

 

 

Goodbye peace process.

 

Hey jackass, I gave my reasoning yesterday so dont try to single me out and throw down the labels on me. I told you that it was a terrible thing and Hamas deserves no benefit of the doubt. But dont be stupid or naive. There is more to the election of Hamas than the simple "we Palestinians are genetically predisposed to blow things up" argument you've convinced yourself of. You cant deny the existence of successful social and charitable organizations of Hamas had a lot to do with this. This is how democracies work. Basic economics says rational actors act in their self interest and Hamas did more to convince people that they would protect their self interest. I dont buy it and I think its a bad thing. So dont blame me and dont blame every last Palestinian and dont blame those people who defended the moderate Palestinians. Blame democracy if you feel the need to blame something.

 

Yet in your mission to be as bigoted and racist as possible, youve labelled every last Palestinian as hungering to see Hamas rise to power to kill every last Jew. Clearly not all of them did and clearly a large chunk of them see this as bad for their own mission for peace(hence your buddy accord ridiculing the Palestinians upset at Hamas' election). Ive only always defended those people who I know want peace-never Hamas. Because thats too difficult for you to understand, you just threw them all into one lump just like bigots throw all Jews into one lump.

 

But go ahead, ignore everything I said so you can just believe that all Muslims eat Jewish children.

 

 

And as for you accord, what does this say about democracy working in the Middle East? Not as simple as people make it out to be huh?

This is what one of my professors said on the elections. At first I thought he was crazy, but it does make some sense.

 

He says that Hamas winning the election is not a terrible because the are going to have to change their views. When they were on the outside looking in they could act how they wanted because they were the minority. Now that they are the majority they will have to tone down their actions. What will happen is if they start attacking Israel, Europe will stop giving them money and hurt them financially. Once they mess with Israel a few times and get defeated, they will have to tone things down.

 

We will see what happens

This is what one of my professors said on the elections. At first I thought he was crazy, but it does make some sense.

 

He says that Hamas winning the election is not a terrible because the are going to have to change their views. When they were on the outside looking in they could act how they wanted because they were the minority. Now that they are the majority they will have to tone down their actions. What will happen is if they start attacking Israel, Europe will stop giving them money and hurt them financially. Once they mess with Israel a few times and get defeated, they will have to tone things down.

 

We will see what happens

 

Yeah thats the general hope from a lot of people. Problem is this theory will be dismissed because people think Europe will just feed Hamas since all Palestinians are the same. When the reality is that those that lean towards helping the Palestinians don't implicitly support Hamas. So either Hamas is going to have to strive towards peace to mantain outside help or they will throw the structured government and democracy out the window and become pariahs/dictators.

I hate to burst your bubbles fm and JetsMania, but believe it or not there is a historical precedent for the events that happened, and that is the 1932 elections in Weimar Germany. Replace Nazis with Hamas, Communists with Fatah, and Brownshirts with the Kassam Brigades (the active terrorist "wing" of Hamas), and you get the same results (well, except the Nazis didn't get an outright majority in the 1932 elections). They both capitalized on government mismanagement and efforts to "blame someone else" -- namely, the Jews. The conservative parties in Germany thought they could moderate Hitler and the Nazis by bringing them into the government. Well, we now know how that turned out, b/c it didn't even take ONE DAY for Hitler to start implementing the Nazi agenda. And when Hitler started "testing the waters" for how far he could go, everyone else in the world buckled. Increasing the size of the German Army was forbidden under the Treaty of Versailles, but he did it anyways. Seizing of the Rhineland and the Saar were explicitly prohibited as well, but he did it anyways. Then came the Anschluss with Austria, the Sudeten crisis (in which Neville Chamberlain buckled severely), the seizure of Czechoslovakia, all which led up to the invasion of Poland, the "official" beginning of WWII.

 

So spare me the sob stories on how Hamas will be forced to moderate, because movements like Hamas never do.

Hamas' democratic takeover of power in that region is not only bad for the Middle East peace process, but even worse for the neo-Conservative idea that ANY democratic elections in the Middle East are good. While Bush continues to believe in this idea, Iraq moves closer to becoming Iran Jr, and the Palestinians elect probably the most anti-Semitic group in the Middle East to run their government.

 

To make matters worse, there are ties between Hamas and Iran.

I hate to burst your bubbles fm and JetsMania, but believe it or not there is a historical precedent for the events that happened, and that is the 1932 elections in Weimar Germany. Replace Nazis with Hamas, Communists with Fatah, and Brownshirts with the Kassam Brigades (the active terrorist "wing" of Hamas), and you get the same results (well, except the Nazis didn't get an outright majority in the 1932 elections). They both capitalized on government mismanagement and efforts to "blame someone else" -- namely, the Jews. The conservative parties in Germany thought they could moderate Hitler and the Nazis by bringing them into the government. Well, we now know how that turned out, b/c it didn't even take ONE DAY for Hitler to start implementing the Nazi agenda. And when Hitler started "testing the waters" for how far he could go, everyone else in the world buckled. Increasing the size of the German Army was forbidden under the Treaty of Versailles, but he did it anyways. Seizing of the Rhineland and the Saar were explicitly prohibited as well, but he did it anyways. Then came the Anschluss with Austria, the Sudeten crisis (in which Neville Chamberlain buckled severely), the seizure of Czechoslovakia, all which led up to the invasion of Poland, the "official" beginning of WWII.

 

So spare me the sob stories on how Hamas will be forced to moderate, because movements like Hamas never do.

 

What sob story? Who gave you a sob story? Not one person has disagreed with you that Hamas' election is a bad thing. Your qualm is with the open democratic system that everyone wanted to see, including Im sure Israel. The problem is that the system failed and people will have the same viewpoint that they had before regarding Hamas-that Hamas is a terrible organization. Not one person will tell you that we should appease Hamas the way Hitler was appeased. And I bet 100 bucks that you wont find a single post from anyone ever saying that. Israel has an absolute right to defend itself against this organization.

 

But since youre making the analogy, what is the current political system in Germany? Democracy. So in reality, your point fails. The mistake in that situations was not trusting democracy to the German people, it was appeasing Hitler. And nobody is or should appease Hamas. That way, maybe Hamas will be driven into change or else become a weak but control obsessed dictator. Get it?