More Kristof foolishness

By

Nicholas Kristof, the man who stoutly defended Sami Al—Arian (the man who was a key supporter and financier for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad network) now counsels Israel to, well, capitulate, in his subscriber—only New York Times column. This sentence is particularly obtuse:

"All this suggests that the only way for Israel to achieve security is to reach a final peace agreement, involving the establishment of a Palestinian state (because states can be deterred more easily than independent groups like Hamas)."

Hello, Nick. Hamas is the Palestinian government and once in power launched thousands of missiles into Israel, smuggles arms and soldiers into Gaza, and continues to raise a new generation of children taught to hate and exalt violence. That is terror government for you.

His thesis involkes comparison with Spain's treament of the Basques and England's treatment of the IRA. These groups were fought for many years before more moderate leadership emerged within these groups. in other words, the victories against them eventually dissuaded them from continuing thier course. The Basque were arguably defeated by the Spanish government; the IRA funding in America was restricted and that weakened them (come to think of it, that was the same sort of funding that Al—Arian facilitated for terror groups).

Neither the Basques nor the IRA openly declared that the goal of their struggle was the destruction of Spain and England nor the destruction of the Spanish and British people. In contrast, Hamas and Hezbollah openly declare their goal is the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews around the world. Equating these groups to the Arab terror networks is nonsensical.
 
Somehow this very basic knowledge either eludes Kristof or he cares not to inform his readers of these facts.
 
However, there is more regarding his view of states being easier to reason with than terror groups. Hezbollah has cabinet posts in Lebanon and through its various machinations, believes it has veto power and control over Lebanon. If you agree with the logic of Kristof, one would hope that Hezbollah gain total control over Lebanon. Yes..when extremists took control of Iran after the Shah's downfall, that sure moderated them. Nasrallah openly boasts of his current level of power.

Imagine how he would be emboldened if he had even more control — a position that Kristof seemingly advocates.

Ed Lasky   7 23 06

Nicholas Kristof, the man who stoutly defended Sami Al—Arian (the man who was a key supporter and financier for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad network) now counsels Israel to, well, capitulate, in his subscriber—only New York Times column. This sentence is particularly obtuse:

"All this suggests that the only way for Israel to achieve security is to reach a final peace agreement, involving the establishment of a Palestinian state (because states can be deterred more easily than independent groups like Hamas)."

Hello, Nick. Hamas is the Palestinian government and once in power launched thousands of missiles into Israel, smuggles arms and soldiers into Gaza, and continues to raise a new generation of children taught to hate and exalt violence. That is terror government for you.

His thesis involkes comparison with Spain's treament of the Basques and England's treatment of the IRA. These groups were fought for many years before more moderate leadership emerged within these groups. in other words, the victories against them eventually dissuaded them from continuing thier course. The Basque were arguably defeated by the Spanish government; the IRA funding in America was restricted and that weakened them (come to think of it, that was the same sort of funding that Al—Arian facilitated for terror groups).

Neither the Basques nor the IRA openly declared that the goal of their struggle was the destruction of Spain and England nor the destruction of the Spanish and British people. In contrast, Hamas and Hezbollah openly declare their goal is the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews around the world. Equating these groups to the Arab terror networks is nonsensical.
 
Somehow this very basic knowledge either eludes Kristof or he cares not to inform his readers of these facts.
 
However, there is more regarding his view of states being easier to reason with than terror groups. Hezbollah has cabinet posts in Lebanon and through its various machinations, believes it has veto power and control over Lebanon. If you agree with the logic of Kristof, one would hope that Hezbollah gain total control over Lebanon. Yes..when extremists took control of Iran after the Shah's downfall, that sure moderated them. Nasrallah openly boasts of his current level of power.

Imagine how he would be emboldened if he had even more control — a position that Kristof seemingly advocates.

Ed Lasky   7 23 06