| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Who is responsible for Gaza? A reply to Matthew Yglesias |
| 2007-05-28 |
| By Noah Pollak There has been a dustup between New Republic editor-in-chief Marty Peretz and Atlantic magazine blogger Matthew Yglesias. It is an unimportant tiff over an important question: Why are the Gaza Palestinians killing each other? Peretz blames the situation on the immutably violent characteristics of Palestinian society, whereas Yglesias says the carnage is pretty much the Bush administration's fault. If I may rephrase Yglesias's argument and add a helpful enumeration to his points, he says that (1) the Fatah party was keeping things under control until (2) the foolish Bush administration pushed the PA to hold elections. These brought Hamas to power, and (3) now the administration is making the problem worse by helping Fatah wage street battles with Hamas. Amazingly, none of these assertions are true. |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #9 Referring to Arafat as any sort of leader is a huge misnomer. Semantics. He who dishes out the gold and favors is the one in charge. Maybe boss or capo would have been a better label. But Pollak's word will have to do. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-05-28 18:37 |
| #8 Frank and Lonzo nail it. "Fatah" is a moniker given to the collection of gangsters, sycophants, and terrorists Arafat assembled around himself to protect his rule. One of the only things the author gets right, who just as quickly then proceeds onto yet another glaring error. Upon Arafat’s death, Fatah became adrift and leaderless. Referring to Arafat as any sort of leader is a huge misnomer. He was a terrorist thug and naught else. To attribute Fatah with any actual government, as opposed to the ultra-corrupt and brutal gangsterism it was, is worse than misleading. Save for its sole declared campaign of genocide against Israel's population, Fatah had always been "adrift" in a sea of As Lonzo noted, the democratic election (certified by Carter, no less), of Hamas was the best thing that ever happened. Although an ultimate disaster for the Palestinians—who as usual, never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity—it finally cemented their political will and presented unequivocal proof of their malignancy for all to see. Along with the 9-11, Bali, Madrid and London atrocities, Hamas' election put a real face on Islamic terrorism. Once lurking in the shadows, its genocidal hatred is now instead on public parade. It is no longer possible for the global community to pretend that Islam has any peaceful intentions. This, perhaps, will prove to be the Palestinians' greatest legacy, exposing to this world the rotting and essentially Hitlerian core of Islam. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-28 15:26 |
| #7 The appalling results of the democratic elections in the Palestinian territories were the best thing that could have happened. The illusion that this was an oppressed group which deserved a state alongside Israel was shattered. The Palestinians were revealed as a population guided by an agenda of hatred, chaos and destruction - a dagger aimed at the heart of the Arab's major bogeyman, Israel. Perhaps that ugly reality is dismaying to Yglesias, but its having been laid bare has allowed the world to treat the Palestinians as they deserve to be treated - as an implacable enemy of civilization - until their nature changes. |
| Posted by: Lonzo Glung7757 2007-05-28 14:18 |
| #6 Frank nailed it dead on. Why can't the Euro weenies and other apologists face the reality that these are nothing but bottom feeders? If they depart the earth today, we are all so much the better for it. |
| Posted by: Woozle Elmeter2970 2007-05-28 11:43 |
| #5 Matthew Yglesias--useless idiot. If the Paleos kill each other off, the world is better off. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2007-05-28 09:38 |
| #4 What Frank G said. |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2007-05-28 09:28 |
| #3 the election of Hamas just proved that the vast majority of Paleos are hate-filled bloodthirsty nihilists who would rather live in a squalid shithole, seething and killing each other, for the rare chance to kill a Joooo with a homemade rocket, than actually do something to improve their lives. Fuck em. They got the life they chose, however brutal and short. I'd cut the water and power, seal it up, let em kill each other, and shoot the last one alive |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-05-28 08:50 |
| #2 Abraham: if it just kept it in his pants... |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-05-28 01:29 |
| #1 Amazingly, none of these assertions are true. "Amazingly"? How about "unsurprisingly"? Or "predictably"? Or "inevitably"? |
| Posted by: Angie Schultz 2007-05-28 01:10 |