Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
There's nothing wrong with economic warfare against Hamas, but describing the blockade as such is odd. I guess, if Hamas' economy is based on IEDs, suicide belts, rockets and smuggling tunnels... it makes sense to minimalize it. It wasn't economic warfare against Palestine, right?
The current Iranian government is the elected government (hell even if they cheated in the last election it was probably not enough to swing control from the current leaders to the opposition). And yet we have no problems using economic warfare against them. Hamas may be the elected leaders of Gaza (though their take over of the place from the Fatah did get pretty damn violent) but they advocate more than just economic warfare against Israel but real shooting warfare. If you're going to advocate that then democracy or not economic warfare is justified.
As I've heard, Hitler (or his party?) won 34% of the vote and formed a coalition for power... then he openly went racist and basically just took over. I'm not sure that constitutes "was elected".
He has received the majority of his country's people votes, became the biggest party in his country and hence the leader.
He has then threw democracy out of the window and Germany became a dictatorship, but he was elected democratically.
He has received the majority of his country's people votes, became the biggest party in his country and hence the leader.
He has then threw democracy out of the window and Germany became a dictatorship, but he was elected democratically.
I tend to disagree with you there.In the case of Hamas,
When one kills the opposition, literally slaughtering them in the streets and instilling fear of death to families in their supporters, and then "wins" the election... that doesn't really count either. Sure, they were democratically elected if 'viciously slaughter those who oppose you' is part of the democratic process. A vote taking place alone does not make a process democratic, there's alot more to it than that. There was voting under Saddam - it wasn't a democracy.
Iran is not a democracy either and Ahmadinejad is not "democratically elected"; self-appointed clerics pick who is allowed to run for the elected offices. When the government's highest echelon self-appoints and then literally chooses the candidates for non-appointed offices... that is not a democracy - it's a theocratic farce of democracy.
As cited above.Hitler became Führer (Supreme Leader) on August 2, 1934: he'd been Chancellor of Germany since January 30, 1933. Very technically, Hitler was never actually elected, but he did take power legally under the laws of the then-Weimar Republic, which he almost immediately abolished. Until Hitler was appointed Chancellor, the Nazis never held an actual majority in the government and the parliament...
When Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934, Hitler's cabinet passed a law transferring the power of the presidency to Hitler as both Chancellor and Führer (Leader). In mid-August a plebiscite was held, and 85% of the people voted to sustain Hitler as supreme leader of the state, people and military. Hitler could no longer be legally challenged. But he hadn't been elected per se: he'd been appointed Chancellor, then usurped the power of the presidency, and was approved in place by that 85% vote, but the fact remains (and the German voters living at the time must bear the responsibility) 85% voted to follow Hitler to their eventual Götterdamerung.
Even if Hamas was democratically elected in 2006, there has been no legit elections since (they killed the opposition) and so they do not stand currently today as "democratically elected".
In Iran, even if the elections are not rigged... the candidates are.
Regarding Hitler, I can only appeal to weak authority:
As cited above.
Isn't Hamas the elected government? Democracy.
However, the things you list deosn't appear to be the reason for the blockade. Right?
The problem is that we are ALSO isolating Palestinians who havent done anything wrong. Cutting Hamas' legs out from under them is fine, but economic warfare is not the way to do when their income isnt from economic activity that can be simply shut off.I edited some, but my point is...
We wage economic warfare against Iran, North Korea, etc... why not Hamas? I mean, hell, they aren't even waging economic warfare against the 'country'... just the current group of tyrants. That seems rather restrained. Besides, exactly how does Hamas make money legitimately?
Do you think instead of economic warfare, we should provide economic assistance to terrorist groups? Think we should we be neutral towards them? Of course you don't - I'm making a point.
And yes, the point of the blockade is to neuter Hamas. I suppose that would include limiting their access to money (as is US policy). It's not like they sell anything on EBay or produce anything, ya know? Palestinians do, but Hamas doesn't. At least, not anything we want. Really, we must isolate and disempower them economically; that's obvious.
Actually....I mean, what's next? "Hamas is a humanitarian organization"? C'mon.
Dont get me wrong, Hamas is an organization that uses children as bullet shields and produced an anti-Semetic Mickey Mouse kid's show rip-off; they are NOT warm and fuzzy people, but they do provide a lot to the Palestinian people. I dont think that should be enough to protect Hamas or excuse their criminal actives, but it's important to keep in mind.
Got a link for that?Hamas denies Humanitarian aid to Gaza.
As we speak the humanitarian aid from the flotilla of hatred is still packed up near the Israeli border with Gaza because Hamas refuses to allow it in.
Besides that, Israel has recently eased up the blockade on Gaza and has decided to allow candies, soft drinks, jams, and many other types of foods into the Strip.
Hamas has then announced that it would not allow it in.
Got a link for that?
I don't have a link but it certainly was true a few days ago. I also came upon a site which said Israel was only allowing a small part of it in. Whether that is true or not I do not know.Got a link for that?
just use google, here are the first two:
Flotilla aid refused by Hamas
Hamas refuses flotilla aid delivered by Israel | World news | The Guardian
"According to officials in Gaza, Hamas has said it will not permit the supplies to enter the besieged territory until all detained activists are released and Israel agrees to deliver all aid consignments, including construction materials."
Sounds like a dumb reason to not allow them in, over a point of pride. I can see why Hamas doesnt want to accept them, they're trying to increase international pressure on Israel to break the siege.
I don't have a link but it certainly was true a few days ago. I also came upon a site which said Israel was only allowing a small part of it in. Whether that is true or not I do not know.
The aid ship was bringing ten tons of stuff, a drop in the oceon with what Gaza needs. I was watching some videos last night and apparently they need about one million tons of cement to rebuild after the war that ended 16 months or so ago.
They get about 100 lorries of stuff from Israel per day, whether it is aid or not I do not know. 10 years ago they used to get 1,800 lorries per day.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?