Political Cartoons

I hope they have good border security... wouldn't want all those darned white people sneaking in.

(deleted comment)

From:

My bad =)

Ethnic groups:
Definition Field Listing
British Isles origin 28%, French origin 23%, other European 15%, Amerindian 2%, other, mostly Asian, African, Arab 6%, mixed background 26%

From:

neonleonb.livejournal.com

There have been so many rejected peace proposals, I think it's fair to claim that some sort of reason is missing. Israel's not some sort of evil monster; it's a country that has been repeatedly attacked from all sides since the very moment of its inception. Why are so many people anti-Israel?

From:

madmethod.livejournal.com

I'm not anti-Israel, but I am against our level of support for that nation. I'm against Israel using our support as leverage against other nations in the area, which is easily turned into leverage against America by Islamic extremists. Israel is a part, however small it may be, of the problems in that region and should be held as accountable as arabs in the area.

Post Script: America and Europe have our demons in that region, and I don't feel we should be left off the hook either.

From:

Because Isreal continues to take action contrary to their signed agreements with regards to Palestine.

Because Isreal takes actions that are clearly and utterly reprehensible.

Isreal is not entirely at fault, but Palestine is essentialy a prison, and Isreal is making it more so every day. A few good recent examples of this are the wall, and the Isreali reaction to the Hamas victory in the authority elections.

For the first, the wall went up and was promised to not become a new border. Isreal recently went back on that promise(not that it mattered, cause Palestine couldnt do anything about it) and is expanding official authority to the line.

The Isreali reaction the the Hamas victory however, was worse. As testiment to "you can elect whom you want, so long as it is who we want", Isreal did a number of things.

1. They stopped Palestinean tax revenues. Palestine is taxed by Isreal, which then gives those revenues back to the Palestinean Authority. This equals 1/3 of the GDP in Palestine(to compare, the U.S. govt spending is about 1/5 to 1/6 of GDP), and funds thing like "picking up the trash", paying for energy(oil), funding hospitals, the salaries of all government workers, etc.

The arguement went "maybe Hamas will shape up when they have to pick up the trash?", except that Isreal never gave them a chance to pick up the trash. They were set up to fail essentialy.

2. They lobbied to take away the palestinean aid(See above for the consequences of such)

3. The return of these were based on the Palestinean Authority accepting treaties and agreements that Isreal does not honor.

This sort of behaviour has gone on for quite a long time, and considering that, it is unsuprising that so many people find the actions of Isreal reprehensible.

From:

neonleonb.livejournal.com

As far as Hamas goes, that group won't even recognize Israel as a country, which pretty much precludes the possibility of making any sort of agreement with it. Furthermore, they continue to endorse terrorism against Jewish civilians. I don't see why Israel should help support any such organization.

From:

1. They, after the election, did not endorse terrorism against jewish civillians. And their official stance was "we want to sit down with Isreal and work out some new rules, because these old ones arent working". Neither Hamas NOR Fatah recognized Isreal(in fact, both parties official stance is the eradication of Isreal), however Fatah was following treaties that Isreal was not bothering to uphold.

The issue was not whether or not Hamas recognized Isreal as a nation, but whether or not Hamas would aquiess to Isreali power, and continue to allow Isreal to shit on Palestine. They dont really have a choice in the manner(because they will be starved to death), but it was simply a power play on Isreals part.

When asking "why do people hate Isreal?" that is the supreme deterimor, individuals do not judge nations based on how well they play the power game, they judge them based on how they act, and Isreal has consistantly acted in a manner that can not be considred just and can cannot be considered good. They have judged a government before that government could take action, and they have constantly used their superior power to the detriment of others.

From:

actually fatah did recognize Israel's right to exist, and committed themselves and the PA to that position by treaty. that began the moment the Oslo Accords were signed.

From:

No, no Palestinian party actually recognizes Israel's "right to exist." Hamas already offered a 15 year truce in which they would accept the 67 borders and East Jerusalem as being part of a sovereign Palestinian state. They even threatened to forcibly disarm Hamas.

From:

Last word should read "Islamic Jihad"

From:

they were obligated to disarm all nongovernmental forces by treaty already, and if they had done so 6 years ago they might not have been in the mess they are in today.

From:

it doesnt matter whether a party does, it matters whether the government does and by extension the party members who occupy the positions of power within that government. Fatah, when they were in the government, signed an agreement officially recognizing Israel's righ to exist and accepted that as a precondition for negotiations. Hamas doesnt have the luxury of bringing it's entire party platform with them to power in the government. A government official is constrained by the treaties to which he or she is bound.

From:

Argument over a right to exist is moot--what matters is whether or not a government is willing to accept a de facto existence in the meantime. "Right to existence" should not be a precondition for peace; rather, it should be a result. In any case the government's recognition has not translated into a ceasure of violence by Fatah's militant wing, but Hamas has not attacked Israel in over a year. I think it is wise to negotiate with Hamas rather than push the Palestinian society into instability and what may become civil war.

From:

but Hamas has not attacked Israel in over a year. I think it is wise to negotiate with Hamas rather than push the Palestinian society into instability and what may become civil war.

tell that to the people of sderot who are receiving almost daily gifts of rocket fire from their hamas friends in Gaza. a precondition for negotiations in good faith is officially recognizing the entity you are negotiating with as a valid contracting party with whom treaties must be respected, as well as conceding that wiping it off the map or taking it over is no longer a goal of the Palestinian negotiating party.

As for Hamas they need to get used to the idea that they are not the opposition anymore, and that when one is a government official actions and positions and other command decisions have consequences. While this isnt the approach I would have reccomended, Israel, the US and the EU are perfectly within their rights to do what they are doing and it is not an unreasonable approach to take. If it becomes civil war hamas has nobody to blame except themselves and their own childish intransigence.

From:

I agree that Hamas' current policies are rather incomprehensible, and I do believe that their leaders are somewhat oblivious to the reality of the situation. I don't think they were expecting to find themselves in real authority. In any case, Hamas' strong organizational abilities are an indication that there IS potential. US and EU policy should not be to cause the Hamas government or Palestinian society to collapse, but to prevent Hamas' marginalization to the Syria and Iran.

From:

In the end it is Hamas's decision whether or not the Palestinian government and society collapse.

From:

No, in the end, it has always been an Isreali decision.

From:

that is not correct. Israel does not supply financial aid to the PA government, nor does it control the states who do. Hamas cannot expect to keep getting support from these countries if they bite the hand that feeds them.

From:

Isreal controls the taxation of the Palestinean Authority. When hamas was elected, the instant they were elected, before any public statements could be made, Isreal stoped allowing the tax revenue collected in Palestine to go to the Palestinean Authority.

The taxing authority of the PA is entirely in the hands of Isreal.

From:

I should add that just as Israeli trust of the Palestinians is lacking, Palestinian trust of the Israelis is also lacking and this should definitely be taken into consideration when trying to understand the position of the other side.

From:

right but the hamas position vis a vis israel is not reflective of the population as a whole, at least according to http://www.pcpsr.org

they were elected on an anti fatah corruption platform that included little to no mention of how they were going to deal with Israel. its easy to not be corrupt when you have no money in the first place.

From:

Then technically, so did Hamas. Fatah's official position on the matter was "wipe isreal off the map"

From:

technically speaking they did, and then decided they didnt like it so they werent going to follow it and took the opposite position in their official statements. which is why they are no longer getting any money

From:

They made no official statements to the effect. Not until after their money was shut off. Which happened immediatly after the election.

Not that Isreal has any moral authority to stop those payments.

From:

moral authority and morality in general is subjective and hence irrelevant.

they made the statements long before the money was actually shut off.

From:

not too familiar with basic contract law are you. see if the palestinians dont follow their end of the bargain, Israel is released from upholding its end of the contract. the palestinians began violating their end of the contract in earnest around september of 2000. the current Palestinian government refuses to accept even the most basic preconditions for renegotiating and restarting the contract. Its ridiculous to suggest Israel should keep following its end of the bargain. It's like insisting a homeowner pay a contractor for work he has not done and refuses to do.

From:

Because Israel has been so noble with its side of the "contract" for the past 55 years.

From:

Israel hasnt had a contract with the Palestinians for the last 55 years, only the last 15 or 16.

From:

No, the current Palestinian govt refuses to accept the already violated treaties and wants to re-negotiate.

Agreeing to give up your right to bargan is not a precondition for renegotiating.

From:

how is recognizing Israel's right to exist giving up their right to bargain? that makes no sense whatsoever. Hamas wants to renegotiate without that basic precondition and that is not okay. Hence they have no money

From:

No.

Hamas wanted to renegotiate without agreeing to existing treaties that have not been upheld. There is a large difference.

In 1790 you would not ask a state to negotiate under the guise of the Articles of Confederation, why do we expect Hamas to bargan by agreeing to pre-existing conditions that have not been upheld?

That STILL doesnt give Isreal the right to shut off Palestinean tax revenue.

From: