Comments on: Only Carter Could Go to Hamas?

By: runasim

runasim — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:02:32 +0000

Holly is right. Hamas does say they want to destroy Israel., and the goal is for that not to happen.
The divergence in opinion is about which path is more likely to achieve the goal.

There is an increased danger to Israel with every year the current dead-end situation continues. With every year, the cross grieveances multiply, and it becomes hardert to organize all the strands into a vision for a doable solution

An inflexible Israel, also, can not attractt world support the way a more flexible Israel can.

Time is working agaisnt Isrrael, and it does not always use the time wisely.

By: runasim

runasim — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:34:23 +0000

In a conflict, each side thinks their demands are 'reasonble', and the other side lacks moral principles. One side's defense of principles tis the others side's extremism.

There are only two choices. One is to continue killing and brutalizing each other, and the other is to seek a way to co-exist.

Carter is enough of a humanitrian to acknowledge the suffering on both sides and enough of a realist to see that the only to stop it is for neutral trhid parties to intervene. Unltiamtely, the only way to achieve a peace that lasts is for both sides to become relatavistic enough about morelity to listen and undestand the story from the other's point of view.

Sometimes there are higher principles to uphold than strict adherence to operating by means of jingoism like 'moral ralitivsm', PC and the rest of the sloganeering nonsense.

.

By: Tully

Tully — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:22:46 +0000

Hamas' peace terms are simple–the complete destruction of Israel.

By: CStanley

CStanley — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:30:14 +0000

I suppose you could say that, Davebo, but only a moral relativist perspective could support the idea of equivalency between the various “terms” of each side. One side does insist that it be allowed to continue to exist, while the other side refuses to denounce the most extreme among them who won't accept the other side's right to exist. If you think those are equally reasonable demands, well, OK….

By: Davebo

Davebo — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:20:22 +0000

His pursuit of peace as the goal assumes that everyone else also shares that goal, while extremists actually only want peace on their own terms

Isn't that true of all involved in the conflict?

By: Tully

Tully — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:13:05 +0000

Carter is inept, and should go back to building houses and writing children's books.

By: CStanley

CStanley — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:53:48 +0000

I think the more accurate criticism of Carter isn't that he supports extremists, but that he naively thinks he can work with extremists to broker peace. His pursuit of peace as the goal assumes that everyone else also shares that goal, while extremists actually only want peace on their own terms (and those terms are unacceptable if they don't allow for others to coexist with them.)