Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

US Does Negotiate with Terrorists

Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:40:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hillary Clinton was sent to Egypt by President Obama for the explicit purpose of negotiating a cease fire between Israel and Hamas. Hamas is officially designated a terrorist organization by the US. How can we contend that the US doesn't negotiate with terrorists?

I don't see how working through Mohammed Morsi as an intermediary changes anything, a negotiation is a negotiation, the means of communications shouldn't matter. Hamas was firing rockets at civilian populations in Israel, that is a terrorist act, and our secretary of state went there specifically to negotiate a cease fire, achieved it, and it is being touted as a major US success that demonstrates that we still have influence in the region. How can we say we aren't negotiating with terrorists?

Have we reversed our official policy?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:42:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This isn't news. We've been negotiating with the Israeli government for years ;)

(The people are one thing; the government another)
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:43:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 7:42:03 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
This isn't news. We've been negotiating with the Israeli government for years ;)

(The people are one thing; the government another)

I don't think US policy is defined by who you think is a terrorist, thank god.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:44:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Pretty much anyone the US Government doesn't like is labeled a terrorist. It's the adult, statist version of "poopy head."
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:46:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 7:44:35 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Pretty much anyone the US Government doesn't like is labeled a terrorist. It's the adult, statist version of "poopy head."

This.

One man's terrorist is the other man's freedom fighter.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:46:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 7:43:38 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:42:03 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
This isn't news. We've been negotiating with the Israeli government for years ;)

(The people are one thing; the government another)

I don't think US policy is defined by who you think is a terrorist, thank god.

Yeah, because then we might actually have to prosecute US government officials. God forbid that our government and its cronies be held accountable for their crimes.
TheElderScroll
Posts: 643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 8:23:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The alternative is much worse. Can you envision a ground incursion? Hamas wants Israel to invade Gaza strip so that the International community would blame Israeli government for killing innocent civilians (over 1,400 Palestinians were killed four-year ago). Israel would be further isolated in the Middle East. Besides, Egypt is governed by the Muslim Brotherhood, the parental organization of the governing body of Hamas. Tunisia and Turkey are no friends to Israel either. Israel and the United States need Egypt to help maintain regional stability. Further push by Israel may put Egypt into a very awkward position. Right now, Egypt wants to maintain a status quo in the so that it can focus on its own problem. The prolonged war would damage Mohamed Morsi's credibility as a genuine reformer, and it would provide extremists inside the Egyptian government with opportunity to seize the control. Ground invasion would also inexorably inflict casualties on Israeli military. Therefore a cease-fire is a much better option, at least for now.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 9:28:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:23:21 PM, TheElderScroll wrote:
The alternative is much worse. Can you envision a ground incursion? Hamas wants Israel to invade Gaza strip so that the International community would blame Israeli government for killing innocent civilians (over 1,400 Palestinians were killed four-year ago). Israel would be further isolated in the Middle East. Besides, Egypt is governed by the Muslim Brotherhood, the parental organization of the governing body of Hamas. Tunisia and Turkey are no friends to Israel either. Israel and the United States need Egypt to help maintain regional stability. Further push by Israel may put Egypt into a very awkward position. Right now, Egypt wants to maintain a status quo in the so that it can focus on its own problem. The prolonged war would damage Mohamed Morsi's credibility as a genuine reformer, and it would provide extremists inside the Egyptian government with opportunity to seize the control. Ground invasion would also inexorably inflict casualties on Israeli military. Therefore a cease-fire is a much better option, at least for now.

I'm not saying it was a bad thing by any stretch, I think it was the right thing to do. I just find it curious that there has been no mention of the policy of not negotiating with terrorists, it appears to be conspicuously absent from the news coverage.

Just curious if anybody knows why, or how it's being spun. Is the new policy we never negotiate with terrorists, except sometimes we do?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 9:29:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:23:21 PM, TheElderScroll wrote:
The alternative is much worse. Can you envision a ground incursion? Hamas wants Israel to invade Gaza strip so that the International community would blame Israeli government for killing innocent civilians (over 1,400 Palestinians were killed four-year ago). Israel would be further isolated in the Middle East. Besides, Egypt is governed by the Muslim Brotherhood, the parental organization of the governing body of Hamas. Tunisia and Turkey are no friends to Israel either. Israel and the United States need Egypt to help maintain regional stability. Further push by Israel may put Egypt into a very awkward position. Right now, Egypt wants to maintain a status quo in the so that it can focus on its own problem. The prolonged war would damage Mohamed Morsi's credibility as a genuine reformer, and it would provide extremists inside the Egyptian government with opportunity to seize the control. Ground invasion would also inexorably inflict casualties on Israeli military. Therefore a cease-fire is a much better option, at least for now.

I'm not saying it was a bad thing by any stretch, I think it was the right thing to do. I just find it curious that there has been no mention of the policy of not negotiating with terrorists, it appears to be conspicuously absent from the news coverage.

I'm just curious if anybody knows why, or how it's being spun. Is the new policy we never negotiate with terrorists, except sometimes we do?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater