No ...

I choose not to participate in the "new rule." And here's why - sometimes a fly needs to be killed with a hammer. I have reached my limits with the entire line of reasoning about what Israel must, could, should do to secure "peace." Allow me to explain.

"Hamas has its foundations in terrorism, I do not deny... just as Sinn Fein did in Northern Ireland for the 40 years prior to the Good Friday Accords, but it doesn't negate the fact that the people of Gaza elected Hamas members to represent them ..."

They (Hamas) have its "foundations" in terrorism? They are on the US list of terrorist organizations right now! What is this nonsense? And no, it doesn't negate the fact that the people chose them as their governing body, but neither does the fact they are a governing body change the fact that they are terrorists!!! In fact, it's quite illuminating (and by the way- they didn't elect "members" whom happen to be in Hamas, as this quote seems to suggest. They have a parliamentary system, they elected Hamas as "party", a group, solidifying that "the people" support the group's aims).

You described Hamas as having a "staggering" victory and subsequent power via free elections. This is true. What is also true is that each and every voter which gave Hamas authority to "represent" them knew full well what Hamas is - a militant, rabidly racist, terror (although their voters would argue "freedom fighters" I'm sure) organization that seeks NO peace with Israel and would never recognize their right to exist. The most recent leader of Hamas shocked the West when saying he wished ALL the worlds Jews to come to Israel. That is until he followed that suggestion by noting this would make it easier to kill them. THAT is who the people chose. Does that not speak to the population itself, for which Israel is supposed to be "winning the hearts and minds?" After all of these decades, countless peace processes directed by the West, and untold millions in tons of aide, when the "common man" (whose face is apparently covered in dirt kicked by Israelis, say some) finally had his say not only did he reject a peace process but chose representation that was SURE to continue violence. In other words there is no peace process to be had. I find your even loose comparison of Sinn Fein utterly ridiculous and beneath your abilities (and by the way, I had a grand 8 hours sleep last night - this simply pisses me off to no end). Fein terrorized (& they were terrorists) claiming England had no inherent right to rule the Irish. They did not however have the destruction of the entire English population as a stated goal. Not to mention, when the UK finally conceded enough to Fein, it laid down (or buried) its' weapons. Can you honestly say this will ever be achievable with Hamas? The PA has been offered as much as 90% of their stated requests in past peace processes and still refused. I'm not "dismissing" them as terrorists, I'm identifying them as terrorists and noting that having been chosen as the PA's ruling body means the voting population does not seek peace, making Hamas all the more dangerous, not less.

"It's a crying shame that I am openly derided for asking the simple question of whether or not there were alternative methods to show the people of Gaza, Palestine and the world just how BAD Hamas was at running a government without directly increasing or contributing to the troubles and suffering of the people that elected them into power."

Here's where I blow my stack. Here's where it doesn't matter if I've had 10 hours sleep, the explicits start to fly. This is a fine geopolitical point, one involving the art of state craft, of national maneuvering in order to secure peaceful relations, of the international chess match for which societies around the world have engaged throughout history, IF WE ARE WRITING A F***ING THEORETICAL ESSAY!!!

The point being is the "embargo" was never meant to further alienate the Palestinian people (who after all, just want peace & cheaper tv programming, that's why they chose Hamas, right?) from their government. It is NOT meant to "show the Palestinian people and the world just how bad Hamas was at running a government." It is to stop ROCKETS from reigning down on innocent Jews!

I mean seriously, do you not get this? This wasn't a move to show the Palestinian people "how bad" Hamas is at governing. It is to save the lives of every day Israelis. The strategic course you are suggesting for Israel - of trying to demonstrate to average Palestinians how inept Hamas is without directly contributing to their ever day troubles - is the equivalent of when a man is having a heart attack, describing to him the health benefits of a low cholesterol diet! It's get out the paddles time man! To suggest that perhaps Israel is better served by blanketly lifting the embargo in order to better show the Palestinian people "how bad" Hamas is at governing negates the reality that such a move means MORE ROCKET ATTACKS.

Jesus, May and Joseph Titus, why do you refuse to grasp this? Even Egypt indirectly supports the embargo by offering aide ships the ability to be searched at their ports prior to heading to the embargoed waters. This is not the time to suggest Israel find some clever third way to effect peace with a people WHO DO NOT DESIRE PEACE. Hamas is an army of darkness, to paraphrase Henry Jones. No better than the Nazi Party. They are simply less effective at killing Jews (so far). You do not negotiate with NAZIs. You do not try and show "the people" how misguided their government is so long as German ovens are being constructed or Gaza rockets are reigning down - YOU DEFEAT THEM. Period. And I'm not suggesting Israel use its nukes and turn Gaza into glass for about 10,000 years (the mismatch in conventional forces is more than up to the task of winning). I'm simply saying that Hamas has declared war against Israel, and Hamas has the support of the population, so they're not going away. It is time to defeat the rabid racist, blood thirsty creature that is Hamas and give future Palestinians the same chance the US gave future Japanese generations (I would have used Germany but the whole Iron Curtain thing immediately post war kind of hurts the analogy).

"Putting aside the fact that their charter calls for the destruction of the very nation that allows them to sit in a position of representative authority at all (the destruction of Israel), let's look at the charter just a bit closer ..."

I realize you wrote this in an endeavour to go into detail about the dysfunctionality of every day Hamas governing, even without their racist/terrorist aims. And how they were sealing their own fate via that dysfunctionality even without the desire to slaughterer all Jews. But here's the problem. It doesn't matter. Even if Hamas wasn't a disaster at governing (they can make the trains run on time all they want) there is no "putting aside" this point in their charter. Not in any analogy, in any discussion, in any realm of possibility which is grounded in reality rather then strategic theory. My God man - look at what you wrote. You didn't ask to "keep in mind" their charter of Israeli destruction, you asked we "put it aside" to further the conversation. And I understand fully what you were attempting to achieve by writing it. I'm simply saying that even under those circumstances, to have a discussion which starts with that sentence means we have lost the lessons of history, no matter how brief, no matter how well intentioned. To be very honest, it's embarrassing you would even write such a thing. There's no discussion to be had when it starts with that sentence. There is no putting that aside under any circumstance, and any time the EU, or Russia, or you, or Obama enters into a discussion in which they must suspend the reality of that charter in order to move the discussion forward, well ... they have given anyway just a little more of their humanity, whether they meant to or not.