You were right...

You were being rude. And obnoxious. And condescending. And as elitist and dismissive as any pseudo-intellectual I've heard in a decade.

But, you were tired... so I'll put aside the meaningless and childish personal stabs and attacks and try and find some rational train of thought in your sarcastic and facetious comments on my question.

When I speak of the "Hamas-led government", I am speaking of the democratically elected coalition parliamentary representative government that both Israel and America helped institute in the Palestinian territories. Hamas won a staggering majority, and while the Fatah Party still plays a major role, it is the 74-seat Hamas majority that is giving Israel the headaches... and the death tolls... that we are discussing when we talk about the "Palestinian Problem". 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 in government, through a process that both Israel and the US promoted and provided.

To dismiss Hamas as "nothing more than terrorists" is to limit YOURSELF from seeing any historical associations or lessons that might be found. The Bolsheviks of the Russian Revolution used terror, intimidation and out-right murder and mayhem to seize control of the Russian political and military machines, and thus cementing 73 years of crushing totalitarian rule for hundreds of millions of people. The Taliban was nothing more than a group of extremist thugs throwing rocks at Russian tanks, using what they learned against the Red Army to seize control of Afghani "choke points" and supply routes that allowed them to slowly take control of the entire country. The National Socialist Democratic Workers Party was little more than a bunch of beer-swilling bullies that specialized in vandalism, arson and extortion... until 1932 and the sweeping victory they had in the general election.

All three of the examples I have made above are examples of political organizations/parties that were doomed to fail because of their formative and fundamental make up... yet had huge and even global impact through their ability to project force. Had any one (or all) of these groups had to answer for their "chartered" goals prior to facing a general popular election, they would have been laughed out of the running. Instead, they were seen by the majority of people to be able to provide something that the existing systems or parties were not... mainly peace and security for the masses.

Hamas is no different, in my opinion (since my opinion is such a source of contempt and disdain today, I'll put that in italics). As an organization, they are doomed to fail. 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.

The PA is a very (VERY) socialist system of government, and because they base so much of their organization and structure on the hadith and sharia-law, the economy of both Gaza and the West Bank is a very structured and controlled beast. The tax rate is exorbitant and the services provided are minimal (if they exist at all). Prices are fixed at an executive level, and legislative processes are answerable to a board of clerical "imams" and no one else. Hamas' party structure even copies that of the CPSU, with a presidium and a politburo comprising its executive directorate, and regional party groups organized to represent the "people" of Gaza making up the party's legislative body. Forget for a minute that Hamas cannot and (seemingly) will not forgo violence and murder in its effort to legitimize its political aims (a long walk, I know... just something else you can mock me for later), look at what happened to Gaza between 2006 (the election that took them to power in the PA) and 2009.

Before Israel even instituted the embargo or closed the border of Gaza to (moderately) unregulated, unrestricted traffic, Gaza was (as Ryan pointed out) utterly dependent on Israel for more than 80% of its food and medical needs, and more than 90% of its water and electrical needs... not because the farms were barren, or because the power plants were out of fuel, or the wells were dry... but because the people of Gaza simply couldn't afford the prices fixed by the Hamas government! A progressive tax rate as high as 88%, with taxes attached to everything from buying food to wearing denim jeans (yes, jeans!). Just to watch 30 minutes of al Jazeera news cost the equivalent of $19, all of which was a "media tax" because the broadcast didn't originate in Gaza (source HERE). Life in Gaza SUCKED because of Hamas rules and regulations... not because of Israel. Hamas has no choice but to use Israel as the "scapegoat" for their failures, and that is why I think (my opinion again) that they refuse to consider taking a legitimate, non-violent course of action in their political efforts... they can't justify their own policies without having someone else to blame for their failures.

In short, Hamas cannot succeed in ruling Gaza (or anywhere else in Palestine)... first and foremost because they ARE sponsors and supporters of terrorism, but we CANNOT discount the fact that their preferred system of government is PROVEN to be a short-cut to failure each and every time it is employed.

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. We here have had the temerity and gall to call into question the policies and actions of many American efforts to win wars that cost thousands of American lives... but to question the policies of Israel is to cross onto "holy ground" it would seem. I'm sorry Ryan read so much into what I posted... it seems that in writing my post, I was positing opinion rather than making an interrogative statement in an effort to elicit information from others... and that is somehow wrong here at the Bund (or, presumably, anywhere else).

There is no profit (fiscally speaking) in modern warfare, and the quickest way to secure peace over the long-term is to show the people of a region or area just how profitable peace can be. If prosperity can be shown to stem from cooperation and mutual understanding between Israel and the Palestinian Territories (as we are beginning to see in the West Bank and Golan, where violence is far less than half of what it is in Gaza), then the trials and tribulations that the Gazan population are being forced to endure under Hamas rule will be less and less appealing to Palestinians in Gaza (and elsewhere). Far be it from me to ever ask whether or not there might be another road to that peace other than the one the IDF has determined to walk... because we all know that Israel can't possibly be wrong in its chosen course of action...

Just ask the 204 American sailors who were killed or wounded on the USS Liberty in 1967.