Comments:Former US president Carter meets with former deputy-PM for Hamas
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
Good for Carter ... opening the lines of communication with all parties brings more transparency to the situation, and that is always a good thing. Wikidsoup - (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. The people that want to marginalize Hamas are forgetting the fact that they were elected by the people of Gaza. Spacehusky - (talk) 20:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
And lead them to a civil war which maid life harder for them? --66.229.16.129 21:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Non-interventionist foreign policy at work... Fephisto - (talk) 20:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think it is bad that Carter is doing this. It undermines the isolation strategy, which is to say, "Do this or we won't engage you" where "this"="stop declaring that your ultimate goal is to destroy Israel" among other things. Now Carter confers legitimancy upon Hamas while it has not moderated it's position. The message Hamas gets is that it doesn't have to do anything but wait.
- Isolating hamas, Spacehusky, is not forgetting the fact that they were elected. It is respecting that fact. Hamas was elected. Hamas' goal is the destruction of Israel and the Jews. Hamas does not even make a pretense of offering long-term peace, but rather short-term cease-fires or 10-year "hudnas," and even offering these are opposed by many Hamas members. No, I do not think the international community should dignify Hamas' position with "talks." Would you have the international community ignore the fact that Hamas was elected, and treat Gaza as if it were under the rule of Fatah or something?
- Israel refuses to talk to Hamas (for now) not because it doesn't accept it as the ruler of Gaza, but because of Hamas' professed goals. Israel partially cuts electricity and fuel to Gaza because Hamas is the ruler of Gaza and not just a group inside it anymore. Smaug - (talk) 17:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)