EX-Prez Carter to meet with Hamas...

DeepIron · 04-17-08, 11:16 AM

This should be interesting...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/...mas/index.html

Hope he takes some peanuts along...

Quote:

But the likely meeting has rankled the Israeli and U.S. governments, which say it runs counter to their policies of not negotiating with terrorists.

Good for him. I'm for just about anything that will upset the "status quo" in this regard.

Platapus · 04-17-08, 11:25 AM

nothing wrong with talking.

During the cold war when the propaganda was predicting that either the Soviets or the Chines (or both) were bent on world domination and the end of freedom, we talked to them.

That is one of the many things that frustrates me about the current administration. They seen afraid to talk to anyone but our allies.

Talking does not mean agreement
Talking does not mean surrender

Talking does lead to understanding so perhaps that's why this administration is reluctant. We already know everything and how everyone thinks and what everyone wants

One of the silliest arguments against talking is that the "bad guys" can spin a meeting with the United States for their propaganda purposes. Here's a news flash: Doing anything can be spun for propaganda... even not doing something can be spun. So we might as well talk.... unless there is another reason we don't want to talk :hmm:

DeepIron · 04-17-08, 11:35 AM

Quote:

That is one of the many things that frustrates me about the current administration. They seen afraid to talk to anyone but our allies.

Me too. I thought it was in the Baker - Hamilton Report regarding Iraq that dialog with other "involved nations" was given high regard. Yet the Bush Administration appears to have a "deaf" ear when it comes to dialogs...

bradclark1 · 04-17-08, 11:55 AM

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Konovalov · 04-17-08, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Agreed absolutely.

Talking should be done at a lower level and behind the scenes. What was former US President Carter thinking?

DeepIron · 04-17-08, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

How "low level" would we have to be to initiate a dialog? I doubt that if the US send a junior attache from the US Embassy to talk, that any good would come from it. Higher level "official" dialogs between Hamas, Israel, US, et al have failed to produce any significant results and I'm pretty certain there were "lower level" discussions as well...

The world is told that progess is being made and time after time, we see an "accord" between the two groups, only to be "busted" by one or the other.

One thing Carter can do is bring more notice to the situation perhaps...

mrbeast · 04-17-08, 02:45 PM

Think in the end its all going to have to boil down to talking. Take Northern Ireland for example. 30 Years of terrorism, killings and destruction; brought to an end by talking. Military action can only do so much.

August · 04-17-08, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

How "low level" would we have to be to initiate a dialog? I doubt that if the US send a junior attache from the US Embassy to talk, that any good would come from it. Higher level "official" dialogs between Hamas, Israel, US, et al have failed to produce any significant results and I'm pretty certain there were "lower level" discussions as well...

The world is told that progess is being made and time after time, we see an "accord" between the two groups, only to be "busted" by one or the other.

One thing Carter can do is bring more notice to the situation perhaps...

More notice to the situation? How much more notice of the Palestinian problem does the world need? It's been a nearly daily news item for the past 40 years. Carter of all people is not going to change that.

This is Jimy Carter we're talking about. He has been playing self appointed diplomat for well over a decade now with no more success than he had during his presidency.

DeepIron · 04-17-08, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

How "low level" would we have to be to initiate a dialog? I doubt that if the US send a junior attache from the US Embassy to talk, that any good would come from it. Higher level "official" dialogs between Hamas, Israel, US, et al have failed to produce any significant results and I'm pretty certain there were "lower level" discussions as well...

The world is told that progess is being made and time after time, we see an "accord" between the two groups, only to be "busted" by one or the other.

One thing Carter can do is bring more notice to the situation perhaps...

More notice to the situation? How much more notice of the Palestinian problem does the world need? It's been a nearly daily news item for the past 40 years. Carter of all people is not going to change that.

That's the point. This situation hasn't changed in decades. I don't see why the administration is upset as, AFAIK, all "official' channels have led to nothing... What I'm saying is "Why not?". What further "damage" can be done that hasn't already? I can't see where using ex-Prez Carter in any propaganda will change anything either... The worst that can happen is, what? That these people will continue to kill one another? Status Quo...

Quote:

This is Jimy Carter we're talking about. He has been playing self appointed diplomat for well over a decade now with no more success than he had during his presidency.

Who knows?

JSLTIGER · 04-17-08, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Agreed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

To respond to this one, if Hamas was legitimately elected to a legitimate governmental body, then that makes the actions of the entire party a governmental action.

Hamas was the group in charge when members of Hamas kidnapped an Israeli soldier by the name of Gilad Shalit in 2006. As you've already established that Hamas legitimately was elected to a legitimate government body, then that means that the actions of its members represent the actions of the Palestinian government. I don't know what you call the kidnapping of one government's agent by another government's agent, but AFAIK, it's called an act of war.

You cannot separate "Hamas" from "Hamas' militant wing." They are one and the same, sharing the same ideas and views. You cannot simply select the parts of Hamas that you want to and not hold them responsible for Hamas' actions.

Skybird · 04-17-08, 06:19 PM

A treaty or deal or agreement with a terror organisation that is totally hostile to what is valued in Western culture is worth nothing. They will play ball only as long as they see fit. I usually have a good opinion of Carter, but this time I totally disagree with him, completely. Every word negotiated with Hamas is a waste of breath.

August · 04-17-08, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

How "low level" would we have to be to initiate a dialog? I doubt that if the US send a junior attache from the US Embassy to talk, that any good would come from it. Higher level "official" dialogs between Hamas, Israel, US, et al have failed to produce any significant results and I'm pretty certain there were "lower level" discussions as well...

The world is told that progess is being made and time after time, we see an "accord" between the two groups, only to be "busted" by one or the other.

One thing Carter can do is bring more notice to the situation perhaps...

More notice to the situation? How much more notice of the Palestinian problem does the world need? It's been a nearly daily news item for the past 40 years. Carter of all people is not going to change that.

That's the point. This situation hasn't changed in decades. I don't see why the administration is upset as, AFAIK, all "official' channels have led to nothing... What I'm saying is "Why not?". What further "damage" can be done that hasn't already? I can't see where using ex-Prez Carter in any propaganda will change anything either... The worst that can happen is, what? That these people will continue to kill one another? Status Quo...

Quote:

This is Jimy Carter we're talking about. He has been playing self appointed diplomat for well over a decade now with no more success than he had during his presidency.

Who knows?

Well actually the worst that could happen was to have a former US presidents head sawn off on al jazzera, but seriously I'd rather not see a him played like the chump I know he will be.

I do suppose however that a little official displeasure by the Bush administration might give Carter some stock in whatever negotiations he's going to attempt.

DeepIron · 04-17-08, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Well actually the worst that could happen was to have a former US presidents head sawn off on al jazzera, but seriously I'd rather not see a him played like the chump I know he will be.

Let's hope not, on both points!

Quote:

I do suppose however that a little official displeasure by the Bush administration might give Carter some stock in whatever negotiations he's going to attempt.

Again, why not? Nothing else has worked, and perhaps it might spur a little more "urgency" from the BA. Now THAT would good on GWB's resume... achieving some long lasting peace between Palestine and Israel... One can only hope..

NEON DEON · 04-17-08, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this.

Ok, just being the Devils Advocate...

Only the militant wings of Hamas is "officially" considered "terrorist". Yes, the Hamas govenment is described as a "group involved in terrorist attacks" but they did legitimately win a majority of seats in the legislative council of the Palestinian Authority...

How "low level" would we have to be to initiate a dialog? I doubt that if the US send a junior attache from the US Embassy to talk, that any good would come from it. Higher level "official" dialogs between Hamas, Israel, US, et al have failed to produce any significant results and I'm pretty certain there were "lower level" discussions as well...

The world is told that progess is being made and time after time, we see an "accord" between the two groups, only to be "busted" by one or the other.

One thing Carter can do is bring more notice to the situation perhaps...

More notice to the situation? How much more notice of the Palestinian problem does the world need? It's been a nearly daily news item for the past 40 years. Carter of all people is not going to change that.

This is Jimy Carter we're talking about. He has been playing self appointed diplomat for well over a decade now with no more success than he had during his presidency.

Carter won the Nobel peace prize in 2002.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/e...bel/index.html

"Carter has been repeatedly nominated for the prize, worth $1 million, and came close to winning in 1978 when he brought Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat together to sign the Camp David Peace Accords"

He can self appoint any time he wants.

SUBMAN1 · 04-17-08, 07:24 PM

This is just dumb. All this is doing is acknowledging Hamas's legitimacy to exist and at the same time, telling people that they are practically a recognized government. Maybe we will all get lucky and Carter will be assassinated. That way it will be a message the the rest of the world of what it is exactly that you are dealing with.

-S

04-17-08, 11:25 AM	#2
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	nothing wrong with talking. During the cold war when the propaganda was predicting that either the Soviets or the Chines (or both) were bent on world domination and the end of freedom, we talked to them. That is one of the many things that frustrates me about the current administration. They seen afraid to talk to anyone but our allies. Talking does not mean agreement Talking does not mean surrender Talking does lead to understanding so perhaps that's why this administration is reluctant. We already know everything and how everyone thinks and what everyone wants One of the silliest arguments against talking is that the "bad guys" can spin a meeting with the United States for their propaganda purposes. Here's a news flash: Doing anything can be spun for propaganda... even not doing something can be spun. So we might as well talk.... unless there is another reason we don't want to talk :hmm: __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

04-17-08, 11:55 AM	#4
bradclark1 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Connecticut, USA. Posts: 2,794 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	Hamas is first and foremost a terrorist organization. A president(even a past president) talking to them sets a bad precedence. It will be seen as a propaganda feather in their cap. I'm not against dialog but it should be low level. Carter is dead wrong doing this. __________________

04-17-08, 02:45 PM	#7
mrbeast Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bolton, UK Posts: 1,236 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Think in the end its all going to have to boil down to talking. Take Northern Ireland for example. 30 Years of terrorism, killings and destruction; brought to an end by talking. Military action can only do so much. __________________

04-17-08, 06:19 PM	#11
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	A treaty or deal or agreement with a terror organisation that is totally hostile to what is valued in Western culture is worth nothing. They will play ball only as long as they see fit. I usually have a good opinion of Carter, but this time I totally disagree with him, completely. Every word negotiated with Hamas is a waste of breath. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 04-17-08 at 06:47 PM.

04-17-08, 07:24 PM	#15
SUBMAN1 Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11,866 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	This is just dumb. All this is doing is acknowledging Hamas's legitimacy to exist and at the same time, telling people that they are practically a recognized government. Maybe we will all get lucky and Carter will be assassinated. That way it will be a message the the rest of the world of what it is exactly that you are dealing with. -S __________________