Did Jimmy have high-level discussions with Nahoul, the Bee?

Jimmy Carter running the country during a deep economic downturn, when trust in elected officials is extremely low, and as gas and fuel prices skyrocket.

Ahh. The memories.

/No thanks.

Unless he plans on giving away more nuclear technology he should maybe practice with this until it decides to be just drywall.

You know who else raised a furor?

Yes Submitter you are a and so is the Bush administration. The whole idea that refusing to talk to people that we don't agree with will somehow make things better is bullshiat.

"There's no doubt in anyone's mind that if Israel is ever going to find peace with justice concerning the relationship with their next-door neighbors, the Palestinians, that Hamas will have to be included in the process,"--President Jimmy Carter

curmudge: Yes Submitter you are a and so is the Bush administration. The whole idea that refusing to talk to people that we don't agree with will somehow make things better is bullshiat.


"There's no doubt in anyone's mind that if Israel is ever going to find peace with justice concerning the relationship with their next-door neighbors, the Palestinians, that Hamas will have to be included in the process,"
--President Jimmy Carter

Even Obama disagrees with meeting with Hamas right now. The only thing Hamas should be meeting with is incoming mortar fire.

I like President Carter, and I wouldn't want to see him in office again.

That would have been better had the image of Adolf's parents not been discarded.

/Godwinnerloser

Infobahn: I like President Carter, and I wouldn't want to see him in office again.

I agree James E. Carter Jr. is one of the best ex-presidents the US has ever produced.

Nabb1 Even Obama disagrees with meeting with Hamas right now.

If Senator Obama said that then he is wrong.

The only thing Hamas should be meeting with is incoming mortar fire.

That is just stupid and does not address the problem. If you keep your foot on peoples necks long enough sooner or later they will bite you on the ankle. Don't get me wrong, I think that the government of Israel has both the duty and right to respond with force in order to protect its' citizens. But refusing to talk to the leaders of Hamas is counter productive.

Jimmy Carter is a nice guy, nice guys finish last, sadly.

Nabb1: The only thing Hamas should be meeting with is incoming mortar fire.

That's a good idea. Someone should try that.

whiskeyinthejar

non story. misrepresentation of the truth pushed by the liberal media

Wanebo: Jimmy Carter running the country during a deep economic downturn, when trust in elected officials is extremely low, and as gas and fuel prices skyrocket.

Ahh. The memories.

/No thanks.

All Carter needed was more corporate corruption--California losing both its electricity and its governor; more felons in the White House--war criminals like Rumsfeld, Cheney and Fredo; and more illegal wars like Iraq--Richard Perle admitted the Iraq war was probably illegal.

Oh and fewer military missions with Ollie North on board--like the hostage rescue.

Then Carter would have been just like Bush. But with more intellect and more real Jesus.

"There's no doubt in anyone's mind that if Israel is ever going to find peace with justice concerning the relationship with their next-door neighbors, the Palestinians, that Hamas will have to be included in the process," Carter added. "I think someone should be meeting with Hamas to see what we can do to encourage them to be cooperative and to find out what their attitude."

Ladies and gentlemen, this right here shows that Jimmy Carter fundamentally does not understand the nature of militant Islam. There is no negotiation, no cooperation, no flexibility on their part -- only temporary matters intended to divert international attention away to allow them to re-arm and continue their stated goals of death and destruction.

Now the conservatives are concerned for the Hamas' feelings?

*rolls eyes*

Yeah, we could try talking to them. It'd be hard, and it ight be useful, might not.

Or we could just sort of hope they'll go away, which seems to be the current administration's policy.

/The Audacity of Hope.
//They're doin' it wrong.

I have several thoughts:

1: Carter is a douche and should be tried for treason.

2: You cannot negotiate with Hamas, ever. I am startled that anybody would be so braindead as to make such an assumption.

3: Anybody who tries is gonna be asking for a beheading.

Ignore your enemies. Refuse to meet with them to discuss a resolution or find a way to a path to resolution and peace. Refuse to treat human beings like human beings. Just blow them to smithereens and solve every problem with war. Torture them. Because that is what we do.

And when the tide turns, do not expect to be treated any differently by our enemies.

There is nothing wrong with Jimmy Carter, he is a man of peace. I can see he would hurt the erections of those who get a hard on for war. How does America get to a peaceful world if we can't even talk to our enemies?

That is one thing I like about Senator Obama. He is willing to talk and open communication and have an adult conversation...even with our enemies. We won't like everything they say, so what. Sitcks and stones...sticks and stones. Because if we do not find a way to avert war, we will be fighting with sticks and stones one day soon. The Bush administration assures us noookular weapons are so easy to make, even a caveman can do it. So talk is good, it saves lives.

Good for Mr. Carter.

KaponoFor3: "There's no doubt in anyone's mind that if Israel is ever going to find peace with justice concerning the relationship with their next-door neighbors, the Palestinians, that Hamas will have to be included in the process," Carter added. "I think someone should be meeting with Hamas to see what we can do to encourage them to be cooperative and to find out what their attitude."

Ladies and gentlemen, this right here shows that Jimmy Carter fundamentally does not understand the nature of militant Islam. There is no negotiation, no cooperation, no flexibility on their part -- only temporary matters intended to divert international attention away to allow them to re-arm and continue their stated goals of death and destruction.

3/10. Either use some smaller words for the dumb-American effect, or use some creativity for the I-understand-this-better-than-all-of-you effect.

repost

Majority of Israelis want to negotiate with Hamas

Israelis Want Direct Talks with Hamas

/driveby

Swampthing in Korea: I have several thoughts:

1: Carter is a douche and should be tried for treason.


Before or after Bush 43 is tried for his war crimes?

Swampthing in Korea: I have several thoughts:

1: Carter is a douche and should be tried for treason.

2: You cannot negotiate with Hamas, ever. I am startled that anybody would be so braindead as to make such an assumption.

3: Anybody who tries is gonna be asking for a beheading.

Forunately for America, our Founding Fathers made sure that the reasons to accuse someone for treason were actually spelled out.

Infobahn

Neither, as that has no relation to what we are discussing.

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer

Well, would could argue that by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy and gives them added chances for propaganda.

The fact that Carter has done this willingly, the case could be made that he is indeed giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Swampthing in Korea: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer

Well, would could argue that by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy and gives them added chances for propaganda.

The fact that Carter has done this willingly, the case could be made that he is indeed giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

That is the most pathetic stretch of logic and reasoning that I've seen on Fark in years. And that's saying a hell of a lot.

But, hey, stretch away at the Constitution. As long as you're not doing anything wrong, you should be safe. Right?

Wanebo

Jimmy Carter Richard Nixon running the country during a deep economic downturn, when trust in elected officials is extremely low, and as gas and fuel prices skyrocket.

Ahh. The false memories.

FTFY.

Swampthing in Korea: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer

Well, would could argue that by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy and gives them added chances for propaganda.

The fact that Carter has done this willingly, the case could be made that he is indeed giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

People without conviction, who hate the rights of others, have made this argument before. It never holds up in an actual court where actual judges who actually passed law school.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Freedom of speech. Definitions of treason. The constitution. Learn about them.

Well, would could argue that by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy and gives them added chances for propaganda

That's pretty smart. By that logic, anyone who has ever met with a hostile party is treasonous. Don't quit your day job.

Doooom

How so?

Popcorn thread?

Swampthing in Korea: Well, would could argue that by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy and gives them added chances for propaganda.

The fact that they are a political party that has been been democratically elected to leadership position provides them with some legitimacy.

The fact that Carter has done this willingly, the case could be made that he is indeed giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

I was unaware that we were at war with the Palestinian Authority. Are the Palestinians now our enemies? If that case can be made, I'd love to see you try to make it.

SherKhan: You know who else raised a furor?

yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Ignore your enemies. Refuse to meet with them to discuss a resolution or find a way to a path to resolution and peace.

This presupposes the fact that both sides WANT PEACE. It is clear that Hamas (or any other militant Islamic group, for that matter) does not desire "resolution and peace"

Doooom: 3/10. Either use some smaller words for the dumb-American effect, or use some creativity for the I-understand-this-better-than-all-of-you effect.

Don't mistake the truth for a troll. If you have read about, studies, and followed the history of the militant Islamic movement as a political ideology, you would know what I said is true.

also

(October 6, 2001)
This is a war in which Arab allies are vital to Washington. Their price - imposed in part by the need of the Arab governments to justify working with the United States to their own publics - is a visible American effort on behalf of the Palestinians. That means American pressure on Israel for more concessions, and an American readiness to overlook the organizations and states that Israel would like to see crushed as terrorists and supporters of terrorists: Hamas, Hezbollah, the various armies of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Syria, Iran.
-----
But it is clear that Mr. Sharon has been deeply unhappy. He interpreted the administration's approach as an effort to keep Arab countries in the often-shaky anti-terror coalition. But he saw little advantage for Israel in reaching out to Mr. Arafat. Mr. Sharon was angered that the administration did not place Hezbollah and Hamas, two militant Muslim anti-Israeli organizations, on a list of terrorist organizations whose financial assets would be seized. Both organizations have been involved in attacks against Israelis since Sept. 11, Israeli officials said.

/driveby

KaponoFor3: yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Ignore your enemies. Refuse to meet with them to discuss a resolution or find a way to a path to resolution and peace.

This presupposes the fact that both sides WANT PEACE. It is clear that Hamas (or any other militant Islamic group, for that matter) does not desire "resolution and peace"

Doooom: 3/10. Either use some smaller words for the dumb-American effect, or use some creativity for the I-understand-this-better-than-all-of-you effect.

Don't mistake the truth for a troll. If you have read about, studies, and followed the history of the militant Islamic movement as a political ideology, you would know what I said is true.

Welll bombing them and killing them for fifty years has worked so well, let's just keep that up a little while longer.

Please. It's about time realpolitik returns. Adhering to a failed strategy just because you like it is insanity.

equilibrium

At war with the PA?

No, but Hamas is, I belive, labelled as a terrorist group.

bheilig

No.

I believe the question is over an organisation not affiliated with the US government actively meeting with Hamas.

KaponoFor3: This presupposes the fact that both sides WANT PEACE. It is clear that Hamas (or any other militant Islamic group, for that matter) does not desire "resolution and peace".

Ah yes, the "We'll never make any difference, so why try?" argument.

KaponoFor3: This presupposes the fact that both sides WANT PEACE. It is clear that Hamas (or any other militant Islamic group, for that matter) does not desire "resolution and peace"

Of course. They aren't like us. We have no common ground. There can be no peace with them. If we do not annihilate them they will attempt to annihilate us.

You're only one step from stating that they are sub-human. Take that final step so everyone can see you for who you really are.

/heard this same rhetoric in the 80s about the Russians

I find that only 8 Americans have ever been convicted of treason, one of whom was later pardoned, one of whom had their conviction annulled. (I may have missed some but only 40 people have ever been tried for treason).

No American has been convicted of an act of treason for events occuring after WII.

KaponoFor3
This presupposes the fact that both sides WANT PEACE. It is clear that Hamas (or any other militant Islamic group, for that matter) does not desire "resolution and peace"

HAMAS has recently been on record as offering an extended hudna (truce). We already know that the majority of Palestinians support a two-state solution.

So while I do agree that it's pretty clear that one side does not want peace, I disagree with where your finger points. But no, it's pretty clear that one side's primary interest isn't peace.

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Welll bombing them and killing them for fifty years has worked so well, let's just keep that up a little while longer.

It's very hard to reason and talk with opponents who do recognize compromise as a viable outcome and solution. Hamas is very, very clear in its organizational/founding charter of its mission and goal:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

See also: Hamas Charter.

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Please. It's about time realpolitik returns. Adhering to a failed strategy just because you like it is insanity.

Realpolitik would say we should just kill all the Iraqis and Iranian and steal their oil. The Saudis too. You want to go and advance that position now?

Swampthing in Korea: No, but Hamas is, I belive, labelled as a terrorist group.

And, as such, I suppose you're saying that our "War on Terror" (which is the most illogical, retarded thing since the "War on Drugs") makes them an enemy of the state, and that we can't talk to them. You should be able to admit that you're stretching the truth of the situation in several places, not the least of which supposes that a person speaking with an enemy of the state is immediately treasonous.

KaponoFor3: Don't mistake the truth for a troll. If you have read about, studies, and followed the history of the militant Islamic movement as a political ideology, you would know what I said is true.

"Truth" and "history" are ridiculously subjective when dealing with world politics. You can talk about how extremist the Muslims are over there, but if the UN kicked me off my own property without my consent I'd be pretty farking pissed and would probably fight back, maybe for, say, 50 or 60 years even.

Look at the whole picture. Hamas wouldn't exist if we hadn't commandeered "Israel".

Swampthing in Korea: by having an Ex-president meet Hamas, it confers them legitimacy

No, I think that happened when Hamas won a majority of seats in a free and open election. Sometimes when we spread democracy, people vote for leaders we don't like. We can either be mature and learn to deal with them (not cave into them but use diplomacy/politics) or we can take our ball and go home.

Swampthing in Korea: At war with the PA?

No, but Hamas is, I belive, labelled as a terrorist group.

I see. So even though we are not at war with the PA we have declared their democratically elected leadership to be terrorists. Since we are at war with terrorists we are therefore at war with the democratically elected leaders of the PA and anyone who meets with them is a traitor in the war on terror.

That is pretty convenient.

Darth Otter: Ah yes, the "We'll never make any difference, so why try?" argument.
equilibrium: Of course. They aren't like us. We have no common ground. There can be no peace with them. If we do not annihilate them they will attempt to annihilate us.

I have never even stated anything remotely like this. But I do recognize and understand the nature of fundamentalist Islamic groups. I mean just go read Hamas' charter and tell me what would lead you to believe that the other side has ANY interest in peace or compromise whatsoever. Seriously.

I'm not saying the problem is answered in bombs, death, and carnage. But until Hamas is willing to come to the compromise table in good faith, no progress will be made. Period.

mrexcess: HAMAS has recently been on record as offering an extended hudna (truce). We already know that the majority of Palestinians support a two-state solution.

Hudnas (or truces) have been historically used by Hamas as a temporary stop-gap measure to re-arm itself and not as a long term strategy for peace. I wish it were the other way.

And I am glad to know that a majority of Palestinians support a two-state solution. Then why won't their democratically elected governmental representatives advance this position? Why, instead, do they continue to hold out that only one position will be acceptable to them: the end of the Jewish state?

Militant, fundamentalist Islamic groups do. not. compromise.

equilibrium


Dude, are you mad?

You CANNOT negotiate with Hamas. Do you even understand anything about their organisation?

Doooom: You can talk about how extremist the Muslims are over there, but if the UN kicked me off my own property without my consent I'd be pretty farking pissed and would probably fight back, maybe for, say, 50 or 60 years even.

Would you have a right to be angry? Absolutely. I understand their anger. But their response is not acceptable -- killing innocent civilians to prove a political point or to inspire fear in a neighboring population should be absolutely condemned at every turn by all reasonable men.

Jimmy Carter's attempts at forging peace: "lets meet and discuss our differences and maybe work out a compromise."

George W. Bush's attempts at forging peace: "What? They have bigger dicks? BOMB THEM!"


/that second part cannot be obscure

The more Jimmy tries to repair his image/legacy, the more obvious it becomes why he will go down as a complete failure of a president/human...