Why Hamas exists, what creates Hamas

[Denny Crane!]

Which is all well and good but poverty is the thing that gives these people a franchise, unhappiness and a lack of determination

Israel practically created Hamas. They didn't create islamic insanity, AQ or the hatred of Israel but you have to accept that Hamas as a political entity exists because people were desperate. Their recruits are desperate people.

I'm just guessing that places where Hamas doesn't have a foothold, that are developing economically don't produce as much violence.

No offense, but your pretending that groups like the PLO never existed. Israel tried to have a policy of throwing money at the palestinians and it didnt work. The status quo seems much better frankly, Hamas actively stops anyone shooting rockets at Israel and theres few if any suicide bombings.[/quote]

I can't deny there is less suicide bombings actually and I hadn't thought of that. Does that mean the situation you have now is actually better than before despite all the media? Certainly one half of Palestine seems to be doing better than it was.

I can't forget the PLO existed, they tried to recruit my best friend when he lived in Israel for a year in a kibbutz and travelling through Eygpt and Jordan.

Ive yet to see any convincing reasont hrowing more money at the palestinians is anything but a stupid argument in terms of security (for other reasons maybe , but not for security reasons) And its desptie ignoring the fact that some specific individuals in the gaza strip are very rich, and all the terrorist groups delibaretly tried to inspire poverty in their recruits and that gaza and the west bank were always pretty poor anyway

It is not throwing money at them that I suggest but that rampant poverty leads to extremism, cutting off the necessities for them to grow into a normal state. They might have always been poor but how is that situation going to improve under a blockade?

Even besides that, theres a decent amount of proof that indicates that suicide bombers are usually well-educated and not poverty stricken.

Frankly sayign economics has anything to do with it is plain wrong. The "bread and circuses" strategy of throwing money at it doesnt work.

You think so? Then how is it that rich countries on the whole have less fanatacism and less extremism? Wealth and education, it isn't a coincidence. I'm going to quickly exempt Saudi Arabia since they practically state sanction wahabbism but there are other examples throughout the west and east. By contrast grinding poverty produces theocracies, dictatorships and extremism.

And of course it is not impossible to indoctrinate people well educated or not (or in some cases force them) but the environment in which this takes place, how does that arrive? The historical context is one of manipulation, oppression and imperialism from the west, combine that instability with poverty and you end up with these societies where this takes place.

I'm having to generalise a bit because in all fairness I'm pretty ignorant of the Palestinian conflict, and this debate is me trying to understand more.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Poverty is absolutely the bottom-line. People with property and prospects to defend will have as much an enemy in Hamas as anything else. Affluence also over a longer term produces education, which damages Hamas' recruiting pools.

It's not the sole reason. Israel's punitive Siege of Gaza and Operation Cast Lead illustrated that Israel was permitted to use chemical weapons, lie about their use, and force malnutrition on the people regardless of their affiliations. To see your house destroyed and the ribcages of your children through their skin, you can understand how Israel's tactics see it receiving much of the blame, and not Hamas.

[Rolling Thunder]

Robert Fisk, in his seminal work "The Great War For Civilisation", outlines that Israel actually aided in the creation and indeed sponsored Hamas in the hope that they would disrupt and destabilised their old enemy, Fatah. Well, they did, and that came back to bite them on the ass.

[Borgoroth]

Seriously, the answer to why Hamas exists, doesn't require much thought to realize.

You can't put a country (Israel) where there already is a country (Palestine).

[Treize]

Seriously, the answer to why Hamas exists, doesn't require much thought to realize.

You can't put a country (Israel) where there already is a country (Palestine).

Indeed. That country was founded by immigrants and the natives opposed this from the start. Not only the West Bank and gaza are occupied territories but all of Palestine is occupied. The wrong side won the war but pretty much nothing can be done about it anymore.

[Haakon]

You can't put a country (Israel) where there already is a country (Palestine).

The state of Israel was tiny when it first was created in 1947, but that was too much for the arab nations. Todays borders are a result of Syrian, Egyptian, Jordanian agression.
Further more, there never was a country called Palestine. Its an area that has been ruled by various factions. So the UN didnt put a country where there already was a country.

[Borgoroth]

The state of Israel was tiny when it first was created in 1947, but that was too much for the arab nations. Todays borders are a result of Syrian, Egyptian, Jordanian agression.
Further more, there never was a country called Palestine. Its an area that has been ruled by various factions. So the UN didnt put a country where there already was a country.

So they put a country where there were several countries? No, sorry, factions, which are not countries, because specific western countries never bothered to acknowledge or mention them?

If it is the borders/countries/nations/factions/goverment or w/e part of this that shades the simplicity of the question "Why hamas exists" I'll write it as a story, starting 2000 years ago and ending at presesnt time.

Imagine if there was no countries in the world, or one big country, either way, for hundreds of years a culture has rooted itself in one part of this country, like all cultures it has a few attributes which other cultures does not share, accepted behavior, philosophical beliefs or what type of music is regarded good and bad. One day, the goverment decides that another culture, one that has its origin in the very same place, but due to some event 2,000 years ago this older culture was replaced by the other culture. This resulted in a culture shock where the older culture being a minority, were left with little options, try to fit in and adapt to the new culture, or look for a new place to live and call home, live as they want and nothing else. However there is no such place, as everywhere they go, there are people and they all got their of culture, always being treated as outcasts. Now 2,000 years go by, and this old culture still exists, somewhat changed ofcourse due to the course of history, always being a minority and never accepted fully by the other cultures, nevertheless it still exists. During the 2,000 years that has gone by since the war that caused them to leave so long ago, there has alway risen problems whenever the culture grows in and it often resulted in persecution and killing. But at this modern time, when people do not fight wars for the same reason or act as people did before, a big problem was at hand. This culture needs a place of their own, otherwise they will never be accepted and the persecution will ever stop, the goverment then decides to grant this culture the place where it had started so many hundreds of years ago, what could be more suitable? Suddenly, this culture, that now is spread out over the world, different in so many ways from what it had been, was given back a place to call their own, their homeland so to speak. But this culture and the vast majority of the people who was a part of it had never been to this "homeland" in their entire life, not just that, but the vast majority of everyone of that culture for the past 1,500 years had not been there. But there was one issue that had to be tended before they could finnally live in peace and and reunite the culture to a central fixed location, there was the people who allready lived in this area, the descendants to the culture that had taken this area. Suddenly their structure of society was replaced by this new people, removing the regional goverment, replacing it with a new. But even more unsetteling, they were suddely the minority culture to the culture that almost for aslong as people can remember has been seen as outcasts and strange.

I'll end there and ask anyone who bothered reading it, wtf do you think happens next? The whole situation is because of the simple fact that you can not go to a place and simply replace the existing culture with another, for THAT is what causes the problems, cuture shocks, petty differences that for some idiotic reason has been kept alive for thousands of years, the problems of people dead long ago lives on. But that is another topic, but this is why hamas exists, there are very few things I claim to be correct about before listening to the arguments of the other, but this is so stupendously simple.

due to some events/debate or w/e you want,

[Haakon]

So they put a country where there were several countries? No, sorry, factions, which are not countries, because specific western countries never bothered to acknowledge or mention them?

Western countries? How bout eastern countries as well? Or is this really about western imperialism?

Imagine if there was no countries in the world, or one big country, either way, for hundreds of years a culture has rooted itself in one part of this country, like all cultures it has a few attributes which other cultures does not share, accepted behavior, philosophical beliefs or what type of music is regarded good and bad. One day, the goverment decides that another culture, one that has its origin in the very same place, but due to some event 2,000 years ago this older culture was replaced by the other culture. This resulted in a culture shock where the older culture being a minority, were left with little options, try to fit in and adapt to the new culture, or look for a new place to live and call home, live as they want and nothing else. However there is no such place, as everywhere they go, there are people and they all got their of culture, always being treated as outcasts. Now 2,000 years go by, and this old culture still exists, somewhat changed ofcourse due to the course of history, always being a minority and never accepted fully by the other cultures, nevertheless it still exists. During the 2,000 years that has gone by since the war that caused them to leave so long ago, there has alway risen problems whenever the culture grows in and it often resulted in persecution and killing. But at this modern time, when people do not fight wars for the same reason or act as people did before, a big problem was at hand. This culture needs a place of their own, otherwise they will never be accepted and the persecution will ever stop, the goverment then decides to grant this culture the place where it had started so many hundreds of years ago, what could be more suitable? Suddenly, this culture, that now is spread out over the world, different in so many ways from what it had been, was given back a place to call their own, their homeland so to speak. But this culture and the vast majority of the people who was a part of it had never been to this "homeland" in their entire life, not just that, but the vast majority of everyone of that culture for the past 1,500 years had not been there. But there was one issue that had to be tended before they could finnally live in peace and and reunite the culture to a central fixed location, there was the people who allready lived in this area, the descendants to the culture that had taken this area. Suddenly their structure of society was replaced by this new people, removing the regional goverment, replacing it with a new. But even more unsetteling, they were suddely the minority culture to the culture that almost for aslong as people can remember has been seen as outcasts and strange.

Only there were many Jews living in todays Israel before its creation. So your logic is false. Israel is just as mulitcultural today as it was in the past.

I'll end there and ask anyone who bothered reading it, wtf do you think happens next? The whole situation is because of the simple fact that you can not go to a place and simply replace the existing culture with another, for THAT is what causes the problems, cuture shocks, petty differences that for some idiotic reason has been kept alive for thousands of years, the problems of people dead long ago lives on. But that is another topic, but this is why hamas exists, there are very few things I claim to be correct about before listening to the arguments of the other, but this is so stupendously simple.

due to some events/debate or w/e you want,

Yet we pretend these problems, culture shocks etc is oficially not an issue in the west. Funny thing that. Either the problems we see in Israel will come to exists in the west also, or it is a wrong analysis.
In either case, the answer will mean violence.

[Treize]

Only there were many Jews living in todays Israel before its creation. So your logic is false. Israel is just as mulitcultural today as it was in the past.

Didn't the Old Yishuv only number like 15000-20000?

Israel is a multicultural country because it has multiple cultural groups living in it BUT it is monocultural by law (I believe that is a reasonable discription for the situation) which is wrong when we consider that the land of Palestine has been multicultural for centuries/millennia. In the sense of a mixed population so without real bounderies between territories. If that was the case Palestine could have been split into a number of mini and micro states. Not that that would be any good in my opinion but they could have done that. But this was not the case so it cannot be justified that a (in 1947) minority gets most of the land while other people don't get their own state at all. Secondly this minority who founded this state was composed of mainly first generation immigrants. That is the same as when Moroccans start claiming Flevoland (to create a state that is Arab by law, with a different position for non-Arabs).

[♔Goodguy1066♔]

Seriously, the answer to why Hamas exists, doesn't require much thought to realize.

You can't put a country (Israel) where there already is a country (Palestine).

What's wrong with this quote? First person to realize gets a biscuit...

[Treize]

So... Why on earth would people who live somewhere for many generations all of a sudden cede half of said land to foreign immigrants? And that piece of land was also populated by like 49% Arabs who became second class citizens by law. How on earth is that justified?!

[Haakon]

So... Why on earth would people who live somewhere for many generations all of a sudden cede half of said land to foreign immigrants?

You mean the western wall were not buildt by Jews?

And that piece of land was also populated by like 49% Arabs who became second class citizens by law. How on earth is that justified?!

At the beginning of the century (1900) the Jews in Palestine numbered around 70,000 and were about ten percent of the population, and in Jerusalem they outnumbered the Arab Muslims and Christians

Palestine has always been a mulicultural region, that hasnt "belonged" to anyone since the days of Judea. Further more, in the 1920's and 30's, Jews were under attacks by Arabs and many were forced to flee.
Israel is just as much Jewish as it is Palestinian.

[Treize]

You mean the western wall were not buildt by Jews?

Are you serious? Are you using a 2000+ years old wall to justify that people who haven't lived in Palestine for 2000 years to return and reclaim it?

Palestine has always been a mulicultural region, that hasnt "belonged" to anyone since the days of Judea. Further more, in the 1920's and 30's, Jews were under attacks by Arabs and many were forced to flee.

Ofcourse, nobody is denying that. I just want to add that zionism started around 1990 and by 1920 there where already many Jewish immigrants in Palestine. And this caused tension for various reasons with both sides being guilty. The main reason was IIRC that the Jews bought land and replaced the native labourers with settlers. And not all hated eachother because of the many benefits.

Personally I do not like it when immigrants start making claims of land within the country/colony/political entity that they live in. But yes a small number of the Jewish population lived there for a long time and they are just as Palestinian as the other groups.

But does that give them the right to found their own state? Well if the borders between the regions populated by all the groups of Palestine (Jews, Druze, Armenians, Bedouines, the Arabs who are not Arab and others.) where clear than yes. But this was not the case, it was a multicultural society. And what gives a single (mainly foreign) minority the right to claim over half the land in question to found a state for and by that particular minority (by law)? Palestine should have (and still should) become a multicultural state as it has always been.

[Haakon]

Are you serious? Are you using a 2000+ years old wall to justify that people who haven't lived in Palestine for 2000 years to return and reclaim it?

You are using the term "natives" when refering to the Palestinians. They are not anymore native than Jews. Palestinians are mostly people from Jordan and Syria.

But does that give them the right to found their own state? Well if the borders between the regions populated by all the groups of Palestine (Jews, Druze, Armenians, Bedouines, the Arabs who are not Arab and others.) where clear than yes. But this was not the case, it was a multicultural society. And what gives a single (mainly foreign) minority the right to claim over half the land in question to found a state for and by that particular minority (by law)? Palestine should have (and still should) become a multicultural state as it has always been.

The UN founded Israel, not Zionists. Personally I dont find the 1948 decleration unreasonable, I think it was a solution that everyone could be happy with. But pan-arabism i.e racism saw through a war with Israel with the purpose of "pushing the Jews into the ocean". The plan failed, and the result is todays Israel. Does this mean that I think its ok that Israel bulldoze the homes of Palestinians? No sir. But I aknowledge the reasons for Israel being as it is today. Theres plenty of blame to go around, and there really are no innocent parties in this conflict.

[Azog 150]

The UN founded Israel, not Zionists. Personally I dont find the 1948 decleration unreasonable, I think it was a solution that everyone could be happy with. But pan-arabism i.e racism saw through a war with Israel with the purpose of "pushing the Jews into the ocean". The plan failed, and the result is todays Israel. Does this mean that I think its ok that Israel bulldoze the homes of Palestinians? No sir. But I aknowledge the reasons for Israel being as it is today. Theres plenty of blame to go around, and there really are no innocent parties in this conflict.

This. We can play the blame game all day but theres no point. Both sides have done their fair share of wrong and both sides need to realise that if there is ever going to be any peace.

[Treize]

You are using the term "natives" when refering to the Palestinians. They are not anymore native than Jews. Palestinians are mostly people from Jordan and Syria.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_people

Recent genetic evidence has demonstrated that Palestinians as an ethnic group are closely related to Jews and represent modern "descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times,"[17][18] largely predating the Arabian Muslim conquest that resulted in their acculturation, established Arabic as the predominant vernacular, and over time also Islamized many of them from various prior faiths.

And when you look at the number of immigrants who arrived in Palestine under the British mandate only a small minority was non-Jewish.

The UN founded Israel, not Zionists.

The UN proposed the creation of a Jewish state (with a, like, 51% mayority BTW), yes. But lets not pretend that the UN gave a about the natives (who include a small number of Jews ofcourse).

Personally I dont find the 1948 decleration unreasonable, I think it was a solution that everyone could be happy with. But pan-arabism i.e racism saw through a war with Israel with the purpose of "pushing the Jews into the ocean".

The creation of a nation state (by mainly foreigners ho have 000 rights to the land) in a multicultural region that discriminates its own citizens and is not totally secular is never justified.

As for the Arab League (not my friends), didn't they just want to destroy the Jewish state and give it to the mayority? Some say the wanted to deport the Jews, some say they didn't want to. The truth is unknown.

The plan failed, and the result is todays Israel. Does this mean that I think its ok that Israel bulldoze the homes of Palestinians? No sir. But I aknowledge the reasons for Israel being as it is today. Theres plenty of blame to go around, and there really are no innocent parties in this conflict.

Unfortunatly, yes.
But what about the (non-Jewish, BTW 68% of Jewish-Israeli's in native born and therefore-) Palestinians? They are now devided into three groups. People who immigrated abroad, people who live in the PA territories in crappy conditions or the ones who live in Israël as non-Jews in a Jewish state (which is just as racist as pan-arabism). Infact a multicultural land is now dominated by one group, and even when we forget about where they came from, that is not good.

And how would it be fair to give people who have the same rights to Palestine only the WB and gaza? And lets not forget about all the other groups who have no state of their own. The only solution that would be totally fair for everyone would be a multicultural state (preferably in all of Palestine) not biased towards a single ethnic group and secular. But the Jews don't want that for obvious reasons.

[Treize]

No, but we are not a country that is a state for a mixture of saxons, frisians, franks, batavians and canafates by law. We are a Dutch state much like how Israel is an Israeli state. It is about citizenship, not about ethnic background.

Secondly we are not a country that was founded (lets say 1588 was the year the first Dutch state was created) in a multicultural region unlike yours. Some people might see Frisians as a different people because they have their own dying language but we do not discriminate them whatsoever. Nor do we discriminate immigrants. Arabs, Indonesians and people for the Caribbean are not second class citizens by law.

Palestine is not home of only the Jews so founding a Jewish state-by-law is wrong because of that. There is nothing wrong with a country with a Jewish mayority or anything but racial (and religious) laws are barbaric and certainly not Western.

[eran]

But they are OK with that too
They want 67 borders.

No, but we are not a country that is a state for a mixture of saxons, frisians, franks, batavians and canafates by law. We are a Dutch state much like how Israel is an Israeli state. It is about citizenship, not about ethnic background.

Secondly we are not a country that was founded (lets say 1588 was the year the first Dutch state was created) in a multicultural region unlike yours. Some people might see Frisians as a different people because they have their own dying language but we do not discriminate them whatsoever. Nor do we discriminate immigrants. Arabs, Indonesians and people for the Caribbean are not second class citizens by law.

Palestine is not home of only the Jews so founding a Jewish state-by-law is wrong because of that. There is nothing wrong with a country with a Jewish mayority or anything but racial (and religious) laws are barbaric and certainly not Western.

But they are not second class citizens.

[Vince Noir]

But they are OK with that too
They want 67 borders.

I've spoken to many Palestinians who would happily cut their arms off for the 67 borders. But that of course is asking to much...furthermore, of course, Israel have imported tens of thousands of settlers from around the world and made sure they build homes on this occupied land, so that giving it back would be very problematic. They know this, that's why they offer HUGE subsidiaries to come live in Israel, particularly if you're going to set up camp on occupied land. While in Palestine recently, I met handful of young adults in Jerusalem who had been offered as much as 25,000 US dollars each to come and live in the occupied zones, amongst various other monetary subsidiaries. Now we know where all this aid is going eh?

But they are not second class citizens.

Nelson Mandela, ANC Veterans, even ex president Jimmy Carter have stated that the apartheid is Israel is worse than it was in South Africa.

'Democratic' racism, by Jonathan Cook

'Democratic' racism, part 2, by Jonathan Cook

'Jews-Only' Law Sparks Firestorm, by Bradley Burston

'State lands' rule also used to expropriate West Bank territory, by Aluf Benn, Ha'Aretz

'This is like apartheid': ANC veterans visit West Bank, by Donald Macintyre

'Who is a Jew' Matters in Israel, by Sheldon L. Richman

41% of Israel's Jews favour segregation of Arabs, by Chris McGreal

70% of Israeli Jews oppose selling JNF lands to Arabs, by Amiram Barkat

Arab spouses face Israeli legal purge, by Ben Lynfield

Brothers in arms, by Chris McGreal

Call for more rights for Arab minority in Israel, by Rory McCarthy

Can you really not see?, by Amira Hass

Carter: Israeli apartheid worse than South Africa, by BBC News

Desmond Tutu Likens Israeli Actions to Apartheid, by Adrianne Appel

Don't call it discrimination, by Nimer Sultany

Don't mention the A-word, by Richard Silverstein

Israel Bars Arab-Americans From Visiting West Bank, Gaza Strip, by Barbara Ferguson

Israel Is Not Comparable to "Advanced Western Democracies", by Shaw J. Dallal

Israel and Apartheid: In Defense of Jimmy Carter, by Tony Karon

Israel and South Africa, by Dr. Israel Shahak

Israel seeks funds for separate Arabs-only roads, by Chris McGreal

Israel's Discriminatory Practices Are Rooted in Jewish Religious Law, by Dr. Israel Shahak

Israel's Two-Tiered Citizenship Law Bars Non-Jews From 93 Percent of Its Lands, by Roselle Tekiner

There's plenty more where this came from, and I mean, literally, hundreds.

[Treize]

But they are not second class citizens.

A Jewish state (by law) is per definition an apartheid state.
And while that might have been (still a very stupid and very wrong thing) in a homogeneous country, it is a horrible thing to do in multicultural Palestine (and especially when the people who did it where mostly foreigners).


@goodguy

Let us use a different approach.
Imagine that you live as a native in a certain land (a colony of a mayor imperial power) and within decades thousands of foreigners move into your land (with pros and cons) and then all of a sudden they tell you that you have to hand them half of that former colony. And that if you happen to live in that half that you will be an alien in your own land. Would you accept that?