April 9, 2006
A JOINT HAMAS/ISRAEL OPERATION:
IDF: Hamas planning steps to halt rocket fire (Amos Harel and Arnon Regular, 4/10/06, Haaretz)
Hamas is close to a decision on initial steps aimed at restraining the terror organizations that are launching Qassam rockets at Israeli targets, Israeli security officials said Sunday. The planned Hamas move comes on the backdrop of an Israeli military response that has killed more than a dozen Palestinians in Gaza since Friday.Posted by Orrin Judd at April 9, 2006 9:37 PMThe Qassam attacks on Israeli targets over the last week have been carried out by various Fatah groups. Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Hamas-supported Popular Resistance Committees have not been participating in the rocket fire, the security sources said.
Two groups affiliated with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement - the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Abu Rish Brigades have said they would continue firing Qassams. Some cells have openly said they were carrying out the attacks in order to embarrass the Hamas government and prevent it from stabilizing. The Martyrs Brigades cell has been significantly increasing its Qassam attacks recently, and the Israel Air Force has assassinated at least five senior Brigades commanders in the last two months.
It is not clear to what degree Hamas is capable of forcing militants to stop the rocket fire. Such a move is liable to lead to clashes with Fatah cells at a time when the Palestinian security services are not yet controlled by Hamas.
Key words/phrases:
* "planning steps"
* "close to a decision"
* "initial steps"
* "planned...move"
* "Palestinian security services"
Query: If "some cells"---"affiliated with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement"---have stated that they are shooting missiles into Israel to "embarrass the Hamas government" (poor, beleaguered Hamas!), what are the (presumably, equally cogent) reasons why these groups were shooting missiles into Israel before Hamas was elected?
Posted by: Barry Meislin at April 10, 2006 3:14 AMBecause they hate Abbas too. They're dead-enders.
Posted by: oj at April 10, 2006 7:35 AMAnyone who understands the concept of "sovereignity" appreciates the absurdity of the line, "It is not clear to what degree Hamas in capable of forcing militants to stop the rocket fire."
If the sand critters cannot control the bad sand critters, someone else has to to it for them. Disallowing one's territory to be used as a platform for attacks on a neighboring country is a core responsibilty of neutrality.
Posted by: Lou Gots at April 10, 2006 12:30 PMLou:
Anyone who understands sovereignty recognizes that until the Palestinians have a state their government can't be held responsible for anything--they aren't sovereign yet.
Posted by: oj at April 10, 2006 12:54 PMThat's it, exactly. Pershing can go in after Pancho Villa anytime the United States chooses, and the pseudo-state unable to preserve its neutrality has nothing to say about it.
By all means, go on calling a tail a leg if there is some advantage to it, but the dog still doesn't have five legs.
Posted by: Lou Gots at April 10, 2006 4:08 PMNo, Mexico wasn't US occuppied territory at the time. It was a sovereign state so required to control its residents.
You're right though,m Palestine isn't yet a sovereign state so can't be held to the standards of one. There is no dog.
Posted by: oj at April 10, 2006 4:12 PM