Hamas in its final stages?

I'm beginning to read articles now that say Hamas is starting to desert the conflict. That younger militants are refusing to go outside for fear of Israeli strikes, and so the senior leaders have to lead by example and then -- end up getting hit by Israeli strikes.

The only real thing that seems to be bolstering Hamas's morale these days is Khaled Meshaal in Syria. It's a problem because he happens to be in Syria. If only there were some way to assassinate him...

Anyway. I think it looks clear that probably within a week, the Gaza offensive will end. Israel is just outside Gaza City's downtown area now and makes more progress, however slow, on a daily basis. At this point, we need to ask ourselves, what next?

The U.S. often takes a stance that looks something like this: "1) there's a problem. 2) destroy it. threat neutralized. 3) leave."

That's one of the things that needs to be changed about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Now, let me say that I never have supported the Iraq War. But we're there now and so I think we need to pump more money into building some schools, renewing their infrastructure, building roads, etc. Rebuild the country. Not doing so was what allowed the Afghans to have the excuse to attack us to begin with. If we reach out, rebuild the country and actually help the people of the country, then people will have to make a choice: Do I continue to assist the insurgency with no certain or clear goal, or do I embrace the U.S. in light of the fact that they're actually doing some good things here now?

This is the kind of thing that Israel needs to do post-Gaza offensive. Rebuild the houses that were destroyed. Build a new hospital. New medical clinics. Fix the water supplies. Establish more humanitarian aid to the region. Improve the quality of life to better than what it was while Hamas was there. Then bring in the Fatah. Calm down the spirits of people, and then allow Abbas to regain control of the strip. This is honestly the only way I can possibly see there being sustainable peace in the Strip. And at that point, Iran and Syria will be forced to capitulate that Israel is not full of baby-eating monsters and will have no arguments left against the Jews. The only other possible thing could be the al-Aqsa mosque. I'm not sure if there is actual controversy there still, but some people here still talk about it.

Getting up and leaving was what led to World War II, when France, UK, and the U.S. gave a big old "fuck you" to Germany after WWI. This is not the time to repeat those mistakes.

Distancing of political relations?

I am continually growing disheartened over the long term workability of the offensive in Gaza. It's not that I'm starting to have second thoughts on whether we need to remove Hamas. It's that it seems that more and more Palestinian civilians are dying and less and less militants. It is possible that many of the civilians are actually gunmen or militants who are either off-duty or simply in disguise. But numbers going as high as 45% on the rate of civilian casualties does not bode well for Israel's public image in the Middle East, especially when Jordanian protesters are pushing for the king to review political ties to Israel. 

What has me most worried, however, is this article, where it is said that, according to president Bush, last year he stopped the Israeli's from striking at Iran's nuclear facilities. 

What I want to know is, if this happened last year, then when? Why is the press being so vague in determining an actual time frame? And why is this now being leaked to the media, at a time when Israel is in a vulnerable position from its allies? Israeli-U.S. partnership is a long since foregone conclusion and it seems that the U.S. is now backing out of that position to leave the Israelis out in the cold.

The timing of the situation seems to be intended to distance the U.S. from Israel politically while at the same time doing even further damage to Israel's image in the eyes of the more moderate Arab powers.

Why, America, do you wish to hurt Israel rather than advise your long-time ally to be careful when firing shells from those tanks?

I hope I'm wrong about this situation and it can be explained very easily.

Prince of Persia

So I just played the game Prince of Persia released in December 08 by Ubisoft. The first thing I noticed when playing this game was that the graphics looked like strikingly like those of Assassin's Creed which was done by the same group. Big surprise there.

Anyway, I thought that this was a big step up from Assassin's Creed in terms of the options for combos in the combat system. However, I thought there definitely could have been greater variety in combos, and maybe have them learned over time like in a game like Xenogears. Of course, that require an increase in the frequency of fights, but then again, I also thought there weren't enough enemy encounters.

***spoilers below***

One other thing, though, was that it was NOT the storybook ending that so many other games are. In the end, after about a week's work (the game was pretty easy) of healing the lands of the corruption and seeing them transformed from dark, dismal, and dreary into expansive, beautiful, and rich; I was developing an emotional attachment to the lands in the game. When I would heal a land, I would think to myself "Yes! Only 2 more in this area! Take that, Ahriman!"

And then in the end of the game, Elika sacrifices herself and the only presented option is the only one that makes sense: destroy the trees of life, destroy the temple, take the life force, and give it to Elika to revive her while freeing Ahriman in the process, the dark god you'd worked so hard to imprison. While you're chopping down the trees, Ahriman is whispering in the background things like, "Choose life. The light burns. The darkness soothes. What injury have I done to you that you have not done to me? I will be free." etc. 

After perusing some different gaming forums, the overall consensus is that the prince, arrogant, and self-serving as he is, eventually fell in love with Elika and would rather destroy the world than see her die. But one thing it seems that everyone overlooked was the role of Elika's father, the intiator in corrupting the lands and releasing Ahriman to save his daughter, previously dead.

And in the end, after getting into a fight with the father and condemning everything he'd done, the prince is forced to take up the exact role that he'd decried. Interesting juxtaposition of roles, I'd say.

One final thing I'll comment on that was present both in Prince of Persia and Assassin's Creed was that both games seem to be forming the first part of a "TV series" type of game. That is, a very in depth and extensive story that is simply too much to be told in one game. Especially one as detailed, visually, as these. Sure, Final Fantasy tells a detailed and extensive story over the course of three or four discs. But then again, they've never had the graphical beauty that these two had. So, I'd say it's interesting to see what lays ahead with games so in-depthly designed and I'm excited to see the next installments.

Will this stuff ever end?

But Meshaal said Hamas "will consider any international troops imposed on our people as an occupation force" and Hamas and other groups have said they will oppose any measure that hinders the armed "resistance."

What exactly should Israel do in the face of such a mindset? I have a good friend here who is a devout Muslim from Pakistan and who told me a while back that all of the Muslims he knows recognize Israel's right to exist and at this point, rather than invading Gaza, Israel needs to ask the Muslim world what to do.

In the face of an organization like this with backing from Iran and Syria, what the hell should Israel do?

Questions about hate in China

One thing I've noticed here in China is a pattern of continued and unadulterated hate for a group of people. Another thing I've noticed is that Chinese people, at least over here, don't really make a separation between a person and a person's country. That is, if the government of your country says or does something, they assume that you agree with what was said or done. With all that combined, it's become clear to me that there is, in fact, an unspoken hate list in China. 

Before everyone begins yelling at me, yes, I am stereotyping. But I am applying this not to specific people but society as a whole, as in "the Chinese people" that I'm always reading about in one article or another as if they're all of a hive mind.

Anyway, the hate list goes as follows. I'll provide the reasons (as I understand them) and list it from most hated to least hated.

Japan - World War II and Nanjing

Tibetans - Dalai Lama and Tibetan independence movements

Taiwanese - independence movements

French - Olympic protests and Sarkozy meeting with the Dalai Lama

Koreans - Early release of an Olympic opening ceremony rehearsal video

Americans - ...envy? Who knows?

Africans - no actual reason, simple racism

One thing to note here is that I have seen a clear negative correlation between education and hate. That means the dumber you are, the more you hate. This phenomenon is one I've never really seen anywhere else. In the U.S., sure, we have our passing "hates" and spats of racism. Like the harassment of those of Middle Eastern descent since 9/11, for example. However, as a matter of policy, it's not something that is openly tolerated as it is here.

The one that concerns me most on this list is the hate for the Japanese. You see, it's quite easy for me, when getting into a discussion with a Chinese person to point out how ridiculous it is to protest America by not eating at KFC for a day or to protest France by not buying from Carrefour. But, the thing is that with Japan, the only reason for the continued hate can only be justified by the government's continued denial of the Nanjing massacre ever actually occurring.

So I want to know, if anyone knows more about this than me, do the Japanese still actually deny that the Nanjing massacre occurred? And do they still teach it in Japanese history books that Japan came to help China? And finally, do the Japanese themselves, especially the youth, know the truth?

Hamas's PR

On reading the news today, I came across this article over at Reuters about the Israeli offensive in Gaza. The bit that I had issue with was this part:

The Israeli military said it carried out more than 70 air strikes in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip on Friday against militants, rocket launching sites and weapons caches, and that the Islamist group fired at least 30 rockets across the border.

Medical officials in the Gaza Strip said the Palestinian death toll had risen to 784. Hamas officials said more than a third were children. Ten Israeli soldiers have been killed, as well as three civilians hit by Hamas rocket fire.

Make sure you read that correctly. Israel is in Hamas's backyard, knocking on the door and about to pound it in. They're about to come in and shut everything down and Hamas is not concerned with stopping that threat -- only with continuing to target Israeli civilians in southern Israel. I don't understand how anyone can grant them validity. Oh, wait, I do. They clearly are out for nothing more than the destruction of Jews.

Not to mention the bit about how they claim that one third of the victims of the offensive have been children. Considering that most estimates say that around 20-25% of all deaths in Gaza have been civilians, that would mean that if it had risen, the death toll would be one hundred percent children. As if the IDF is hunting down and murdering children.

Now, it is true that Hamas officials have claimed the death toll to be as high as 40%, but that still means that almost all civilian deaths in Gaza have been children. Are we to believe that when the bombs dropped on Gaza, that all the parents shoved their children outside so that they'd be vaporized once the planes past overhead? I'm at least confident that most people in Gaza want their children to live, not to die.

Considering the anti-semitic nature of this organization, I'm going to go ahead and put it out there for the protesters who claim not to be anti-semitic, but simply defending the rights of the Palestinians: If you support an obviously anti-semitic organization like Hamas, then you are supporting and promoting anti-semitism which implies that you yourself are anti-semitic.

On Gaza

This is a repost of a note that I had put on Facebook.

To those who will read this note: of course my opinion on the situation in Gaza right now is biased by the fact that I am Jewish. I would say it is also biased by the fact that I have family in Israel and so I take it personally whenever someone says Israel has no right to exist, or when a political leader says that because of the IDF's actions, no Jewish child is safe.

Because of this bias, you can think of this more of a side of the argument, rather than an objective report. Since this is an issue that is so close to my heart, and because I have so much bloody time these days since I'm finished giving exams, I read about the offensive in Gaza at least 3-4 times a day, in addition to reading a few different blogs.

One thing I've noticed is that with all the protest websites and everything else condemning Israel, with everyone saying that they do not hate Jews, but only Zionists; it seems that no one really understands what Zionism is. Ask yourself for a moment. Do you know what Zionism is? I'll bet at least one person reading this thinks it's the ultra-right wing Jews who are out for Jewish supremacy in the world. And you would be wrong. Those who know me personally know that I always vote democrat and am most assuredly a centrist if there ever was one, and yet I am a Zionist. A Zionist is nothing more than the idea that the Jewish people should have their own homeland based on the preservation of the Jewish people and their ethnicity and religion. Is such a thing wrong, considering that there is are nations that are built upon preserving the ethnicity of the Spanish, Italians, French, Germans, Russians, Poles, Czechs, Finnish, Norwegians, Swedes, Danes, English, Irish, and Portuguese to name but a few among the many? Or all the nations that are predicated upon the preservation of Islam and those that adhere to it, whether they be Malaysians, Indonesians, Pashtuns, Turks, Arabs, or blacks? Those who are so strongly opposed to Zionism: Are you trying to suggest then that the Jews are the only group who do not have the right to self-determination?

But I digress. Let us state a few facts in this situation.

Fact: Hamas has been firing rockets into southern Israel with the specific intent to kill civilians for the past 3 years. Their effectiveness in doing so is absolutely irrelevant. 

Fact: Israel has been making every effort to avoid civilian casualties, as is evidenced by the fact only about 20-25% of the Palestinian deaths since the ground offensive began have been civilian deaths.

Fact: Until the ground offensive began, 75% of Israeli casualties were those of civilians. Now, of course, those casualties only totaled to 4, but the percentage still demonstrates who is being targeted. 

Fact: Hamas is well-known for launching its rockets from crowded population centers. I read a report earlier today where two people said they witness Hamas militants firing 2 blocks away from their home. They dared not protest for fear of being labeled a spy. Also, the U.N. school that was recently hit by Israeli tank fire is reported, though not confirmed, to have also had Hamas militants operating within the compound. 

Aside from these facts, it's interesting to me to note, again, all the protests. I've read that many people complain about not being able to criticize the situation in the Middle East without being labeled an anti-Semite. Well, when you have protests like these,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlHPPO25nM

In the video above, in Amsterdam, the protesters are chanting "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the chambers of gas."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo

(note at 3:20 what a girl says the Jews need to "go back to the ovens") I have to wonder: wtf is not anti-semitic about these protests? Now, I understand that these protests should not be taken as representative of all of the protests. But for those of you who protested the current offensive in Gaza: Did you protest even a single time for the past 3 years when Hamas was raining rockets down on Sderot? Or when Hezbollah abducted 2 Israeli soldiers? Or when Hamas seized the Gaza Strip from Fatah by executing all the Fatah personnel? Or have you ever protested when a woman is stoned to death in any of Israel's neighboring countries after being ACCUSED of adultery?

No? Why then do you protest when the only democracy in the Middle East exercises its right of self-defense? Those who call the Hamas freedom fighters, I would take note that the reason Hamas is such a thorn in Israel's side is simply because of their absolute callousness toward Palestinian civilian deaths. Take this quote, from Jeffrey Goldberg, on the "pornographic interest of Jewish more failure," for example:

"One more thing, speaking of pornography -- we've all seen endless pictures of dead Palestinian children now. It's a terrible, ghastly, horrible thing, the deaths of children, and for the parents it doesn't matter if they were killed by accident or by mistake. But ask yourselves this: Why are these pictures so omnipresent? I'll tell you why, again from firsthand, and repeated, experience: Hamas (and the Aksa Brigades, and Islamic Jihad, the whole bunch) prevents the burial, or even preparation of the bodies for burial, until the bodies are used as props in the Palestinian Passion Play. Once, in Khan Younis, I actually saw gunmen unwrap a shrouded body, carry it a hundred yards and position it atop a pile of rubble -- and then wait a half-hour until photographers showed. It was one of the more horrible things I've seen in my life. And it's typical of Hamas. If reporters would probe deeper, they'd learn the awful truth of Hamas. But Palestinian moral failings are not of great interest to many people. "

One thing that no one seems to be asking in this whole situation, though, is where the hell is Egypt in all this? Egypt, along with Saudi Arabia, is supposed to be a Middle Eastern power broker. And yet, the both of them seem to be largely silent. It is true that Egypt has recently pushed for a cease fire, but considering that Gaza shares a border with Egypt, where are the medical supplies that should be flowing into Gaza? Where are the food rations that should be flowing into Gaza from Egypt? 

One thing that is quite obvious to everyone involved is that on the whole, any given Muslim will probably support the Palestinian cause and that any given Jew will support the Israeli cause. But for Muslims who claim to feel the need of the Palestinians, why is there no help being given in the Palestinian time of need? 

Clearly, I support the offensive in Gaza. I'm happy the IDF is doing something about it. I am hoping every time I read about the offensive, that there are no Palestinian civilians killed, and I am hoping every time I read about it that I don't have to read about more soldier deaths.

But I absolutely hope that Israel manages to unseat Hamas. With an organization like Hamas in power or even in existence, there will never be peace in the Middle East. The reason being is that Hamas uses an interpretation of Islam that simply cannot accept the idea of a Jewish national identity. They've labeled Jews as being murderous assassins of the prophets and of being descended from apes and pigs. They call the Jews' continued existence an offense against God. How can there be peace with such an organization?