Post Global Barometer - Yes I'm Robert of Los Angeles

Observation: Hamas, Gaza, Israel, The West Bank, et al. The past few days have been good ones for Islamists such as Osama bin Laden who have seen their vision of an Islamic empire take small steps forward with the Gaza win, with the Fatah defeat, with Lebanon closer to chaos and with the US "surge" not succeeding (at least by the Pentagon's estimate). Israel, with a Martin Indyk column in The Washington Post this morning and a Calev Ben-Dor analysis in the Jerusalem Post yesterday (both available for viewing in the GPB Supporting Data for Israel), has suggested that all this could actually be good for Israel because it allows Gaza (the violent failed state of radical Islam) to be separated from the West Bank (the haven of moderate Islam led by secular Fatah). The columns by Ben-Dor and Indyk go on to say that Hamas will clearly fail because Gaza is ungovernable (particularly when all monetary resources to govern are denied). Yet, more objective analysis by cutting-edge groups such as Stratfor say "Hamas wants to show that the Western economic embargo against its democratically elected government will only result in more chaos in the territories and create a larger breeding ground for militias and crime families to take root. (The leading crime family in Gaza, Dugmush, is already believed to have aligned itself with al Qaeda-linked militants.) Hamas wants to be seen as a strong political force that Western governments will have to deal with if they want to prevent a larger conflagration down the line." (Stratfor's analysis is also available in GPB Supporting Data for Israel). Hamas has shown in the past it is far more able to govern than Fatah (that's why it defeated Fatah in the January 2006 elections)...and that it is capable, as Fatah is not, of enforcing a cease fire (as it did for several months while Fatah-aligned groups continually fired missiles into Israel). The bet of key analysts is on Hamas, despite international pressure against it, not Fatah.Observation: Appeasement and smart strategies: The GPB has been privileged to have many smart people comment on its observations over the past year. Currently, if you click on the "Comments" button, you'll see two comments by a frequent writer who goes by the name of "Robert of Los Angeles". In his first comment, Robert raises the point that if you are not at physical war with groups like Al Qaeda, then you are appeasing them. It is a very valid argument that many from conservative talk show hosts to center-right analysts have raised. In his second comment, Robert suggests that Radical Islamists are conducting their own "surge" and are using "a coordinated 5 prong attack that may achieve much more by guerrilla and terrorist means than direct military assault." As we at the GPB have modeled the tactics of radical Islamist groups over the past 5 years, we have found what Robert says to be true. Islamists, defined as those who seek to overthrow the existing Middle East power structure to create what some call a Caliphate, are not fighting a "war" as the US defines it...they are not engaging as Robert says in frontal attacks. Their war is one waged for hearts and minds...and control of the global political agenda. Violence or terror is clearly a tool but it is only one tool of many that include the most effective internet and media campaigns we have ever seen. So when we at the GPB suggest that the US is fighting the wrong war, we are not suggesting that the US appease its opponents. Rather, we are suggesting that the US fight the real war...the one the very smart people in bin Laden's camp are fighting, which is a multi-faceted war to win global political support. If anyone doubts that this is a war, one Radical Islamists are winning, they need only look at global public opinion polls and at who is being more effective on the international stage (see the 4 week view of the GPB) if you doubt us. Vote for all that apply OR Add your own Solution
Current Tallies/ Rankings


No, the US will never learn.

I'm a Republican who read Noam Chomsky on a dare. I don't agree with most of what the guy says, but I'm starting to think he's right on some of his views of America's inanely aggressive and intrusive foreign policy. We butt in, screw things up and make things worse for us almost every time. Bush is only the worst of a long line of Presidents, Republican and Democrat, who have conducted foreign policies that hurt rather than help us. We'd be (and the world would be) much better off if we'd take about a decade off from any foreign adventures.

6/13/2007 8:51:46 AM
James R., Springfield, ILVOTE
7


Putin's new hand

The US and Europe seem to have failed to realize that Russia is now a global player with clout again. He really has very little that he needs to negotiate on right now. US and European dithering about human rights, Kosovo and Moldova do nothing but annoy an already miffed Russia. If the US and EU would simply acknowledge Russia's new position on the global stage, I think a lot of these hot issues would suddenly disappear.

6/14/2007 5:40:57 AM
Z. Klaffey, LondonVOTE
5


Are all of you completely insane?

Sorry, got that out of my system. It doesn't matter whether we are losing the war or whether we caused the war, it matter that we ARE at war. There is no appeasement, no negotiation BECAUSE first of all there is NO nation to negotiate with in facing Al Qaeda and their very raison d'etre would forbid it. So don't kid yourself about such things. And many truly THINK that you can no more trust a DEAL with Mahmoud than you could with Hitler! Did upending the South on cause a tipping to chaos and greater slavery? Did upending the Nazi cause chaos and Communism - yes it did but it was still worth it. Did upending Eastern Europe bring horror - no, though surviving Bosnians and Kosovars would disagree. You act as if standing for nothing, acting upon nothing, in fact keeping the horrible status quo (which the West DOES share blame in!!) is a GOOD THING and would have lasted anyhow. Nothing is further from the TRUTH. Are we helping the radicals get what they want? I don't think so. If there are not enough Arabs and Muslims that yearn for freedom and to use their Western educations! to help their brother, then it is a shame upon them and not on us. Too long (i.e. before Bush) have extremists been murdering and intimidating the people of the STANs, Iraq and the Levant, too long have the old generation radicals (the protocommunist PLO / PKK), the Baathist and neo-Stalinist parties, the new kids on the block the AQ and the Hezbollah -- made "secular" military oppressors and pseudo-fundamentalist oligarchys the ONLY alternative.

6/14/2007 9:42:14 AM
Robert of Los AngelesVOTE
4


On a positive note (if you're an Islamist)

If you actually were analysts or picked analysts who put key information together, you'd SEE something very interesting about the Islamists "surge" - a coordinated 5 prong attack that may achieve much more by guerrilla and terrorist means than direct military assault. I've questioned whether combining ISLAMISTS here makes sense as different factions have different purposes. But on this 5 or 6 prong attack on Western interests and Israel there is no doubt they're working together. 1) Hamas blitzkrieg in Gaza 2) Tripoli AQ "Fatah al Islam" - ending badly to be sure for AQ but that is to be expected of a martyrdom operation 3) Hezbollah rearming 4) Assasination campaign in Beirut continues. 5) Palestinian uprising in Lebanese camps escalate. Add a free bonus 6) PKK (Syrian supported) attacks on Turkey to destabilize Kurdistan / Iraq Tie this in with a renewed international diplomatic campaign for return of Golan Heights and you realize that Syria is making a strong move to use ALL of these Islamist factions, and wouldn't and couldn't do all of this without Iran.

6/14/2007 11:10:16 AM
Robert of Los AngelesVOTE
2


What about Hizbullah?

Yes - Lieberman and Bush are falling for Bin Laden's trap. But Bin Laden doesn't stand for all Islamists. What about the Shiite group Hizbullah in Lebanon? I wonder what they would have to say.

6/14/2007 7:38:52 AM
Charles in TorontoVOTE
1


"Fall" of Gaza a huge opportunity

With Hamas now isolated in Gaza: 1. Further isolate them.. cutoff everything possible. 2. Encourage Israel to immediately recognize the West Bank as the legitimate Palestinian State. Do the deal now, and let Hamas figure out how to survive on their own.

6/15/2007 9:49:29 AM
Steve Salt Lake CityVOTE
0


"Fall" of Gaza a huge opportunity

With Hamas now isolated in Gaza: 1. Further isolate them.. cutoff everything possible. 2. Encourage Israel to immediately recognize the West Bank as the legitimate Palestinian State. Do the deal now, and let Hamas figure out how to survive on their own.

6/15/2007 9:53:17 AM
Steve Salt Lake CityVOTE
0


Thanks ...and you're right (see what a little flattery and attention will do)

You're absolutely right that Gaza and most of the news is very bad for us and we've made many mistakes both politically and militarily. But I take solace that the battle lines are becoming clearer, no more fence sitters, and some very strange bedfellows. And while the new Israel-Fatah alliance of necessity is not the GOOD bad news of Hitler attacking Stalin throwing him into Churchill's ready embrace (because the West Bank is not the strategic lynchpin of the region)and yet it is a symbolic wonder that the next handshake between a PLO and a Zionist leader (maybe alongside Mount Moriah) will be a little warmer and a little more genuine.

6/15/2007 9:28:54 AM
Robert of Los Angeles