Hamas takes control in Palestine

[son_of_angels]

I know that many, many Catholics are opposed to a Jewish state. I myself am not, only opposed to a Judaist state (for me, allowing an accursed race to regain some dignity is something to be desired, not refused).

Whatever your view, surely we cannot agree with the fall of the Palestinian government to Hamas, an extremely militant group? Moreover, in my opinion, at least Israel gives us a reason to fight the spread of Islam, and to grow Christian influence in the region.

However, something from the article I read on this (it's linked from phatmass) caught my eye,[quote]"The Quartet reiterates its view that there is a fundamental contradiction between armed group and militia activities and the building of a democratic state," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. "A two-state solution to the conflict requires all participants in the democratic process to renounce violence and terror, accept Israel's right to exist, and disarm, as outlined in the 'road map.'" [/quote]

It seems that we have completely forgotten the founding of our own nation, which was built on the growth of "armed group and militia activities" and thus founded an extremely effective democratic state. What gives us the right to judge them?

Come on, let's either support Israel's unilateral regional control, or let them tough it out with their self-created enemies, and quit avoiding the real issue, the Mohammedans themselves.

[Cow of Shame]

[quote name='son_of_angels' date='Jan 27 2006, 12:13 AM'] What gives us the right to judge them?

[/quote]

The same right that lets us tell undeveloped countries not to ravage their land gathering their natural resources or plunder their forests.

heh

[philothea]

[quote name='son_of_angels' date='Jan 26 2006, 10:13 PM']Come on, let's either support Israel's unilateral regional control, or let them tough it out with their self-created enemies, and quit avoiding the real issue, the Mohammedans themselves.
[right][snapback]867178[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I think I agree with you? I don't have any any particular opposition to a Jewish state. I don't like the USA unnaturally propping Israel (or any state) up, because doing so instigates all sorts of strife and imbalance. It's a neverending job that does nothing but gain us enemies.

[Nathan]

Israel is our ally; we are friends. If their security is threatened and they need our help, we should be there to support them.

[Cow of Shame]

[quote name='philothea' date='Jan 27 2006, 01:40 AM']  I don't like the USA unnaturally propping Israel (or any state) up, because doing so instigates all sorts of strife and imbalance. 
[/quote]

Now, if you said we were unnaturally propping up Iraq up, I could see your point...but Israel?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Cow of Shame' date='Jan 27 2006, 02:37 PM']Now, if you said we were unnaturally propping up Iraq up, I could see your point...but Israel?
[right][snapback]867685[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
We've been unnaturally propping up Israel for decades.

It's a byproduct of the fact that so many Christians believe there has to be an actual Jewish state to facilitate Christ's return.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='son_of_angels' date='Jan 27 2006, 12:13 AM']I know that many, many Catholics are opposed to a Jewish state. [right][snapback]867178[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


First thought... I doubt their Catholicity.

Second... great, if Hamas takes control, then Isreal can go in and clean up the terrorist state. It just goes to show that the majority of palestians support terrorism therefore give up their right to their sovereignty.

I believe that if Israel had control and the terrorism stopped from palestinians that Israel would be much more just than if it was the other way around.

[quote][b]2265 [/b]
Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

[b]2266 [/b]
The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and the duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67

[b]2267 [/b]
Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."68

...

[b]2309 [/b]
The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:


-the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

-all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

-there must be serious prospects of success;

-the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

[b]The [u]evaluation of these conditions [/u]for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of [u]those who have responsibility for the common good.[/u][/b]
...
[b]2321 [/b]
The prohibition of murder does not abrogate the right to render an unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. Legitimate defense is a grave duty for whoever is responsible for the lives of others or the common good.[/quote]


God Bless,
ironmonk
[url="http://www.CatholicSwag.com"]http://www.CatholicSwag.com[/url] <-Shirts that love our Jewish brethren

[philothea]

[quote name='Cow of Shame' date='Jan 27 2006, 12:37 PM']Now, if you said we were unnaturally propping up Iraq up, I could see your point...but Israel?
[right][snapback]867685[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Heh. Israel would not have lasted a decade without us... at least, not in their present, rather snarky and aggressive form.

And if they could... good for them! But everyone else in the Mideast wouldn't hate us.

[musturde]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Jan 27 2006, 01:43 PM']First thought... I doubt their Catholicity.
[/quote]
Because the way of getting the land was totally justified, right? God had it planned to take peoples land away. You can agree with Jews living in Israel and you can agree with there being an Israel but don't tell me you agree with the government of Israel. The way they got control and currently stay in control is not Godly at all. The Israelis created an unsolvable problem in the Middle East. They are the reason why we have so much unrest in the Middle East in the first place. The Palestinians are not innocent either but I hate it when people use the idea of Jews being God's people to justify kicking people out of their homes. The state of Israel was made the same way the US was, by taking another group out. The people who live there have to suffer suicide bombings from the Palestinians (who think that each time they get land, it's because of their attacks). The real solution is to have both sides live together. Palestinians have a bad past knitted with all sorts of evil. However, Israel is not AT ALL innocent.


[quote]Second... great, if Hamas takes control, then Isreal can go in and clean up the terrorist state. It just goes to show that the majority of palestians support terrorism therefore give up their right to their sovereignty.
[/quote]
And why haven't they already done that?


[quote]I believe that if Israel had control and the terrorism stopped from palestinians that Israel would be much more just than if it was the other way around.
[/quote]
I seriously believe the only solution that is just is if both lived side by side. Israel has the whole Middle East after it. The formation of Israel is the reason for soo much of the disorder and chaos in the Middle East. If Israel wipes out all the Palestinian extremists, it'll only get more enemies.

[quote]http://www.CatholicSwag.com <-Shirts that love our Jewish brethren[/quote]
[url="http://www.cafepress.com/cp/browse/store/islam_gifts"]http://www.cafepress.com/cp/browse/store/islam_gifts[/url] <-- shirts that love our Muslim brethren

[Paladin D]

I say we take over the area, and build two stadium parks. The Bethlehem Stars, and the Palestinian Jihadists.

[musturde]

btw i forgot to mention, the solution i was proposing is impossible (that they both live together), therefore there is no just solution at this time.

[musturde]

[quote name='philothea' date='Jan 27 2006, 05:20 PM']Heh.  Israel would not have lasted a decade without us... at least, not in their present, rather snarky and aggressive form.

And if they could... good for them!  But everyone else in the Mideast wouldn't hate us.
[right][snapback]868047[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

True, I believe Osama woulda probably still hated us tho.

[cappie]

Hamas Victory Stirs Franciscan's Concern
"There Is Much Apprehension," Says Father Pizzaballa

JERUSALEM, JAN. 27, 2006 (Zenit.org).- The superior of the Custody of the Holy Land expressed concern for the Christian communities given the outright victory of the Hamas Islamic movement in the Palestinian elections.

Franciscan Father Pierbattista Pizzaballa's concern was reported by the SIR agency of the Italian episcopate. It quoted him as saying that "an era has ended, there is concern, but the door does not have to be closed immediately."

"We wait to see what Hamas intends to do, how it organizes itself," said Father Pizzaballa. "We must be open but vigilant, without giving in at all to violence."

The vast majority of the Christians in the Holy Land are Palestinian.

"There is much apprehension," the Franciscan said. "Hamas is a party of very clear Muslim identity. We'll see if good sense, the ability to govern, and moderation prevail, or if the intention is to continue the struggle as has been the case to date."

He told Vatican Radio today: "Hamas, even if it does not want it, will have to come to a negotiation with Israel. It is a reality that it cannot ignore, at least from the technical point of view. Water, light, electricity, all these things depend on Israel, so that whoever administers public affairs must, by force, talk with Israel."

"Also for us, as Christians, many questions are posed," Father Pizzaballa added. "The Christians are Palestinian citizens in everything and for everything, but it is clear that they also claim their identity of Christians, which must be maintained in everything and for everything.

"I hope common sense will prevail. Opposition is one thing, government another."
ZE06012706

[Iacobus]

Hamas coming to power is a dangerous thing but it was done in a fully democratic process. What I have heard the most about it was that the majority of the voters did not vote for Hamas so much as they voted against Abbas and the Fatah (sp?) party.

This puts us, and a lot of the world, in a problem. We were promoting the elections for the PA but now the elections we wanted have brought a terrorist group to power. We have to denouce the terrorist group unequiovcally but we must, at the same time, accept the results of the election. What Bush was betting on, and it wasn't a wild idea to most people, was that terrorism cannot live with democracy. But it looks like these elections have proved to us what China has proven over the past years, what Westerns think democray/free market needs may not be true. We now know that a non-democratic state can have a "free" market and now we also know the a democratic state can have terrorism. (As a side note, I thought the miltia thing and the problem the US has with home-grown terrorism would have illustrated that... esp seeing as the vast majority of terrorist attacks on the US were caused by non-Islamic US based terrorism...)

[toledo_jesus]

yeah, this smells of elderberries.