Your backpedaling equivocation.
What was backpedaling about it? I said "maybe" in the original post, as in "perhaps", or "hypothetically". I was sticking with the "You never know until you try" theme I had created. I don't KNOW that this would be effective, so I cannot lay any claim to anything concrete.
I never claimed that it
was the reason behind Hamas, just that it was hypothetically possible that it could be. I see no equivocation, as I have used the definition the same in all cases.
You're still responding to it.
So if it elicits a repsonse about how ineffective it is, that makes it effective?
Sorry, but Hamas has been isolated. You don't see the regions government's coming to their aid as they have in the past. In fact, it's nearly clear that the regional governments desire Fatah's return.
Hamas gained power while they are being "isolated". Gaza has been isolated, but Hamas is stronger now than they were before.
I agree that Fatah is by far and away a better option that Hamas because Fatah is not a bunch of scumbags who hide behind chidlren, but while Hamas has power, they should be dealt with as though they have the power.
It rewards them. It legitimizes their behavior. But, of course, to someone like you, there's no difference in standing between the US and, say, a lesser power who would be used as back-channel diplomatic source. Instead, hey, the US is just another nation and speaking directly to the terrorists doesn't at all legitimize Hamas's behavior.
I don't think the US talking to them legitimizes their behavior, it legitimizes the
Palestianian GRIEVANCES. Many of theose grievances are legit. Hamas is a bunch of scumbags who hide behind children, but they got "legitimized" by a popular vote done while the US was "isolating" them.
I think an about face on the issue is necessary to prevent them form gaining further power.
I don't have any.
It's the insanity that must underscore the thinking that more, more, more, more, unending talking will result in any alternative result.
But they have been talked to.
I'm talking specifically about the US talking to Hamas. That hasn't been done.
The clear point was that one side wants to destroy the other. This is explicitly been acknowledged by that one side.
And I'm saying that we should at least
try to talk themout of this stance. I don;t think bombing them out of it is possible. It only fuels them to become worse, IMO.
No, your comments regarding the terrorists reveal your apologism, not my mere disagreement with you.
Can you please illustrate the specific apologies I've made?