December 19, 2006
We Don't Want No Civil War
When two factions (or more) within one nation decide to contend with each other with bullets and bombs instead of through the political process, we are told that there is a civil war. At least, that's the case in Iraq. Now if, say, two factions (Hamas and Fatah) in, say, the Palestinian territory also resort to the bullets and bombs approach to negotiation...well, it's not quite a civil war. (How could it be? After all, the U.S. isn't "occupying" their country). No, that fighting is just "gunbattles" and "clashes." And even though "[t]he fighting has renewed fears of civil war in the Gaza Strip and the occupied West Bank," well, it isn't really a Civil War yet. (Via Instapundit)
By that definition, any gang war would constitute a 'civil war' in the eyes of the liberal weenies that want to tuck their tails and run out of Iraq, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Greg at December 19, 2006 11:10 AMthe key difference is that Palestine is not its own nation at the current momment. their is no government of palestine, only a provisonal authority. The situations are nowhere near analogous as you would have them be.
But greg is right, its easier to just blame liberals.
Posted by: george at December 19, 2006 6:14 PMGeorge,
Your "key difference" is nothing but a semantical argument. The situations are analogous. Iraq is an old nation with a new government and the Palestinians want to have a new nation with a new government.
Practically speaking, the world has recognized the validity of a self-governing Palestinian state. The world has already recognized the new government of Iraq.
Both governments, one provisional, one official and both elected need to mature. If the Palestinian's want to show the world that they are ready to govern themselves, they need to stop looking towards violence as a means of solving political problems. This is the same as with the various parties / factions within Iraq.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at December 20, 2006 7:45 PM