Nathan Newman wrote:
> For those Palestinians who want peace, suicide bombings may be
> counterproductive -- although as Robert Wright notes in Slate (which has
> been pretty good as Israel recently), being able to promote terrorism is a
> bargaining chip in that they have the ability to turn it off.
>
> But for those Palestinians who want to destroy Israel altogether, the
> encouragement of extremism by the Israelis is the goal.
-A lot of this is true, but it's also exaggerated. The argument that all the -suicide bombers are seeking to destroy Israel is just a platitude.
And exactly what I didn't say, since I noted there were too uses to suicide bombings-- bargaining chip for peace versus pushing extremism, representing the two goals.
> Even the
>extremist groups aren't stupid. They know that no matter what they do,
>Israel isn't going away anytime soon.
Who said soon? Those who want Israel destroyed no doubt are patient. But time is on their side in many ways, politically and demographically. And the latter applies to both Israel/Palestine and in the United States, where muslims and arabs are an increasing bloc of voters.
During negotiations leading up to Camp David II, the suicide bombings undermined peace, but as a tactic of war, I generally think that the suicide bombings are an effective weapon. A brutal one whose results will not be a pleasant peace but once the negotiations broke down and in the absence of the desire for a pure nonviolent mass mobilization, the only military tool available of any effectiveness.
-- Nathan Newman