Hamas apologists are using misleading clichés

Hamas apologists have invented a number of clichés calculated to weaken Israel’s resolve to eliminate Hamas.

Number one among them is..What will happen to Gaza after Hamas? To answer this question, one must first ask…What was happening in Gaza under Hamas? Well, we all know that Hamas made an investment of underground terror tunnels worth billions of dollars. The resources diverted by the terrorists in construction of terror infrastructure would have gone a long way into transforming Gaza into a Singapore.

Hamas ran a tyrannical roughshod over Gazans with terror, murder and indoctrination as preferred governance tools. Education was corrupted into brainwashing carricculum for manufacture of future terrorists. While top Hamas leaders hide in exile, they have baptized deaths of Palestinian youth engaged in terrorism as martyrdom. In fact, male terrorists who die while frighting Jews or as suicide bombers are promised an instant prize of 72 virgins in heaven. I wonder what is the equivalent reward for female martyrs!

Hamas has never been committed to the welfare of Palestinian Arabs. Palestinians are mere cannon fodder in an insidious pursuit of regional dominance by Iran. In the ongoing war with Israel, the murderers have been using Gazans as human shields in order to incur massive civilian casualties for propaganda purposes. To them, publicity is more important than lives of Palestinians. The value of human life is an alien concept. Under Hamas tyranny, life is, to quote the Animal Farm, “nasty, brutish and short”.

So why would anyone be worried about elimination of Hamas together with their legacy of hate and bloodshed? Certainly, a new dawn will emerge, hopefully, more democratic, responsible and accountable to Palestinian Arabs. As they say, let’s cross that bridge when we reach there. By the way, what happened to Germany after Hitler and his Nazis criminals?
The other misleading and defeatist cliche is… Hamas is an ideology and you can’t defeat an ideology! One can only shudder at the sheer idiocy of this statement. When did a proxy terror organization become an ideology? Why don’t you deal with Iran, Turkey and Qatar and see whether the “ideology” will last one more day. Let me ask, what would have happened if the allied forces surrendered to Hitler because Nazism was an ideology?

What if America allowed the Ku Klux Clan to spread violence because the dangerous gang was “an ideology and an ideology cannot be defeated?”

If we were to go by the nonsensical ideology argument…then it was wrong to kill Bin Laden and his Al-qaeda because “Al-qaeda was an ideology and an ideology cannot be defeated”. Similarly, Isis should have been allowed to continue their campaign of human butchery in Syria because “Isis was an ideology and an ideology cannot be defeated”.

While at it, no one should have interfered with Al shabaab because “the shabaab was an ideology and an ideology cannot be defeated” as they made women dance in the streets of Mogadishu in an “holy” inspection of whether the ladies had committed the crime of wearing underwears.

In a nutshell, the “ideology” argument in defense of Hamas terrorists is a piece of intellectual garbage.

There’s another cunning question by by Israel’s interlocutors, it goes like this… do you think Benjamin Netanyahu should resign? The import of this question is to try and introduce an element of domestic political competition in Israel. The calculation is… with internal divisions, Israel will lose focus on her existential threat as politicians compete for power. The question is also meant to magnify Netanyahu’s real or imagined mistakes and pollute domestic support when he needs it most, as he prosecutes war with terrorists. Israel must stand united than ever before. Terrorists have no regard whether one stands on far right, centre or extreme left.

One would also be forgiven to ask.. We’re their calls for George Bush to resign after 911? Where else have you heard questions about resignation of presidents or prime ministers acquire both national and international status because of an act of terrorism?