The problem with the Jerusalem attack, from Hamas’s viewpoint, is that it was too successful. The large number of people killed, and the large number of children among them, aroused American and European anger at the organization […] and provided a rare moment of international legitimacy for Israel’s forceful response.Note that - only if large numbers of people or children are killed does the international community accept any response by Israel (this is what prevents Israel from dealing with this properly). The article then asks
question is, what will happen if Hamas’s retaliation is similarly “successful” - and if, once again, the gain proves to be not worth the cost?When has the gain ever been worth the cost? What gain has there ever been from these attacks? The gain from the last 3 years of violence has been hundreds of dead, civil unrest, the end of the closest agreement on peace and the destruction of the Palestinian economy. Until now, achieving that was worth all of the deaths on both sides? That’s so twisted that it’s difficult to even grasp the concept.
This has been a common theme running through the conflict and something that’s long since erased any trace of sympathy I had for the Palestinians. Whenever they are given a choice between helping themselves and hurting others, they chose to hurt others. It is the ultimate in spite, completely devoid of any self-interest. And if the Palestinians don’t matter to the Palestinians, why should they matter to me?