Bush administration is 'troubled' by Israel's killing of Hamas leader

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration said Monday it was "deeply troubled" by Israel's killing of Ahmed Yassin, a founder of the militant Palestinian group Hamas, and said it had no advance warning of the attack.

The Bush administration urged restraint on both sides in the Mideast conflict, while European nations and the United Nations flatly condemned Israel.
Charles Dharapak, AP

While not condemning Israel's attack, the State Department said it increases tensions and would make it harder to pursue peace in the Middle East. "We are troubled," spokesman Richard Boucher. However, he did not directly condemn Israel's killing of the spiritual leader of Hamas as he left a mosque in Gaza.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan, coordinating the U.S. message to Jerusalem, said "we are deeply troubled by this morning's incident in Gaza."

Boucher denounced Yassin's group as a terrorist organization.

Secretary of State Colin Powell intended to discuss the stymied peacemaking process in a meeting with visiting Israel Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom that had been scheduled weeks ago.

The killing of the Hamas leader raised fears of possible retaliation against the United States. "Anytime threats are made against the United States, we take them seriously," a U.S. counterterrorism official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

U.S. counterterrorism officials said they would watch closely after Hamas said it would also hold the United States responsible for the attack.

Meanwhile, Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, said Israel gave the United States no advance warning of the attack. And Boucher said no one in the U.S. government had been informed before Israel killed Yassin and two of his body guards with a missile attack.

Bush administration officials urged restraint on both sides in the conflict, while European nations and the United Nations flatly condemned Israel.

Rice said she knew of no consultations between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President Bush about any plan to target the sheik, who helped found the group in 1987.

But Rice, asked about U.S. reaction to the attack during an interview on NBC's Today show, said: "Let's remember that Hamas is a terrorist organization and that Sheik Yassin has himself, personally, we believe, been involved in terrorist planning."

Denouncing Yassin as "the godfather of suicide bombers," Foreign Minister Shalom said Israel was doing everything it could to coordinate with the United States. But, he told reporters after meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney, "it didn't include this action."

Shalom called the attack "pure self-defense in order to protect our people."

Interviewed by Israel TV Channel 2, he said, "Israel is an independent, sovereign country that on defense issues reaches decisions independently."

By contrast to the U.S. response, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the assassination "is unacceptable, it is unjustified and it is very unlikely to achieve its objectives," and other European foreign ministers and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan condemned it as a violation of international law.

After the killing, Hamas directly threatened the United States — something it usually does not do — saying America's backing of Israel made the assassination possible. "All the Muslims of the world will be honored to join in on the retaliation for this crime," Hamas said in a statement.

In the past, Hamas has insisted that its fight is against Israel and has refrained from targeting U.S. citizens or interests, instead focusing on fund-raising and recruitment within the United States, according to senior federal law enforcement officials. Investigations regarding Hamas in this country have focused mostly on front companies and charities that funnel millions of dollars to the terrorist group.

Earlier this year, FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress that Hamas was a threat within the United States but had not demonstrated it would act violently.

At the White House, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said it was important for "the parties to exercise maximum restraint."

"We urge everyone to remain calm in the region," he said. "Our policy remains the same" — that those on both sides be aware of the consequences of their actions, McClellan told a White House briefing.

"There was no warning given to us," McClellan said.

Yassin was killed with seven other people early Monday as he left a mosque in the Gaza Strip. The killing also sparked larger, more violent demonstrations throughout the Hamas stronghold of Gaza.

Rice said, "It is very important that everyone step back and try now to be calm in the region."

"There is always a possibility of a better day in the Middle East and some of the things that are being talked about by the Israelis, about disengagement from areas, might provide new opportunities," she said. "And so I would hope that nothing will be done that would preclude those new opportunities from emerging."

A week ago, the Bush administration had warned that meaningful peace talks progress in Mideast peacemaking would be very difficult unless Palestinian leaders cracked down on terror groups. This followed two suicide bombings in Israel.

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-03-22-us-mideast_x.htm

Wow, the world seems to get worse and worse. Bush try and help your allies, Spain and Israel...because it's becoming apparent you don't care.

the leader of a savage terrorist organization who specializes in blowing up women and children is killed and you say that it makes the world worse :rolleyes:

I don't think anyone's saying that he was a good guy, just that kiling him probably won't do any good.

Originally posted by Overdose
Wow, the world seems to get worse and worse. Bush try and help your allies, Spain and Israel...because it's becoming apparent you don't care.

So wait, you think we should be helping Israel? Because the usual mantra from the left is that we need to stop supporting Israel. And we have offered help to Spain, but they didn't accept it.

My thinking of Israel is that I do not think we should be supporting them.

But regardless of my thoughts, President Bush has not been able to protect his allies, aka Spain and Israel.

Proving we cannot protect our allies, from these “terror” incidents. Meaning we aren’t really stopping terror, now are we? Or helping our allies.

so now we are supposed to spend billions on making sure spain and israel dont get hit? so much for your nation building argument

We are supposed to be spending Billions fighting terror, not Iraqis.

We are supposed to be spending billions fighting the organizations that will attack our allies and us.

If George Bush wants to keep the few allies he has, he needs to give them a reason for why his "war" is working on taking care of "terror". He hasn't given them a reason, because they have had attacks, so Bush's plans of fighting terror haven’t worked.

Originally posted by WhammyBar
I don't think anyone's saying that he was a good guy, just that kiling him probably won't do any good. Ok...this coward ordered the murders of countless innocents and you think that killing this slimeball will do no good? How could you think this doesnt do any good? It rids the world of another cockroach that should have been stepped on years ago. Sure, there will be other cockroaches that scurry to take his place, and they should be dealt with just as this scumbag was. The time for pacifying terrorists should be over with. Its gets you nowhere except dead.

Originally posted by HaVoK
Ok...this coward ordered the murders of countless innocents and you think that killing this slimeball will do no good? How could you think this doesnt do any good? It rids the world of another cockroach that should have been stepped on years ago. Sure, there will be other cockroaches that scurry to take his place, and they should be dealt with just as this scumbag was. The time for pacifying terrorists should be over with. Its gets you nowhere except dead.

at the moment, it will probably just anger his supporters. the problem isn't really the terrorist organizations. in a stable society fringe hgroups with such radical views would not be supported by the people, its only in desperate times that people are motivated to such extreme actions. there are people just like him all ovr the world, it's not bad intenet that's the problem, it's the terible situation people are in that leads them to trust poeple like that. read my post on the other thread on this topic.

Originally posted by Overdose
If George Bush wants to keep the few allies he has, he needs to give them a reason for why his "war" is working on taking care of "terror". He hasn't given them a reason, because they have had attacks, so Bush's plans of fighting terror haven’t worked.

You honestly think that it's possible to completely end terrorism? It's just not going to happen - the best you can hope for is to greatly reduce it. I think your opinion that attacking Iraq was a waste of anti-terrorism resources is a perfectly reasonable one, but your opinion that continuing attacks prove that the fight against terrorism has been a failure is not. Short of having access to the top secret intelligence the government has, we just don't know. Hopefully 20 years from now we'll be able to look back and see if we were or were not successful.

I agree with Whammybar. The problem is not killing terrorists - for everyterrorist you kill, you make mad 100 people who will then become terrorists. The problem is creating a peaceful and prosperous society in which people have better options than turning to terrorism or fundamentalism to get a better life.

“You honestly think that it's possible to completely end terrorism?”

I do not think we can completely end terrorism, but attacking Iraq, is not helping end terrorism any faster. If we spent the billions on attacking these terrorist organizations, and not Iraq, we’d be much farther in our way to ending, or preventing many terrorists.


“It's just not going to happen - the best you can hope for is to greatly reduce it. I think your opinion that attacking Iraq was a waste of anti-terrorism resources is a perfectly reasonable one, but your opinion that continuing attacks prove that the fight against terrorism has been a failure is not.”

It has not been a complete failure, but these attacks in Spain, make it clear we are not doing enough to even reduce it.

We have gotten many Al’Queda leaders, and that’s a good thing. I do believe, that if we had not spent time in Iraq, we’d have more, and we’d be farther along in this “war on terrorism”.


Attacking Iraq now, was not the time or place. Attacking Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th, or the war on terrorism. Stopping a mass murder is not on the agenda to protecting our lives.

If we want to attack Iraq or give them a free government, we need more help then we have now. So the fact we are wasting time, and money, on something that isn't preventing terrorism (the thing we are fighting), is lame. The fact that we do not have the troops to maintain minimal peace, (hotel bombing’s), is lame. The fact that even though we are in this war, we do not have enough allies...to support us is lame. As are deficit will grow into the trillions, is lame.

While all of this is happening, we are pushed into this, "fear", of how we "may be next"...and our allies are getting attacked….

Hamas has sworn to destroy Israel. If that's their goal then they can hardly complain when Isreal works to destroy them.

Al Quida has sworn to destroy the US - I cannot see anybody crying when we try to destroy them - I doubt anybody would cut Bin Laden some slack if he was in a wheelchair.

Originally posted by astrapol2
The problem is not killing terrorists - for everyterrorist you kill, you make mad 100 people who will then become terrorists.

Do you really think that killing terrorists makes non-terrorists mad?

Originally posted by astrapol2
I agree with Whammybar. The problem is not killing terrorists - for everyterrorist you kill, you make mad 100 people who will then become terrorists. The problem is creating a peaceful and prosperous society in which people have better options than turning to terrorism or fundamentalism to get a better life.

so freeing iraq form the iron grip of saddam hussein doesnt count as creating a better society? this is what I mean when I say the no war in iraq crowd cant see the forest through the trees. they dont see the big picture in liberating iraq. they claim to be all upset about a dviersion away form the capture of one man named OBL. they still want to capture the idividuals responsible for 9-11. I agree that catching them and giving them justice is very important, believe me, I want to see these bastards pay dearly, but to not see the big pictue, the big impact a free and independant Iraq would ahve on the terrorist breeding ground in the middle east is very short sighted. think about it as a reverse domino effect, a free iraq leads to a free saudi arabia, and so on and so on. dictatorships do not last surrounded by democracies, think about it. dictatorships are usually clustered together. a big old democracy smack dab in the middle of the middle east will have an affect. but for it to work and take hold will take soemthing our liberal brothers seem to be lacking in, that being fortitude, perseverance, poise, moral clarity.

they dont see that by making Iraq a free country, with freedoms never before seen in the middle east, like freedom of seech, freedomof the press, that in itself is fighting future terrorists, as per astropols idea.

Originally posted by HaVoK
Ok...this coward ordered the murders of countless innocents and you think that killing this slimeball will do no good? How could you think this doesnt do any good? It rids the world of another cockroach that should have been stepped on years ago. Sure, there will be other cockroaches that scurry to take his place, and they should be dealt with just as this scumbag was. The time for pacifying terrorists should be over with. Its gets you nowhere except dead.

HaVok, this cockroach/slimeball/coward/scumbag was also the spiritual leader of Hamas, and a paraplegic confined to a wheelchair. Killing him certainly did no good because he wasn't one of the guys blowing himself up, and his death will definitely lead to other deaths on both sides. If the Israeli's had enough reason to assassinate him why didn't they take him into custody, try him, and incarcerate him? I have to disagree with your last statement. If you don't ultimately pacify the terrorists you will certainly end up dead.

Pacify terrorists? Get real. That is the worst possible solution.

pagan ,again with the arresting terrorists and trying them? its eems the events of the past couple of years have not happend in your version of reality. you still want to go around arresting and pacifying terrorists. we should be applauding israel for acting. everyone is so freaking scared of retribution. a bunch of cowardly nervous ninnys afraid to act for fear of retribution. if we based all of our actions on the possible reaction we would get nothing done in this war on terror. these arab terrorists talk a big game, but their bark is worse then their bite.

There is a difference between pacifying & arresting. I'm all for arresting.

I do agree though that - fear of the consequences always leads to weakness and exploitation by those who do not fear such things.

Terrorists cannot be pacified or appeased. They need to be arrested where possible (not so possible with the case of Hamas) and eliminated otherwise without any form of mercy or holding back.

People that train others to blow themselves up wrapped in 6 inch nails - need to be hunted down and destroyed - they are a scourge of humanity that does not want peace in any form and uses 'resistance' as a cover for their evil. They only want violence and the only way to deal with them is to give them violence. These people exist in a small % in every society - only in this situation they have a 'cause' to raise their profile from the insanely disgusting to nationalistic hero.

Peace comes at a price. It always has and it always will. It'd be nice if that wasn't true - but it is fact. We live in the real world not fairy land (no pun intended)