See how the Arabs treat each other. Bloody savages.
Yes, this is the main motivation why Israel created Hamas.
Fatah was the hegemonic power in Palestine in the 1980s. Hamas was
created by Israel as a rival for Fatah.
Use Palestinians to kill Palestinians.
This is the strategy of "sitting on top of the mountain to watch
the tigers fight".
Later on, more radical elements took over and Israel thus lost
control of Hamas.
The Nazis were also supported by Britain to counter the
Bolsheviks.
Later, the british lost control of Hitler as well and got involved
in a war with him, resulting in WWII.
Question: Some
people do not realize yet that the Soviet-German non-aggression
treaty is the result of the breakdown of the Anglo-French-Soviet
talks, but think that the Soviet-German treaty caused the
breakdown. Will you please explain why the Anglo-French-Soviet
talks failed?
Mao Zedong: The talks failed purely because the
British and French governments were insincere. In recent years the
reactionary international bourgeoisie, and primarily that of
Britain and France, have consistently pursued the reactionary
policy of " non-intervention " towards aggression by fascist
Germany, Italy and Japan.
Their purpose is to connive at wars of aggression and to profit by
them. Thus Britain and France flatly rejected the Soviet Union's
repeated proposals for a genuine front against aggression; standing
on the side-lines, they took a "non-interventionist" position and
connived at German, Italian and Japanese aggression.
Their aim was to step forward and intervene when the belligerents
had worn each other out. In pursuit of this reactionary policy they
sacrificed half of China to Japan, and the whole of Abyssinia,
Spain, Austria and Czechoslovakia to Italy and Germany.
Then they wanted to sacrifice the Soviet Union.
This plot was clearly revealed in the recent Anglo-French-Soviet
talks.
They lasted for more than four months, from April 15 to August 23,
during which the Soviet Union exercised the utmost patience. But,
from start to finish, Britain and France rejected the principle of
equality and reciprocity; they demanded that the Soviet Union
provide safeguards for their security, but refused to do likewise
for the Soviet Union and the small Baltic states, so as to leave a
gap through which Germany could attack, and they also refused to
allow the passage of Soviet troops through Poland to fight the
aggressor. That is why the talks broke down.
In the meantime, Germany indicated her willingness to stop her
activities against the Soviet Union and abandon the so-called
Agreement Against the Communist International and recognized the
inviolability of the Soviet frontiers; hence the conclusion of the
Soviet-German non-aggression treaty.
The policy of " non-intervention " pursued by international and
primarily Anglo-French reaction is a policy of "sitting on top of
the mountain to watch the tigers fight", a downright imperialist
policy of profiting at others' expense.
This policy was initiated when Chamberlain took office, reached its
climax in the Munich agreement of September last year and finally
collapsed in the recent Anglo-French-Soviet talks.
From now on the situation will inevitably develop into one of
direct conflict between the two big imperialist blocs, the
Anglo-French bloc and the German-Italian bloc.
As I said in October 1938 at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth
Central Committee of our Party, "The inevitable result of
Chamberlain's policy will be like 'lifting a rock only to drop it
on one's own toes'." Chamberlain started with the aim of injuring
others only to end up by ruining himself. This is the law
of development which governs all reactionary
policies...
http://marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-2/mswv2_17.htm
...In order to carry out
this plan of allowing Germany to drive eastward against Russia, it
was necessary to do three things:
(1) to liquidate all the countries standing between Germany and
Russia;
(2) to prevent France from honoring her alliances with these
countries; and
(3) to hoodwink the English people into accepting this as a
necessary, indeed, the only solution to the international
problem.
The Chamberlain group were so successful in all three of these
things that they came within an ace of succeeding, and failed only
because of the obstinacy of the Poles, the unseemly haste of
Hitler, and the fact that at the eleventh hour the Milner Group
realized the implications of their policy and tried to reverse
it...
...If, by means of another Munich, he could have obtained a
German-Polish settlement that would satisfy Germany and avoid war,
he would have taken it.
It was the hope of such an agreement that prevented him from making
any real agreement with Russia, for it was, apparently, the
expectation of the British government that if the Germans could get
the Polish Corridor by negotiation, they could then drive into
Russia across the Baltic States.
For this reason, in the negotiations with Russia, Halifax refused
any multilateral pact against aggression, any guarantee of the
Baltic States, or any tripartite guarantee of
Poland...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement_of_Hitler
