"Contrary to common opinion I think the Muslim Brotherhood has been quite nonviolent. I'm not counting demonstrations but actual armed resistance."
I actually agree with this to an extent, but the Muslim Brotherhood has two faces - it has a political wing, and a militant wing. Officially it's militant wing is no more, but as is always the case you can't just stop extremists being extremists overnight - even in Northern Ireland we still have IRA wannabes causing trouble, setting bombs though it's obvious the bulk of those behind the IRA have been happy to move to political means now. The vast majority of the muslim brotherhood is now political, but the remaining elements that aren't have direct links with Hamas which is the problem. That has resulted in incidents such as this for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
There have been quite a number of other incidents of Egyptian soldiers being killed by MB/Hamas militants so it's most definitely not entirely a non-violent link.
"Then after being beaten up constantly Hamas only fired rockets when being hit exceptionally hard."
That's really not true at all, have a look here at the linked through main articles that document them, many of these attacks are entirely unprovoked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Most definitely not all are unprovoked but a good few are.
"So you think Hamas should disarm in order to take away the excuse. . Ok. And let's not forget all provocations should be ignored and make sure nobody else can react to provocations as well. Also give up all hope to build up an economy because any significant economy can create sophisticated rockets in no time. And learn to do without water because Israel needs it. Actually , best just disappear."
Well it depends if Hamas really wants the moral high ground or not. Of course it doesn't have to have the moral high ground, it can continue being part the problem, but then it doesn't get to play the victim because it's part of the problem. It really can't go both ways.
There's this short sighted view that a bit of pain to gain the moral high ground is something they shouldn't have to accept, but it's self-defeating because the pain is far far worse when not gaining the moral high ground results in the kind of escalation we're seeing now. If there's going to be pain it's better to gain something from it - moral superiority.
Of course don't get me wrong, the same is true of the Israelis, if they want the moral high ground they should just let Hamas bombard their civilian areas without response, but given the rife amounts of anti-semitism I think it's less likely to get them any support - even if Israel did that they'd still be the bad guys in many people's eyes simply because many people genuinely are just outright anti-semitic.
"Nonviolence may work, but there are countermeasures for everything, and demanding nonviolence from the oppressed is ridiculous."
Why is it ridiculous? It worked for Gandhi. But regardless, I'm not demanding it at all, I really couldn't give a shit, if they want to kill each other and keep carrying out actions that get themselves killed then fine, that's their choice. I'm just saying if that is what they want then they can't also expect to occupy the moral high ground, they have to accept that they're getting exactly what they've asked for.
As I said I'm more than happy to agree that it would be nice if Israel also stopped responding to Hamas provocations just as it'd be nice if Hamas stopped responding to Israel's - I'm not saying that Hamas should be the only player that does that, simply that if Hamas wants us all to fall into line and say "Oh the poor Palestinians!" then maybe they should actually try being the poor Palestinians who don't deserve what's happening to them (which is the case for those in the West Bank for example) rather than a bunch of violent literal terrorists/terrorist supporters who are getting the exact response they've provoked.
You're absolutely right, it's not just on Hamas to stop doing this, it's on Israel too - but we're not constantly being told by the media to view Israel as the victim are we? We're always being asked to view Gazans as the victims, when they're as much the perpetrators as the Israelis.
All I'm saying is if you want to play the victim then be the victim, otherwise accept you're as much an aggressor and part the problem as the other guy and that what's happening is going to continue to happen because that's exactly what you've been asking for - and that applies to both sides.