Issues with counter terrorism

I mentioned in my last blog how someone at Craig's internship suggested that Israel was supporting Syria so that they can have Hezbollah as a source of fear to keep the population in line.  As I stated, I certainly don't think this is the case.  At work we deal with Hezbollah and Hamas quite a bit and I don't think that there is any way, shape or form that they could take to make Israel want to work with them.  Originally, Fatah was also a terrorist organization as was the PLO, but both have since renounced violence and are trying to work with the Israelis.  Now I think that we will begin to see Hamas do the same.  Hezbollah will always be a guerrilla movement until they take control of Lebanon.  Beyond that, I think we can hope for greed and political pressure to mollify them a little.  As we have seen in the past, even religious fanatics are susceptible to the draw of money.  The Ayatollahs in Iran talk about spreading Islam and condemning Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians, but they just do it to keep their position within the government and the country.  I think the government in general wants to establish itself as the hegemonic power in the region and this is why they constantly condemn Israel, to get the Arab world on their side or to at least identify with them.  Does Iran really give a shit about Israel or the Palestinians?  I think not.  Hezbollah and their support for them is just a way to put a thorn in the side of it's enemies (the US and, by proxy, Israel). The Ayatollahs are all rich old men who make their living by controlling the vast tracks of land that have been bequithed to them over the generations and they don't want to risk losing that.  They also, of course, want more.  I think the same will be true of Hamas and Hezbollah.  The leaders of Fatah are known for corruption and are not opposed to working with Israel so long as it maintains the status quo. As Hamas moves into the picture, they will take a greater stake in the monetary aspects of running the country and they will molify their beliefs if they think that it will perpetuate their economic well being.  The same can be said for Hezbollah.  When it comes right down to it, I think both of these organizations are rational actors.  True, Hamas supports suicide terrorism and Hezbollah likes to fire rockets at Israelis, but we have seen that they are also victims of their own terror.  The leader of Hezbollah has come out and said that if he had known that Israel was going to invade in 2008 following the kidnapping of the IDF soldiers, he never would have ordered it.  The war cost Hezbollah and the Southern Lebanese people billions of dollars in damages to infrastructure and thousands of lives.  They can respect the cost benefit ratio of these actions and, so long as they don't underestimate the response, they will come out ahead.  If the retaliation is greater than the initial attack, they won't be willing to perpetuate further attacks.  Instead, diplomacy is the more effective tactic.  They can still keep the support of the people and enrich themselves by playing ball internationally.  Honestly, if they were willing to renounce violence and form a political party (this would entail changing their charter and recognizing the State of Israel) I have a feeling that the US would gladly give them economic aid in return for it.  It's like Iran.  There has been talk of basically buying the Iranian nuclear program.  Would the US cut a check to Iran for X many billions of dollars for them to give it up, allow inspectors, and have all their highly enriched uranium shipped to a facility outside teh country?  I think we absolutely would.  It's way cheaper than military action in terms of blood, treasure, and the effect it would have the economies of the region and, therefore, the rest of the world.  The biggest problem, like the rest of the conflict, is getting from point A to point B.  The negotiations and the political capital that must be expended to do so.