The Snake Always Bites: A Historical Pattern of Betrayal

When Hope Becomes Folly

Imagine extending your hand to a venomous snake, hoping this time it won't bite.

Despite its history of strikes, you believe in change.

But as always, the snake bites because that's its nature. This is the folly of trusting Hamas.

For decades, Hamas has promised peace, such as their call for a ceasefire a few days ago, only to break it with bloodshed. And yet, the world returns to the table, hopeful and naïve. But Hamas's behavior is not a mystery. It is a replay of historical patterns, a grim echo of other insurgencies and terrorist groups that used diplomacy as camouflage for violence.

Tripoli’s Treachery: The Barbary Pirates’ Betrayals

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, American merchant ships sailing the Mediterranean were routinely attacked by pirates from the Barbary States, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, and Morocco.

These states demanded exorbitant tributes in exchange for safe passage. Presidents George Washington and John Adams paid these ransoms, believing appeasement might bring stability.

But the payments only emboldened the pirates.

Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801 and broke with this precedent. When the Pasha of Tripoli demanded an increased tribute, Jefferson sent a naval squadron instead.

Thus began the First Barbary War. The conflict ended in 1805 with a modest American victory and a treaty, but piracy resumed soon after. It wasn't until after the War of 1812, during the Second Barbary War under President Madison, that decisive U.S. naval victories finally ended the Barbary threat.

The lesson was clear: some enemies use treaties as tactical pauses, not paths to peace.

Hamas, like the Barbary pirates, interprets negotiation not as a gesture of mutual respect but as a temporary truce to gain the upper hand.

False Peace in the Jungle: FARC’s Bloody Negotiations

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) emerged in the 1960s as a Marxist-Leninist insurgency. Over time, they evolved into a narco-terrorist group, enriching themselves through kidnapping, extortion, and cocaine trafficking.

By the 1990s, they controlled vast rural areas and used violence as a bargaining chip against the Colombian state.

Peace talks began in the late '90s under President Andrés Pastrana, who even ceded a demilitarized zone the size of Switzerland for negotiations.

FARC abused this safe haven, using it to regroup, train fighters, and launch fresh attacks.

Public outrage over FARC's duplicity helped shift Colombian politics and ushered in President Álvaro Uribe, who led an aggressive military campaign that crippled FARC.

Eventually, under President Juan Manuel Santos, a controversial peace accord was signed in 2016. While some praised it, others condemned it for being too lenient. Dissident factions immediately broke away and resumed violence. The peace that was promised became fragmented, mirroring how Hamas exploits ceasefires to rearm while speaking of reconciliation.

The Long Lie: The Taliban’s Strategy of Delay

The Taliban rose from the chaos of post-Soviet Afghanistan in the 1990s, presenting themselves as restorers of order. Their regime, marked by brutality and repression, was overthrown by U.S.-led forces in 2001 following the 9/11 attacks.

In 2020, the U.S., under the Trump administration, signed a deal with the Taliban in Doha, promising a phased withdrawal of American troops in exchange for Taliban commitments to curb violence and cut ties with terrorist groups like al-Qaeda.

Predictably, the Taliban used the agreement not to broker peace but to bide time. They intensified attacks on Afghan forces, undermined the central government, and prepared for the vacuum American troops would leave.

By August 2021, the Taliban swiftly overran Afghanistan. Their duplicity became painfully obvious, especially to the Afghan people left behind.

Like Hamas, they signed agreements they had no intention of honoring. Their goal wasn't peace. It was total control.

A Holiday Massacre: The Viet Cong’s Tet Offensive

The Vietnam War was filled with false hopes of a ceasefire and peace. The most infamous betrayal came during the Tet Offensive in January 1968. A nationwide truce had been called for Tết, the Vietnamese lunar new year. The U.S. and South Vietnamese forces, taking the agreement seriously, scaled down operations.

The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces, however, used the lull to launch a surprise offensive, striking over 100 cities and military bases across South Vietnam. Though eventually repelled, the offensive shocked the American public and eroded confidence in the war effort.

The betrayal was not just military; it was psychological. It exposed how enemy forces viewed truces not as moments of peace but as strategies for ambush.

Hamas, too, uses ceasefires as camouflage. Just as the Viet Cong launched Tet under the cover of a truce, Hamas prepared the October 7 attacks during a supposed easing of hostilities. It wasn’t a coincidence. It was a calculation.

Ireland’s Struggle: Ceasefires as Strategy for the IRA

The Irish Republican Army (IRA), particularly its Provisional wing, waged a guerrilla campaign from the late 1960s through the 1990s against British rule in Northern Ireland. Their goal: a unified Ireland. Their methods were bombings, assassinations, and attacks on security forces.

Throughout the conflict, the IRA periodically declared ceasefires, often to appease public pressure or to reposition themselves politically and militarily. The 1975 ceasefire is a prime example. Though publicly claiming a halt to violence, the IRA continued secret attacks and used the breathing room to stockpile weapons and strengthen networks. Trust was shattered.

In time, political solutions emerged through the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, but only after decades of deceit and destruction. Hamas mirrors this behavior but with even less regard for civilian life. Where the IRA at least engaged in parallel political negotiations through Sinn Féin, Hamas hides behind the civilian population, then weeps to the world press when those civilians are harmed.

The Familiar Script: A Pattern Written in Blood

From the Barbary coast to the Colombian jungles, from Afghanistan to Vietnam to Gaza, the pattern holds:

Extend a hand.
Shake with a smile.
Use the time to rearm.
Strike from the shadows.
Claim victimhood.
Repeat.

These groups don’t see negotiations as a compromise. They see them as countdowns to the next assault.

The Mask Is Off: There Is No Gray Area

Some situations demand nuance. This isn’t one of them. Hamas is not a representative body seeking justice. It is a cult of death whose charter calls for the eradication of Jews and the destruction of Israel. It educates children with hate, hides weapons in hospitals, and films atrocities as propaganda.

Ceasefires are used not to pause war but to prepare for more of it. History proves this. Even so, world leaders beg Israel to return to talks with a serpent that has bitten every hand ever extended.

The Snake Always Bites, Time and Again

History teaches us that extending trust to those who have consistently betrayed it is not diplomacy; it’s denial. Just as one wouldn’t expect a scorpion to change its nature, we recognize some entities are inherently untrustworthy. The pattern is clear: the snake always bites.

And Israel, tired of bleeding, is finally stepping away from the table. The question now is whether the rest of the world will learn from history’s painful lessons or remain caught in a loop of self-inflicted wounds.

They called Trump a dictator for building peace through strength. Now they cheer for censorship, open borders, and weaponized agencies.

Help PJ Media continue to shine a light on the truth. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT for 60% off today.