Yeah, but compared to the economic and political instability in the region that would be a result of a civil war, the impact on Palestinian stability of siphoning-off of extreme radicals to go and deal with the infidels in Iraq is likely to be minimal.
Besides, in situations like this it makes more sense to be pessimistic and wrong than optimistic and wrong.
It's not the pessimism I have a problem with here - I myself am arguing that there is little hope for resolving palestine short of a Tsunami. Nor do I have a problem with the left wing anti-Bush anti-Iraq sarcasm in small quantities - it's funny. There is a sense of glass-half-empty here that if there was left leaning governments that erred on the side of caution you would be having glass-half-full arguments with perhaps equally distressing situations in the middle east. The situation where Saddam Hussein and his militias were financing suicide bombings in Israel - as compared to a civil war in Iraq which will rely heavily itself on suicide bombings, financed and staffed by the remaining militia and criminal networks in Iraq is what should be considered here. No one's suggesting that the civil war will be of the type say in Yugoslavia where organised conventional military units were in play on all sides. Nor is the overall civilian situation anywhere near as disastrous as say Chechnya, which is likely to spread instability rather than contain it. Even a strife torn, only nominally democratic Iraq is better for Palestine than than the non-interventionist alternative in this case.