Israel comes under heavy rocket fire from Gaza, suspected terror infiltration

No, that agreement did not involve Palestine in ANY WAY.

And, your site confirms that.

Not only did the agreement not include Palestine, but there is no evidence that the agreement had any impact on Palestine.

 

The recent terrorist attack came well after Netanyahu stuck a fork in the unity government of Abbas.

Try to keep up.

 

It becomes our problem if and only if Hamas were to to do any of those things. Which is highly unlikely.

Firstly Hamas was founded in 1987 with a focus on militant activities including acts of terrorism inside Israel and the occupied territories. No-where else. This has been a deliberate policy choice by Hamas' leadership from the onset precisely to avoid dragging western nations directly into the conflict (or in the case of the US giving it another excuse to become involved). So far that policy has worked very well for them. And they know it.

Given the above expanding the range of operations to include western targets would be entirely counterproductive. Not only would such action incite those nations to undertake military action against it in co-operation with Israel it would also incite retaliation against Hamas main backers Iran and (importantly) Qatar. In Iran's case that backing comes mainly in the form of military aid but Qatar's support is equally if not more important because over the years it has provided billions in financial aid to keep the essential services in the Gaza strip running.

Iran? It has been on a knife edge in terms of potential military action by the US for decades and that's where it wants to stay - on the edge. The regimes own survival is at risk now. If Hamas were to start attacking western targets there would be retaliation against and the regime would would quite likely fall. The Ayatollahs know this. Qatar? It would face pressure to either curb its support (and the Gaza will need it more than ever after this latest found of fighting finishes) or face crippling financial sanctions and other reprisals itself.

Finally and most obviously terrorist attacks by Hamas on western targets or western civilians in the middle east would undermine support for Hamas in the west. For all the reasons stated above Israel would love Hamas to start doing what you have suggested. Hamas also knows this as well.

If Hamas were to go down that path? Fine, then and only then does it become 'my problem'. But until such time as it does your argument amounts to little more than speculation about what Hamas might do, framed in such a way as to 'push' people towards the idea of supporting Israel in this conflict. You could just as easily propose an argument for supporting Hamas now based on what Israel 'might' do at some time in the future.

So no. Still not my problem. And to the extent there are people on both sides of the divide who are totally committed to nothing less than the complete destruction of the opposition without thought of compromise & regardless of the suffering it cause to innocent civilians? As I have said before they. deserve each other. Call me when there's broad support on both sides for lasting solution. I won't hold my breath waiting.

 

I like that you see it as important to identify the goals of Hamas. Not sure of completeness, but this is a very important move.

I think the Israel-Palestine war IS in part our problem, as we have consistently protected Israel's humanitarian atrocities in West bank and support Israel with the weapons and money to do that. Plus, we support Israel maintaining Gaza as an open air prison, not even allowing them to fish their waters for desperately needed food. Their actions with Gaza meet the definition of war starting decades ago - a constant war from which Gaza has no way out.

Plus, we block all movement by the UN, and its agencies, as the US exercises our veto to give Israel cover.

We can't deny our decades long involvement. That involvement DOES affect our relations throughout the wider region.

 

Agreed we we can't. But then neither can everyone else including the very same middle eastern nations your worried about above. About the only one of them who has been 'proactive' in trying to resolve the Israel Palestine dispute these past few decades is Iran! And you can't exactly describe their attempts to 'intervene' as constructive, can you?

The irony of this whole situation is that Hamas has derailed probably the best chance of forcing Israel to the negotiating table, assuming it was willing to negotiate itself (which is doubtful) was the Abraham Accords whihc have drawn Arab leaders into recognizing the Israeli State and entering diplomatic relations with it. This in turn would have put enormous pressure on Israel when combined with pressure from Western Nations to negotiate a permanent fair and lasting peace. Now?

Fat chance of that! The only 'winners' in deconstructing that process are the zealots on both sides. i.e radical Palestinian and Israeli nationalists - the very groups opposed to a negotiated settlement to begin with. And of course Iran which would have ended up even more isolated than it is in the region already if the accords had worked out.

Now? We're probably looking at at least a decade before the accords or a similar process could be re-initiated. By which time there won't be much land left in Palestine that hasn't been annexed by Israel so negotiating a realistic settlement will be even more difficult. And so we circle back to 'not my circus, not my monkeys'. At this point there is no solution and the best option for most small to middling powers? Stay out of it.

Oh, and as far as the Israeli atrocities in Gaza go? Hamas bares equal responsibility. They're the ones who have deliberately using the local civilian population as meat shields. As a defensive strategy, given the military power imbalance it makes sense but it also means that having decided to launch a large scale attack on Israel, a state they deny even has the right to exist they can hardly escape blame for the inevitable Israeli retaliation. For that matter ask yourself if Hamas had launched an attack of that severity on any other nation in the world. How many would have refused to take retaliatory action because of the threat of civilian casualties? Be honest. They might not have attacked with the severity or determination of the Israeli's but I can't see any modern nation state failing to take some form of military retaliation the pressure form their own population woudl be too severe to ignore.

So while I don't like Israel's response and I don't support it I also understand it's inevitability given the history of the parties concerned. The monkeys have well and truly escaped their cages and are running riot.

 

At that time, Olmert was not prosecuted for anything. That came later.

Amazing how can anyone believe the story of the disappearing map, As if the PA doesn't have detailed maps of Jerusalem, and all of Israel. As if Abbas couldn't tell Olmert then that he can't sign without the map. Fact is that the PA never even responded to the proposal. Complete and utter silence.

Only the big group of settlements near Jerusalem would have become part of Israel, according to the plan, hence the land swap proposal. All the other settlements would've been dismantled.

I remember the outrage here back then. Abbas' complete lack of reaction was seen as the death blow to the two state solution, proof that the PA wasn't really interested in two states. Nor were Israeli Arabs living in the areas included in the proposed swap, and East Jerusalem Arabs, interested in living in a Palestinian state.

 

You're confused.
The agreement was conditioned on Israel withdrawing from all occupied territories in Palestine.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/mar/28/israel7

"Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah Bin Abdullaziz, the crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in which his highness presented his initiative, calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land for peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel."

 

I ask you again: how did Netanyahu sabotage the PA and Hamas unity government following the Mecca Agreement?

Judging by your posts, Netanyahu has been prime minister of Israel since king David.

 

2 hr ago
German-Israeli woman kidnapped at music festival has been found dead, Israel's foreign ministry says

From CNN's Anna Chernova


Shani Louk Shani Louk/Instagram

Shani Louk, a German-Israeli woman kidnapped by Hamas gunmen during the October 7 attack and taken to Gaza, has been found dead, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said.

“We are devastated to share that the body of 23 year old German-Israeli Shani (Louk) was found and identified,” the ministry posted on X, formerly Twitter, on Monday.

Louk was at the Nova music festival in southern Israel on October 7 when Hamas breached the border between Gaza and Israel. They blocked off the road to the festival from the north and the south, before swarming the sprawling site on foot, videos showed. The militants then encircled the crowds on three sides, gunning them down and forcing them to flee over fields to the east.

More than 260 bodies were found at the Nova festival site itself, according to Israeli rescue service Zaka but, based on CNN's analysis, the total death toll could be even higher.

Louk was kidnapped at the festival and “tortured and paraded around Gaza by Hamas terrorists,” the foreign ministry statement said, adding that she “experienced unfathomable horrors.”

“May her memory be a blessing,” the statement said.​

Live updates: https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news-10-30-23/index.html

This is the poor young woman who was seen in the back of a pickup with her knees bent sideways.

 

Gaza supporters will say it was a terrible but noble sacrifice, in the name of liberating Palestine.

 

I'm not arguing whether any of those specifics are true or not, and if so, what overall impact they had on the conflict.

My interest is in what moves we need to make with the board we have been handed as a result of the cumulative moves, over decades, of all of the players in this chess match.

The world needs to look through the eyes of both ordinary Israelis, and ordinary Palestinians.

Imo, the world (the UN) must acknowledge Israel's mandate to disarm Hamas, and kill/capture the specific Hamas perpetrators of the attack. Israel needs assurances from the international community that these very specific goals are acknowledged as legitimate.

Not the destruction of Hamas. It is an ideology that cannot be destroyed (with military force alone), and this wording only exacerbates the conflict into a cross vs crescent issue which no rational person wants. Israel should be specific in its military objectives: disarmament. This is possible. The tunnel systems can be largely destroyed. The rocket facilities can be destroyed. Most heavy machine guns can be confiscated. Will future believers in Hamas ideology be able to bury or hide a few guns, sure, but a general disarmament is possible.

The world must give Israel the respect it deserves in acknowledging such a narrow mandate. This should have been the first UN resolution after the attack.

Then, the UN can start passing resolutions to protect innocent Palestinians, and to calm the Israeli vengeful feelings, that any country would be experiencing after such an attack. And if calming isn't enough, we can put maximum pressure on Israel on how, and over what time frame the disarmament occurs. And the UN can exert maximum pressure on Israel to help the UN provide aid to innocent Palestinians in parallel with the disarmament mission. Likewise, maximum pressure on Israel to commit to a plan to allow Palestinians full rights (whether 2 state, or 1 federal state I'm not sure), and concrete steps that allow for an immediate improvement in their condition after disarmament. But again, discussions on this must occur in parallel with the disarmament operation.

But the UN must acknowledge a narrow mandate for Israel to respond first. I know rational people must see this.

 

??

They didn't get maps that Olmert proposed as a final solution.

That doesn't have anything to do with all the maps of Israel, Palestine and the illegal settlements as they were at that time.

What sort of reaction should Abbas have had to demands that he sign a deal on borders that he couldn't even have?

How did Olmert expect Abbas to sell that to the Palestinian people?

 

He increased restrictions on Gaza, refused to release taxes that Israel collects in the name of Palestine, he refused to allow official travel between West Bank and Gaza - I've mentioned these and others.

I don't feel responsible for citing information like this over and over again when you can verify.

 

Gaza supporters will point out none of the events of October 7th would have happened absent the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine.

https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/SCRes242(1967).pdf

 

First, it isn't cross vs. anything. Israel is not Christian. In fact, they've worked to make Christians second class citizens.

Israel's mandate is NOWHERE NEAR the idea of disarmament. They have been waging war on Gaza for decades. They have been bulldozing Palestinian homes and orchards in West Bank and have carved out a major percent of West Bank that has either been stolen from Palestinians or is ruled by Israeli military law (not even civilian law) in which Palestinians have zero representation. American held our revolution over lack of representation.

The US has been regularly vetoing UN actions related to Israel. You can NOT suggest that the UN can do stuff when the US prevents it.

Also, remember back when GWBush tried to push his "roadmap to peace" Israel DEMANDED to continue enlarging their settlements, stealing land from Palestine, DURING negotiations. That is proof that Israel had absolutely NO intent to bargain in good faith.

For one of numerous examples, on the 19 of this month the US vetoed a UN resolution that called for a humanitarian pause and for aid corridors to Gaza.

The day before that, the US vetoed a UN resolution that would have condemned actions against civilians in Gaza.

But, these vetoes have been uniformly protective of whatever Israel does and have been executed over recent decades.

 

It's not even an opinion but a fact. Israel got a massive and active policy of colonizing Palestine. It's a war crime, and it's done by a hell of a lot of violence by Israel and it's Jewish civilians who armed to the teeth terrorize and murder around. Most of the time the Israeli army just watches how Jewish citizens murder around, and help out if Palestinians lift a finger. This eventually lead to the 1st intifada. And during that period, people organized themselves into Hamas.

Do note. The leader of Hamas is from Gaza. He is from Gaza because Israel ethnically cleansed his parents and deported them there. Israel than not only destroyed their house but the wiped the entire town of the map to erase the Arab cultural presence, for the sake to build a Jewish city on top of the ruins. These are war crimes. And subsequently you can even say if Israel did not commit these war crimes, there would not only be no Hamas, it's leader probably would be just be a reasonable happy farmer.... because he would not have any reason to have so much hate.

 

Osama bin Laden grew up in a wealthy aristocratic family. He still became a terrorist, due to his religious teachings probably.

 

WHY Z-PEOPLE HATE ISRAEL?

 

whataboutism, for the sake to deflect away that you can not deny that Israel committed war crimes and Hamas is it's reaction and that even the leader of Hamas is a victim of those war crimes Israel committed.

 

What is a "Gaza supporter? That seems to be an invented term. Secondly, on what basis, do you presume to speak for these people? Are there similar statements, to which you can point, coming from "Gaza supporters?"

Your sentiments are hard to read, because you bounce back & forth, between "Israel should offer Hamas a cease fire," to talking about Gaza supporters seeing dead hostages, as worth it, and "noble sacrifice," in pursuit of the cause of "liberating Palestine." It seems not accidental, that you would go through the dis-clarifying trouble of saying "Gaza supporters," instead of Hamas; therefore I assume that it was not to Hamas, whom you'd intended to attribute your fictional quote. In your own "cease fire" OP, would you qualify as a "Gaza supporter?"

To put a final twist in the Gordian knot of your post-- while I assume you are using the more modern idea of "Palestine," as being Gaza and the West Bank-- because of the nature of the rest of your quote, your reference to liberating "Palestine," sounds akin to the language of Isis (who'd used "the Levant," in their own talking points, I believe). Just FYI, "Palestine" can also refer to a much larger area, including that of Israel-- from the Mediterranean in the west, to the Jordan River in the east, and from Lebanon's border with Israel in the north, to the full extension of the Negev desert, in the south.

 

How can anyone believe the story of the disappearing map? It's obviously just a lame excuse.

Maps are drawn during negotiations. Abbas didn't even respond to the proposal.

 

Netanyahu wasn't prime minister at the time. He became prime minister two years later. Olmert was prime minister in 2007. This is also information you could easily verify.

I don't like Bibi, but he's not the fanged blood dripping demon you love to hate.

Of course Israel didn't want a unity government with Hamas. What country would support giving political power to an organization bent on destroying said country?

 

Max Blumenthal has found a source in the Israeli press alleging some of the worst atrocities attributed to Hamas on October 7th were actually perpetrated by the IDF on its own civilian population:

https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/27/israels-military-shelled-burning-tanks-helicopters/

"Israel’s military received orders to shell Israeli homes and even their own bases as they were overwhelmed by Hamas militants on October 7. How many Israeli citizens said to have been “burned alive” were actually killed by friendly fire?..."

"Yet the mounting evidence of friendly fire orders handed down by Israeli army commanders strongly suggests that at least some of the most jarring images of charred Israeli corpses, Israeli homes reduced to rubble and burned out hulks of vehicles presented to Western media were, in fact, the handiwork of tank crews and helicopter pilots blanketing Israeli territory with shells, cannon fire and Hellfire missiles.

"Indeed, it appears that on October 7, Israel’s military resorted to the same tactics it has employed against civilians in Gaza, driving up the death toll of its own citizens with the indiscriminate use of heavy weapons.

 

How could he respond to a map he didn't have?

 

He's made war on Palestine throughout the period of being prime minister - just like he said he would.

Abbas designed a unity government with Gaza, which admitted no members of Hamas.

Abbas sees Hamas a threat to peace just like everyone else does.

Netanyahu has blocked any opportunity to dislodge Hamas through the work of Abbas, whose unity government required commitment to nonviolence and negotiation only.