256 Gazans killed by unlawful Israeli bombardment

[Samudera Darussalam]

It doesn't help that Gaza and West Bank are geographically separate. It makes it all too easy for different governments to take hold in either.

As I recall Israel offered to build a tunnel connecting part of the West Bank with the Gaza strip for an Arab Palestinian state, and the Palestinians turned it down. The Palestinian Arabs want all of Palestine.

*Sighs*

Let's see. If that offer comes with something similar to "let us annex those settlements that we build in your land!", of course the Palestinians won't accept that. What else would you expect?

[Greater Miami Shores]

As I recall Israel offered to build a tunnel connecting part of the West Bank with the Gaza strip for an Arab Palestinian state, and the Palestinians turned it down. The Palestinian Arabs want all of Palestine.

*Sighs*

Let's see. If that offer comes with something similar to "let us annex those settlements that we build in your land!", of course the Palestinians won't accept that. What else would you expect?

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

[Samudera Darussalam]

*Sighs*

Let's see. If that offer comes with something similar to "let us annex those settlements that we build in your land!", of course the Palestinians won't accept that. What else would you expect?

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

It would be helpful if you can provide a source that back your claim, that the Palestinians want the entirety of historical Palestine, not just a conclusion taken from Palestinian rejection of Israeli offer to connect their lands with tunnels, since the latter doesn't mean or imply what you just said.

Additionally, I'm not countering what you just claimed, since there are indeed Palestinians who want the entirety of the region to be theirs; I just said that you can phrase your argument better than just Palestinian rejection over a "tunnel".

[Wallenburg]

Do you really want to die on the napalm-soaked hill of "the US didn't do terrorism in Vietnam"?

Do you want to die on the hill of "Was Dresden/Coventry/Stalingrad/Warsaw/Leningrad/Tokyo/Hiroshima/Nagasaki terrorism"?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. You seem to underestimate the propensity for states to commit terrorist acts when it serves their geopolitical and military interests.

[Greater Cesnica]

Do you really want to die on the napalm-soaked hill of "the US didn't do terrorism in Vietnam"?

Do you want to die on the hill of "Was Dresden/Coventry/Stalingrad/Warsaw/Leningrad/Tokyo/Hiroshima/Nagasaki terrorism"?

They all were though

[Heaven Hieghts]

*Sighs*

Let's see. If that offer comes with something similar to "let us annex those settlements that we build in your land!", of course the Palestinians won't accept that. What else would you expect?

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

Some do and some don't and many are in between. Palestinians are not a monolith.

[Greater Miami Shores]

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

Some do and some don't and many are in between. Palestinians are not a monolith.

I know but I think many do, thanks for the post, one cant always say all on any issues, this is Fake News, but we don't always qualify it as such. There is no such thing as a monolith, actually I am wrong on this one, lol.

[Kowani]

You guys remember those Pro-Palestine protesters who shut down a drone factory that was selling drones to Israel’s military.
Yeahhh... they’re still there.

The people in the city of Leicester are currently barricading the gates to prevent the police removing activists from Israel’s arms factory, whilst the police prepare riot gear.

(14 minutes old)

[Novus America]

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

Some do and some don't and many are in between. Palestinians are not a monolith.

True, but some polling shows it is a high as 60% refusing to recognize the existence of Israel. Given the large number that refuse to recognize Israel, a solution is essentially impossible. There is no solution that is likely to get widespread enough support to actually implement.

There is a similar issue on the Israeli side, although the overwhelming majority of Israelis are okay with the Palestinian Arabs having Gaza, they are quite divided on what to do about the West Bank, many wanting to annex parts or all of it.

We have to acknowledge that there is no realistic chance of a comprehensive solution, given that neither side can decide exactly what it even will accept, let alone agree to accept something the other side would accept.

[Insaanistan]

So... Palestinians are currently out chanting “Oh Abbas, you traitor! We will stop on your head!”

[Insaanistan]

Some do and some don't and many are in between. Palestinians are not a monolith.

True, but some polling shows it is a high as 60% refusing to recognize the existence of Israel. Given the large number that refuse to recognize Israel, a solution is essentially impossible. There is no solution that is likely to get widespread enough support to actually implement.

There is a similar issue on the Israeli side, although the overwhelming majority of Israelis are okay with the Palestinian Arabs having Gaza, they are quite divided on what to do about the West Bank, many wanting to annex parts or all of it.

We have to acknowledge that there is no realistic chance of a comprehensive solution, given that neither side can decide exactly what it even will accept, let alone agree to accept something the other side would accept.

They care less about Gaza because it’s impoverished and almost Impossible to live in.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

So... Palestinians are currently out chanting “Oh Abbas, you traitor! We will stop on your head!”

Abbas is a crook. The man's a fucking disgrace.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

Some do and some don't and many are in between. Palestinians are not a monolith.

People don't know that though. American mainstream media has programmed people to believe Arabs are all just crazy turban wearing guys who wanna kill everybody and not actual human beings with different views and ideas.

[Novus America]

The Jews had a kingdom there historically which is why they have a claim to the land in question. The reason why their claim is legitimate is mainly because they won the war in 1948, and in 1956, 1968, and 1972. If Israel lost a war to a bad enough extent that they lose all their territory, then I'd consider their claim illegitimate.

If the Spanish kick the English out of England (for example) does that give them the right to England for ever?

I mean to some degree yes if the have controlled it for enough time.

Even in domestic real estate law there are things like the rule against perpetuities, statutes of limitation and adverse possession. At some point if you control land long enough, even if you got it unlawfully it becomes yours, because land conflicts lasting centuries or millennium are not good.

International law is far less clear and far more anarchic but works similarly in reality:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uti_possidetis

The Soviets seized and genocided East Prussia back in the 40s, and now it is acknowledged as part of Russia (and part as Poland). The Germans who once lived there are no longer there, Russia and Poland control them land, and there is no real feasible way to reverse that even if you wanted to.

Russian settlers and the Russian government now have it, and they have the weapons to defend it.

If we go back far enough pretty much every group is on land once controlled by some other group. At some point you have to accept the facts on the ground, unless you are willing to change them by warfare and genocide of your own.

Because a cycle of warfare and genocide is considered bad, eventually you have to acknowledge who controls, controls it.
Sure this creates a perverse incentive for people to place settlements, to pull Fait Acompli.

But what alternative is there?

[Novus America]

True, but some polling shows it is a high as 60% refusing to recognize the existence of Israel. Given the large number that refuse to recognize Israel, a solution is essentially impossible. There is no solution that is likely to get widespread enough support to actually implement.

There is a similar issue on the Israeli side, although the overwhelming majority of Israelis are okay with the Palestinian Arabs having Gaza, they are quite divided on what to do about the West Bank, many wanting to annex parts or all of it.

We have to acknowledge that there is no realistic chance of a comprehensive solution, given that neither side can decide exactly what it even will accept, let alone agree to accept something the other side would accept.

They care less about Gaza because it’s impoverished and almost Impossible to live in.

It was not before Hamas took over. Gaza actually did pretty well in the period between the Israeli withdrawal before Hamas. In some was Gaza is more viable than the West Bank. Because it is not land locked and there are no Israeli settlements there.

The reasons are more for historical, demographic and security purposes, Gaza does not have the same sentimental value and is far enough away it is considered less of a threat. There have even been proposals by Israelis that Gaza be expanded as compensation for Israel taking over parts of the West Bank.

Gaza would be very possible to live in, given it had good governance and a good political culture although admittedly its extreme high population density and excessively high birth rates are problematic for its long term sustainability.

[Insaanistan]

They care less about Gaza because it’s impoverished and almost Impossible to live in.

It was not before Hamas took over. Gaza actually did pretty well in the period between the Israeli withdrawal before Hamas. In some was Gaza is more viable than the West Bank. Because it is not land locked and there are no Israeli settlements there.

The reasons are more for historical, demographic and security purposes, Gaza does not have the same sentimental value and is far enough away it is considered less of a threat. There have even been proposals by Israelis that Gaza be expanded as compensation for Israel taking over parts of the West Bank.

Gaza would be very possible to live in, given it had good governance and a good political culture although admittedly its extreme high population density and excessively high birth rates are problematic for its long term sustainability.

Considering Hamas was created by Israel it still ends up being their fault.

[Novus America]

As I said the Palestinian Arabs don't want a Jewish state of Israel, they want all of Palestine, am I right or am I wrong?

It would be helpful if you can provide a source that back your claim, that the Palestinians want the entirety of historical Palestine, not just a conclusion taken from Palestinian rejection of Israeli offer to connect their lands with tunnels, since the latter doesn't mean or imply what you just said.

Additionally, I'm not countering what you just claimed, since there are indeed Palestinians who want the entirety of the region to be theirs; I just said that you can phrase your argument better than just Palestinian rejection over a "tunnel".

Fair point, but here is something: “A survey taken before the outbreak of fighting in 2014 by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that 60 percent of Palestinians say the goal of their national movement should be "to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine from the river to the sea" compared to just 27 percent who endorse the idea that they should work "to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and achieve a two state solution."”

“A 2014 Haaretz poll asking "Consider that in the framework of an agreement, most settlers are annexed to Israel, Jerusalem will be divided, refugees won't return to Israel and there will be a strict security arrangement, would you support this agreement?", only 35% of Israelis said yes.“

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

Admittedly these polls are difficult because it is very hard to capture such a complex issue in a poll, but ultimately the problem is neither side can decide amongst itself what they will accept. If the majority of people in either place were clamoring for a simple solution it would be possible to implement one but obviously that is not the case.

It is unlikely any solution would gain sufficient support to be accepted by both sides, both internally amongst their own fractured politics, let alone by the other side.

[Novus America]

It was not before Hamas took over. Gaza actually did pretty well in the period between the Israeli withdrawal before Hamas. In some was Gaza is more viable than the West Bank. Because it is not land locked and there are no Israeli settlements there.

The reasons are more for historical, demographic and security purposes, Gaza does not have the same sentimental value and is far enough away it is considered less of a threat. There have even been proposals by Israelis that Gaza be expanded as compensation for Israel taking over parts of the West Bank.

Gaza would be very possible to live in, given it had good governance and a good political culture although admittedly its extreme high population density and excessively high birth rates are problematic for its long term sustainability.

Considering Hamas was created by Israel it still ends up being their fault.

Moving the goalposts.
But of course the reality is much more complex than that. Sure some Israeli policies have increased support for Hamas, but the Muslim Brotherhood (from which Hamas is descended) was created in 1928.

This is particularly problematic as the Muslim Brotherhood is banned as a terrorist organization in many Arab states. Given Hamas is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar, Turkey and Iran, Hamas is a greater problem for many Arab states than anything Israel does.

Israeli policies have sometimes not helped, but militant Islamism is hardly something Israel alone is responsible for.

See in these type of situations it is quite often that there are multiple parties at fault.

The simple fact is though the fact the Gaza was actually doing well before the Hamas takeover indicates it actually can do well, if something can be done to eliminate Hamas as a significant political and armed force there.

Gaza could succeed, but obviously it would need radically different governance than the current Hamas regime there.

[Novus America]

So... Palestinians are currently out chanting “Oh Abbas, you traitor! We will stop on your head!”

Abbas is a crook. The man's a fucking disgrace.

Here is something I think we all can agree on. We might debate other things, but I think it is pretty indisputable Abbas is a crook far more interested in maintaining his little fiefdom than actually improving things. And it also seems quite clear Abbas does not command sufficient support amongst the people he claims to lead.

That said it is not like there is a clear alternative.

[Atheris]

Do you want to die on the hill of "Was Dresden/Coventry/Stalingrad/Warsaw/Leningrad/Tokyo/Hiroshima/Nagasaki terrorism"?

They all were though

Dresden was a legitimate and justifiable military target, the Battle of Britain (as I think that's what Coventry's referring to anyways) was a campaign of targeted terrorism alongside Stalingrad and Warsaw, Leningrad was a siege, Tokyo was a justifiable target, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki can arguably be called terrorism but overall saved more lives than they took and acted both as a threat against Japan and the USSR as well as a more obvious reason for Japan to surrender to the Allies (even if Japan surrendered because of the Soviets, but that's for another thread). Not the point of the thread, though.

So... Palestinians are currently out chanting “Oh Abbas, you traitor! We will stop on your head!”

Abbas is a crook. The man's a fucking disgrace.

Hear, hear.

[Kowani]

Considering Hamas was created by Israel it still ends up being their fault.

Moving the goalposts.
But of course the reality is much more complex than that. Sure some Israeli policies have increased support for Hamas, but the Muslim Brotherhood (from which Hamas is descended) was created in 1928.

Point of order: Israel did literally create Hamas

This isn’t a conspiracy theory. Listen to former Israeli officials such as Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, who was the Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s. Segev later told a New York Times reporter that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a “counterweight” to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who himself referred to Hamas as “a creature of Israel.”)

“The Israeli government gave me a budget,” the retired brigadier general confessed, “and the military government gives to the mosques.”

“Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades, told the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Back in the mid-1980s, Cohen even wrote an official report to his superiors warning them not to play divide-and-rule in the Occupied Territories, by backing Palestinian Islamists against Palestinian secularists. “I … suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face,” he wrote.

(there's a video in there, if you want a bit more detail)

[Novus America]

I'd like to know what the 'free Palestine', 'river to the sea' people think about that. It seems like Hamas are like the looters of BLM; tolerated and accepted but when their crimes are pointed out they're suddenly 'not a part of us, we're not a monolithic hivemind lolollol"

Everytime something of Israel comes up. You always talk about Hamas. Why dont u leave Hamas and actually talk about Israel.

Because we are talking about a conflict between Israel and Hamas. This is like saying “why to you keep talking about the Nazis when we are discussing WWII!”.

[Novus America]

Moving the goalposts.
But of course the reality is much more complex than that. Sure some Israeli policies have increased support for Hamas, but the Muslim Brotherhood (from which Hamas is descended) was created in 1928.

Point of order: Israel did literally create Hamas

This isn’t a conspiracy theory. Listen to former Israeli officials such as Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, who was the Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s. Segev later told a New York Times reporter that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a “counterweight” to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who himself referred to Hamas as “a creature of Israel.”)

“The Israeli government gave me a budget,” the retired brigadier general confessed, “and the military government gives to the mosques.”

“Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades, told the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Back in the mid-1980s, Cohen even wrote an official report to his superiors warning them not to play divide-and-rule in the Occupied Territories, by backing Palestinian Islamists against Palestinian secularists. “I … suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face,” he wrote.

(there's a video in there, if you want a bit more detail)

Well having two people put it so simply does not mean the are not grossly oversimplifying. It is not possible to form a group of that group has no popular support. The Muslim Brotherhood faction of Islamism, which less at times was supported by Israel, the US, various Arab regimes who now oppose etc as a counterweight to Nasserite Arab Nationalism, it is a broader movement in the Middle East with numerous causes, so it is more complex than that.

The reason why using the Muslim Brotherhood to counter Nasserite Arab Nationalism was possible was because Nasserite Arab Nationalism failed and lost support in the first place. And there were plenty of people who sympathized with it prior. Again Hamas is part of a movement going back to 1928, before Israel existed.

But certainly Israel does share a major portion the blame in the missteps that led up to this point.

At this point though the question is what are we going to to about it? Israel helped create Hamas sure, but now we need to figure out how to get rid of Hamas.

When you create a mobster, it was a bad idea to create the monster, but you still have to figure out how to destroy it.
Which nobody is really interested in actually doing themselves. A lot of people would like to see Hamas gone, but the are not willing to do what would be necessary to remove and replace it.

[Novus America]

Actually it was all political.
The US politicians were unable to do what was needed to win although they could have. And by extension the people who elected them. We could have won, if we wanted to pay the costs needed to win.

The same issue is here in Israel. Israel has the military, demographic and economic power to take over Gaza and create a replacement government for it. But its voters and politicians are not willing to pay the required human, political, economic and diplomatic cost.

In both cases Israel and the US could afford a victory, but just because you can afford something does not mean you are willing to pay it.

A simple but apt analogy. You lose the war when you are unable or unwilling to pay the costs (not just monetary but human and political) required to continue it.

If you only have $100 to spend, and I offer you something for $50 you can afford it, but that does not mean you want to buy it.
But if I offer you something for $200 it does not matter if you want it or not.

But in the case of the US in Vietnam or Israel with Gaza it is the former. Not the latter.

There are other reasons for why they pulled out of gaza,
it's impossibly difficult to build jewish settlement on one of the densest places in the world.
Civil unrest
israeli soldiers were easy targets for hamas sniper fire,
the cost of occupation was iincredibly high and it was unsustainable

Well that is really saying the same thing. They did not feel the costs were worth it.
Those all go into the political cost.

And it is not like Israeli casualties were such that they significantly impacted Israel’s demographic or the monetary cost was greater than what their economic could produce. They had the money, weapons and manpower, what was lacking was political will.

And they are not willing to pay the costs to go back in and remove Hamas, as well as build a viable alternative.

[Samudera Darussalam]

It would be helpful if you can provide a source that back your claim, that the Palestinians want the entirety of historical Palestine, not just a conclusion taken from Palestinian rejection of Israeli offer to connect their lands with tunnels, since the latter doesn't mean or imply what you just said.

Additionally, I'm not countering what you just claimed, since there are indeed Palestinians who want the entirety of the region to be theirs; I just said that you can phrase your argument better than just Palestinian rejection over a "tunnel".

Fair point, but here is something: “A survey taken before the outbreak of fighting in 2014 by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that 60 percent of Palestinians say the goal of their national movement should be "to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine from the river to the sea" compared to just 27 percent who endorse the idea that they should work "to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and achieve a two state solution."”

“A 2014 Haaretz poll asking "Consider that in the framework of an agreement, most settlers are annexed to Israel, Jerusalem will be divided, refugees won't return to Israel and there will be a strict security arrangement, would you support this agreement?", only 35% of Israelis said yes.“

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

Admittedly these polls are difficult because it is very hard to capture such a complex issue in a poll, but ultimately the problem is neither side can decide amongst itself what they will accept. If the majority of people in either place were clamoring for a simple solution it would be possible to implement one but obviously that is not the case.

It is unlikely any solution would gain sufficient support to be accepted by both sides, both internally amongst their own fractured politics, let alone by the other side.

Agreed. I've read something like that before. An article that I read last night states:

For years, hardliners on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often including officials, have sought to erase or at least to blur the Green Line — the line that separated Israel from Jordan and Egypt before June 4, 1967, which is also the line that delineated Israel’s post-1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Officials erase the line from government and textbook maps, and activists wield slogans like “from the river to the sea,” or “no settlement is illegal.”
Source

Of course, whenever politics is involved, it got complicated. Recent events and incidents just....makes it even more complicated, even within Israel itself. I can't see the relationship between the Jewish majority and Israeli numerous citizens of Palestinian Arab ancestry makes a recovery, at least in a short time.