Say what, now? Maybe IOF ground forces who snipe at grannies and babies do. That’s not the kind of ground force response that’s being preferred.
Interesting how you’re fine collectively blaming Israelis for the settlers but you get so specific in your blame when it comes to anyone else.
Who stole what from who now?
Hamas is a legitimate target.
I don’t, I blame the settlers and the (many, successive) Israeli government for the settlers. Whole lot of Israelis protest the settlements, though - I certainly don’t blame them.
Are the settlements built on land Israel newly created from vacuum, somehow?
The 5 yo kid living in the same building as the Hamas guy is not.
The settlements are built on land Israel took from Jordan after Jordan tried to wipe Israel out and got its ass kicked in 1967. If that’s “theft” to you, you can call it that, but I am certainly not gonna shed a tear for a theft ‘victim’ for land lost in an attempt to commit genocide.
Practically, I think the settlements should be given up so Palestine can form as an independent country. But it’s hardly some moral imperative (to give up the land itself; Palestinian self determination is a moral imperative and hence the settlements need to be given up). Jordan lost that land in a war of aggression.
Unfortunately, Israel doesn’t have magical bombs that can kill the Hamasnik without hurting anyone else.
…which Jordan took from Palestinians. Just because Israel stole from a thief doesn’t legitimize Israel holding on to it.
It’s theft to me and to the UN and the ICJ.
Which is why its bombings are wrong.
Snerk.
Say what?
In 1947 the Palestinians decided to reject the partition plan. Instead they turned to Jordan, Egypt, and other countries and asked them to invade and evict the Jews. The plan was never to create an independent Palestine, though. If Israel was defeated in the War of Independence, the land would have just become part of Jordan, or even a larger Greater Syria under the king of Jordan.
In what way was the land “stolen”? They willingly joined up with the invaders.
Yes, you’ve established that the only course of action you’d consider proper is Israel bending over and taking it. Cool story bro.
How many times were you dropped on your head as a baby? I’m still not claiming that Israel has no choice. Israel can choose to let Hamas freely shoot into Israel so long as they can find a kid to hide behind. That’s clearly the world you and MrDibble would prefer.
So Israel makes the choice that, in the long term, creates more terrorists and puts Israel’s future more at risk. But at least Netanyahu and Trump’s political futures are looking brighter!
No, letting Hamas attack Israel unopposed is what puts Israel at risk.
There’s more evidence in this thread you have no problem with dead Palestinian children than that statement.
International law didn’t consider it a legal annexation. That’s theft.
Well, no, the plan was to divvy up various bits of Mandatory Palestine. But the Arab League definitely didn’t go along with Jordan’s action, either. It was Israel that let Jordan keep the WB in the Armstice, though. And not all Palestinians were happy with the situation - just ask Abdullah I…
It wasn’t part of Jordan, then Jordan took it over, and then it was. Yes, many Palestinians went along with it, especially the leadership. But there were always Palestinians in the WB who did not want to be Jordanian, and wanted an independent Palestine. They certainly thought it was stolen enough in 1951.
Nice strawman you’ve built there., Let’s see if it has any cites for its bullshit.
.
Once again, tactics not strategy. Israel has no chance of a peaceful and secure future if it’s only reactive and has no long term strategy.
I think you are saying Israel has no chance of a peaceful and secure future unless it develops a long term strategy that does not involve bombing civilians (including children). You say that if Israel bombs civilians, there will be more terrorists; if there are more terrorists, Israel has no chance of a peaceful and secure future.
I think Babale is saying Israel has no chance of a peaceful and secure future unless it does bomb civilians (including children). Babale says if existing terrorists are allowed to live, Israel has no chance of a peaceful and secure future; Israel can only attack existing terrorists by bombing civilians.
I do not see where either of you actually contradict each other in this line of argument…
The unwritten assumption is Israel has a chance of a peaceful and successful future in the first place, which I would reject…
Personally, I could conceive of alternate strategies Israel might have taken regarding 10/7, settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, etc. But it goes without saying that Israel didn’t make those decisions, not due to a lack of imagination for long-term strategy, but because it didn’t and doesn’t have the requisite political will. The right in Israel has clear, long-term plans to rebuild Gaza as part of Israel, displacing the Palestinians to who-cares-where. But they’re only a plurality, ~40%. The international community won’t stand for that kind of blatant annexation, and even Netanyahu is against it. A smaller minority wants a two-state solution, and a very small margin of people want the Gazans to decide their own fate. This is including Arab-Israeli citizens - they don’t really have a seat at the table when it comes to setting policy.
I blame Israeli leadership directly for their own tactical shortcomings, but Netanyahu doesn’t have the power to implement a peaceful long-term strategy for Palestine even if he wanted to. He barely has enough power to stay in office, and the fact that he is still Prime Minister is a testament to his tactical prowess. There is a reason Netanyahu’s government has been pandering to hardliners on Palestine, and there is a reason the government is more concerned about drafting Orthodox men than a ceasefire with Hamas. Given the politics of Israel, I take it as a fait accompli that there is no chance of a peaceful and secure future.
~Max
And that’s where he’s wrong. Both morally and militarily.
If everyone is as fatalist as you, nothing changes. I’m order to make change, people have to stand up and try, and if enough do so, eventually change might actually happen.
Obviously this is much harder to do than say, but your type of fatalism means zero chance instead of a slim one.
Of course not. Netanyahu has achieved all of his goals:
- Avoided any serious investigation of the IDF failure on Oct 7.
- Cleared the way for colonizing (rebuilding) of northern Gaza
- Strengthened his political position
Trump has weighed in on the conflict and has declared that Gaza should be “cleaned out” although his initial plan is for this to happen courtesy of Jordan and other neighboring countries absorbing the Palestinians:
He also resumed shipping 2000lb bombs to Israel. I wonder how many hostages each 2000lb bomb can rescue?
I assume the Israeli government, being totally non-genocidal, have come out strongly against this idea.
Trump’s comments were welcomed by far-right politicians who back Jewish settlements in Gaza.
The Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, described relocation of Palestinians as a “great idea”, and said he would work with the prime minister and cabinet to create an “operational plan for implementation” as soon as possible.