Fair point.
Babale, apologies and I am backing off, but I would appreciate it if you contributed more to this thread than snide comments and telling everybody how butthurt you are by Banquet_Bear.
So the only option for a ceasefire from the Israeli side, as you present it, is Hamas agreeing to complete surrender, and some way to enforce that former Hamas members are not involved in any future power? Which of course would not guarantee that whoever is in power doesn’t share the same antipathy to Israel and desires to harm it, even if not expressed.
If I misunderstand please clarify.
If I have it right, then that seems more like a recipe for continued forever occupation with a military presence, with no reasonable way to achieve the goal, and leaving the remaining hostages in captivity until they die, or happen to be stumbled upon, hopefully not then accidentally killed by the IDF.
A plan to allow Gazans back into the north after hostilities have ceased, with no reasonable plan to ever get to that point, is no different than the plan @Banquet_Bear alleges in any meaningful way. It seems to me.
I’m not there but I question if there aren’t some Israelis who would rather accept a lesser goal and getting a few remaining hostages home, even if the carnage to Gazans is of no concern at this point.
The UN has passed two ceasefire plans, and in at least one of them Israel agreed. Sure Bibi railed on about “destroying Hamas” but the UN deal was agreed to by Israel. Hamas refused both.
And why shouldn’t they? They dont care about their people, in fact they are getting rich by selling aid to their own people.
If Hamas actually agreed to release LIVING hostages, that would help.
No, a humanitarian break in the fighting in exchange for the release of some hostages (and knowing how these things go historically, Israel would also throw on a few hundred or thousand Hamasnik prisoners into the deal) is also an option. But Israel isn’t going to totally pull out while Hamas remains in power.
Hamas has to be removed as the governing authority of the Gaza strip. Past Hamas members being part of whatever government ends up replacing Hamas is probably and unfortunately inevitable, much as some Nazis were involved with Germany’s post war government. But Hamas as a ruling force must be dismantled (and Israel is well on its way to accomplishing that task).
…I reject this.
If you want to know “how much worse it will get under Trump as opposed to Biden”, then you need to have a benchmark. Because my argument is that it won’t materially get worse under Trump. That we will see a continuation of what is happening right now. And it’s crucial to understand how bad things are right now because when it continues under Trump, we don’t just turn around and say “its all on him.” Trump is going to be a disaster. But Biden was also a disaster.
(and it’s “his cites”, not “her cites”)
…I also reject this.
A timeline:
It includes Israel literally assassinating the person they were negotiating with.
I’m happy to discuss this further in a relevant thread.
Where exactly is this floating dock?
How long did it last?
It lasted 20 days. It had to be dismantled three times because of high seas. It was allegedly used in the Nuseirat attack which rescued four hostages killed 274 (mostly civilian) Palestinians. And Sergeant Quandarius Davon Stanley died.
It was nothing more than an expensive PR stunt.
We had a thread on just that. Legally Biden could not do anything more to help end the war in Gaza. Biden can not unilaterally cut off aid to Israel once Congress has authorized it.
Here is the thread-
I dont think you even bothered to post in it?
So, exactly what could Biden do- legally- that would have ended the war in Gaza?
And dont say “cut off aid to Israel” = that was covered and the President can not do that unilaterally.
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA Which is super baised,
We had a long argument about this in the other thread, and you finally conceded that Israel had agreed to the UN ceasefire deal that the US pushed through. Which Hamas rejected.
Adopting Resolution 2735 (2024) with 14 Votes in Favour, Russian Federation Abstaining, Security Council Welcomes New Gaza Ceasefire Proposal, Urges Full Implementation…The representative of the United States, speaking before the vote, said that “the last eight months have been nothing short but devastating” both for Israelis who lost loved ones on 7 October and Palestinian civilians who “are living through sheer hell”, fleeing from one place to another in search of elusive safety.
“The only way to bring about a durable end to this war” is a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, she stressed, adding that Israel has agreed to a comprehensive deal on the table, which is nearly identical to Hamas’ own proposal. “Now we are all waiting for Hamas to agree to the ceasefire deal it claims to want, but we cannot allow to wait and wait,” she stated, noting that “with every passing day, needless suffering continues”.
Notice that AL JAZEERA didnt bother to even mention that UN deal.
So, you already concede that point in another thread. I am not gonna re-argue with you over that. I agree with your points that the Gazas are getting a rare deal, but if you keep trying to show that it is all on israel, not Hamas, there is no point in discussing this with you.
…the answer to the question “how many people have starved to death in Gaza?” is of course, a complex one. It appears we are only discussing it because I quoted the Inter-Agency Standing Committee that argued:
“The entire Palestinian population in North Gaza is at imminent risk of dying from disease, famine and violence.”
This wasn’t my assertion. It was a quote.
The healthcare system in Gaza is broken. Under normal circumstances, it’s difficult enough to measure a famine, but the conditions on the ground right now are apocalyptic.
- From Save the Children:
Also, famine is a fluid situation. From June:
This isn’t a static situation. Its a dynamic one. The north was on the brink of famine earlier this year, but the levels of aid increased and they bought it back.
That isn’t the situation now.
Every humanitarian agency on the ground have said little to no aid is getting through to the north since the start of October.
And the IDF are not disputing this. They’ve said “yes, we are doing this, either because they already have enough aid from a few months ago, or there aren’t any civilians there any more.”
The situation on the ground has deteriorated. The systems for reporting have collapsed. For people are dying from starvation, it is difficult to get to a hospital, which are constantly overwhelmed with the dead and the dying from the bombing and the shooting.
Added to this: Israel are banning medical NGO’s.
The reality is that “how many people have starved to death in Gaza" is a disingenuous question. We don’t know, because (especially in the north) everything that would normally be used to track this is broken. It will be years, probably decades, before we know the true scale of what has happened in Gaza.
…that isn’t a thread on this. It poses a different question.
And what that thread suggests is that I’m absolutely right. There won’t be any material difference on the ground between Biden and Trump.
It’s not a matter of “being bothered.” I have a real life, you know. If you want to find out what happened, you can read the Gaza pit thread.
LOL.
Lets not pretend that western media covering this “war” is ALSO not super biased. There were literally articles in the mainstream press that argued Hamas had rejected the deal on the very day they had accepted it. I’ve quoted from a wide range of sources. I refuse to be just limited to viewing this conflict through a “western” lens.
That was a nuanced concession, and since then I’ve had opportunity to reconsider. But considering this digression was started because you claimed I was getting off topic, this is straying too far off topic for me to continue.
I consider what is happening in Gaza right now to be a genocide. There is only one party that is responsible for that, and that party is Israel.
Which is why your view of the conflict is so disconnected from reality.
Yeah that black and white perspective in a situation that is a checkerboard of shades of grey is a disservice IMHO.
…there is no black and white perspective when it comes to genocide. There are no “shades of grey” where the party that is being genocided is responsible for them being genocided.
What has happened is horrific and I do not make excuses but it is not genocide. But there will be no useful conversation to be had here.
In terms of the OP - Harris may have tried to pull some levers to ramp pressure on Bibi. Or not. Trump definitely won’t. I remain hopeful that the election being a near term event to occur made all sides wanting to wait to see which American administration they be interacting with, and that the election being in the rear view mirror will result in everyone being more willing to get the deals done.
While it may not yet rise to the term genocide, I wonder what the Israeli end game is. It is hard for me to see how this ends well.
Likewise. My fear is that Bibi’s end game is not to have it end. His personal interest is continued external conflict. Of course the same is true for whoever is left of Hamas. For each everyone else is just the cost of staying in power.
He’s gotta’run out of children to slaughter … eventually.
I mean, that’s hardly just their view. Francesca Albanese, the special rapporteur on Palestine to the UN, has advised the UN Human Rights Council that Israel is perpetuating genocide in March 2024—see her report here.
Not saying that’s necessarily the final word, but I think it’s also unreasonable to just dismiss out of hand.
I don’t hold the opinion of an anti-Semite in very high regard, on this or any other topic. And that’s not me calling her that; it’s representatives of the United States, Germany, and France.
Fine. So are the 75% of 750 Middle East scholars responding in the Middle East Scholars Barometer that claim Israel is either conducting war crimes akin to genocide or just simply genocide also anti-Semites?
(I’ll also note that Albanese has been defended by several groups and individuals, including three former holders of her position. But I have no interest in defending her personally, I’m just pointing out that the position that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians is one that has been put forward with extensive support, and hence, there is no use in trying to shut it down preemptively.)
…Francesca Albanese, is not an antisemite. And that’s not me saying that, its 30 Jewish organisations that have rallied to her support.
People have openly accused me of antisemitism, of blood libel, here on these boards. It was a horrific, soul-destroying thing to happen to me. And it worked. It shut me up for a while. And it stopped other people speaking up as well.
There is no reason to stop listening to Francesca Albanese,. The accusations are without foundation.