Striving to make sense of the Middle East

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

16 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

I think you are actually looking at the core problem here - the inability of both sides to compromise. One the one side you have Hamas who will not cease violence until all Jews are removed from the region, and on the other side you have the Israelis who will not stop defending what they see as their right to exist as a sovereign nation. If I have assessed the situation correctly, then where do we go from here with two side who refuse to compromise? Does it mean a solution has to be imposed from outside, and do you truly believe that would bring a lasting peace? I have my own thoughts on the matter but I am interested in what others think is the solution that both sides would find acceptable.

Look back twenty- thirty years. Arafat shaking hands with Rabin. Yes the Palestinians recognized Israel but expected faster movement to state of their own (and yes no more settlements). 

Sadly, the more extreme elements kyboshed that with oddly Netanyahu in cohoots with Hamas as a block on progress !

Clearly a fresh start is needed - a two state solution will need to be engineered with fresh leaders else the cycle will continue, Gaza today, Tel-Aviv tomorrow and so on, Nobody wins.

Oddly - this catastrophe will give impetus for such a solutions - Hamas only came to the fore due to the lack of hope/progress for the Palestinians and Western hypocrisy  (I read they are more popular than ever today in the West Bank) but offer the Palestinians a proper state and many I think will be happy.

Or is the only other answer a genocide and/or further displacement of the Palestinians - which seems to be Israeli current policy? 

[TheGunnShow 5,983]

18 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Look back twenty- thirty years. Arafat shaking hands with Rabin. Yes the Palestinians recognized Israel but expected faster movement to state of their own (and yes no more settlements). 

Sadly, the more extreme elements kyboshed that with oddly Netanyahu in cohoots with Hamas as a block on progress !

Clearly a fresh start is needed - a two state solution will need to be engineered with fresh leaders else the cycle will continue, Gaza today, Tel-Aviv tomorrow and so on, Nobody wins.

Oddly - this catastrophe will give impetus for such a solutions - Hamas only came to the fore due to the lack of hope/progress for the Palestinians and Western hypocrisy  (I read they are more popular than ever today in the West Bank) but offer the Palestinians a proper state and many I think will be happy.

Or is the only other answer a genocide and/or further displacement of the Palestinians - which seems to be Israeli current policy? 

Exactly, Hamas is the symptom of the problem. The problem is that Netanyahu will not negotiate with Fatah, the peaceable wing of the Palestinian Authority, but their job in maintaining some semblance of order in Palestine is made far harder with Hamas on the horizon and their coup d'etat in Gaza, and it is very well documented that Netanyahu and his ilk have been more than willing to turn a blind eye to Hamas's funding to ensure that the PA was unable to advance the cause of a Palestinian state.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

Meanwhile, more illegal settlements were approved in the West Bank (second link is a long-established Israeli charity)

Israeli plan to expand settlements helped trigger US shift in language | Reuters

Israel to Advance Construction of Thousands of New Housing Units in the West Bank - Peace Now

Edited March 5 by TheGunnShow

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

35 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Exactly, Hamas is the symptom of the problem. The problem is that Netanyahu will not negotiate with Fatah, the peaceable wing of the Palestinian Authority, but their job in maintaining some semblance of order in Palestine is made far harder with Hamas on the horizon and their coup d'etat in Gaza, and it is very well documented that Netanyahu and his ilk have been more than willing to turn a blind eye to Hamas's funding to ensure that the PA was unable to advance the cause of a Palestinian state.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

Meanwhile, more illegal settlements were approved in the West Bank (second link is a long-established Israeli charity)

Israeli plan to expand settlements helped trigger US shift in language | Reuters

Israel to Advance Construction of Thousands of New Housing Units in the West Bank - Peace Now

Quite. I've pointed out before that the PLO for instance was quite secular! Hamas gained ground only because of the failure of progress towards a true two state solution after the Oslo accords.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

Exactly, Hamas is the symptom of the problem. The problem is that Netanyahu will not negotiate with Fatah, the peaceable wing of the Palestinian Authority, but their job in maintaining some semblance of order in Palestine is made far harder with Hamas on the horizon and their coup d'etat in Gaza, and it is very well documented that Netanyahu and his ilk have been more than willing to turn a blind eye to Hamas's funding to ensure that the PA was unable to advance the cause of a Palestinian state.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

Meanwhile, more illegal settlements were approved in the West Bank (second link is a long-established Israeli charity)

Israeli plan to expand settlements helped trigger US shift in language | Reuters

Israel to Advance Construction of Thousands of New Housing Units in the West Bank - Peace Now

From the responses to my post I would summarise posters hopes that Hamas will compromise their position of wiping out the Jews in order to allow a two state solution in the region. That used to be my position but changed after October 7th when I felt less hopeful that such a set of conditions could come about. However, I do acknowledge that the best outcome for everyone would be two states existing side by side if they were no longer attacking each other

But as we all know the situation is complicated by other players on both sides who have their own agendas that extend beyond the Gaza-Israel situation and attempt to influence what is going on there. And I'm kind of interested where we might have to go if the two sides can't reach agreement like they did earlier with Arafat and the PLO. 

[TheGunnShow 5,983]

33 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

From the responses to my post I would summarise posters hopes that Hamas will compromise their position of wiping out the Jews in order to allow a two state solution in the region. That used to be my position but changed after October 7th when I felt less hopeful that such a set of conditions could come about. However, I do acknowledge that the best outcome for everyone would be two states existing side by side if they were no longer attacking each other

But as we all know the situation is complicated by other players on both sides who have their own agendas that extend beyond the Gaza-Israel situation and attempt to influence what is going on there. And I'm kind of interested where we might have to go if the two sides can't reach agreement like they did earlier with Arafat and the PLO. 

Essentially, you need to render Hamas irrelevant in some way or another whilst accepting that Netanyahu and the Israeli far-right were essentially happy to have them as a useful enemy of sorts to further their aims of destabilising Palestine and steal their land, so I think they would actually do a lot of the resisting. Military operations will not work - at best you'll drive them underground as ultimately this is about an ideology - and at worst you'll radicalise a whole generation of Gazans, which is ultimately a region that is already very young in terms of its demographics. In doing so all that will happen is that the problem is pushed down the line with far more serious consequences.

Negotiations really should be pushed with Fatah and hard as the relatively secular and peaceable wing. They need to commit to stop building illegal settlements. Personally I'd like to see the head honchos from Hamas in the Hague, but Netanyahu must also be in there, not to mention his litany of corruption trials which are ongoing and from what I'm catching, the hearing of prosecution witnesses should be over near the end of the first half of this year.

Paradoxically, as much as I've said that Netanyahu needs/supports Hamas as a useful enemy, you can readily reverse it and see the same phenomenon - Hamas also needs a Netanyahu. Remember that Shimon Peres was likely to win in 1996 against Netanyahu until Hamas intervened in terror.

The long and bitter relationship between Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas : NPR

Edited March 5 by TheGunnShow

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

Essentially, you need to render Hamas irrelevant in some way or another whilst accepting that Netanyahu and the Israeli far-right were essentially happy to have them as a useful enemy of sorts to further their aims of destabilising Palestine and steal their land, so I think they would actually do a lot of the resisting. Military operations will not work - at best you'll drive them underground as ultimately this is about an ideology - and at worst you'll radicalise a whole generation of Gazans, which is ultimately a region that is already very young in terms of its demographics. In doing so all that will happen is that the problem is pushed down the line with far more serious consequences.

Negotiations really should be pushed with Fatah and hard as the relatively secular and peaceable wing. They need to commit to stop building illegal settlements. Personally I'd like to see the head honchos from Hamas in the Hague, but Netanyahu must also be in there, not to mention his litany of corruption trials which are ongoing and from what I'm catching, the hearing of prosecution witnesses should be over near the end of the first half of this year.

The problem you have is two incompatible extreme positions that we have all allowed to develop in the last twenty odd years fueled by rage and hatred on both sides.

Netanyahu is adamant and has gone out if his way to make sure there can't be a two state solution - and has used Hamas as you suggest to polarize.

Hamas is equally incalcitrant in acceptance of Israel.

Yes both in the Hague.

That said - there are clearly more moderate parts to both organizations / governments - shades of grey where negotiations can start in the shadows (leave the knee-jerk reactionaries out of it). The present situation is probably as good an opportunity for just that. A real US backed and enabled road map to a two state solution must happen and no Isreali / settler 'blocking'.

This fact below I find quite informative - 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/15/biden-extremist-jewish-settlers-travel-ban-loophole

60,000 plus ideology inspired Americans settling in West Bank. Hmm. 

Edited March 5 by Yellow Fever

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The problem you have is two incompatible extreme positions that we have all allowed to develop in the last twenty odd years fueled by rage and hatred on both sides.

Netanyahu is adamant and has gone out if his way to make sure there can't be a two state solution - and has used Hamas as you suggest to polarize.

Hamas is equally incalcitrant in acceptance of Israel.

Yes both in the Hague.

That said - there are clearly more moderate parts to both organizations / governments - shades of grey where negotiations can start in the shadows (leave the knee-jerk reactionaries out of it). The present situation is probably as good an opportunity for just that. A real US backed and enabled road map to a two state solution must happen and no Isreali / settler 'blocking'.

This fact below I find quite informative - 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/15/biden-extremist-jewish-settlers-travel-ban-loophole

60,000 plus ideology inspired Americans settling in West Bank. Hmm. 

Sorry, but your nonsense on this is exasperating. Netanyahu had a three year stint as PM between 1996 and 1999, to be succeeded by Barak (Labour) and then Sharon, who most people agree was surprisingly constructive towards the peace process until his stroke in 2005. In fact, it was Kadima in power, Sharon's party after he left Likud who were in power at the time that Hamas was elected in Gaza in 2006, which then led to the hardening of views in Israel and the blockading of Gaza by both Egypt and israel.

There's no doubt that the growth of more extreme views in Israel has grown since 2007, but be under no illusion that that's a direct consequence of Hamas taking over Gaza and compltetely derailing the peace process with rockets and suicide bombs, and that wasn't Netanyahu's doing because he wasn't in charge.

You're trying to attribute far too much blame to Israel for the collapse of the last peace process, and it just isn't true; its 100% a consequence of the Hamas takeover of Gaza, and until Hamas is removed from Gaza, there's barely any point even dreaming about a peaceful resolution, because it doesn't matter how mollifying Israel was, it won't make any difference while Hamas is still there; Hamas has to go.

Edited March 5 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-03-03/ty-article/.premium/u-s-sends-clear-message-to-netanyahu-with-gantz-invite-whether-biden-admits-it-or-not/0000018e-0431-ded4-a3ee-df3d64ad0000?gift=8cf4d375dfd847b88d4ab985f9d39d9b

While the US continues to back Israel, it is clear it has had enough of Netanyahu himself. Gantz has now had direct face to face meetings in Egypt and in the US. It seems clear that he's going to be the main challenger when the next Israeli election comes along.

The difficulty is that Israel's next elections are scheduled for October 2026. Gantz can't really walk away from the war cabinet without very good reason, but he can afford to be a very challenging partner to Netanyahu and to continue to engage internationally without considering Netanyahu, while the international community snubs Netanyahu, which won't help Netanyahu domestically.

Edited March 6 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

23 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Sorry, but your nonsense on this is exasperating. Netanyahu had a three year stint as PM between 1996 and 1999, to be succeeded by Barak (Labour) and then Sharon, who most people agree was surprisingly constructive towards the peace process until his stroke in 2005. In fact, it was Kadima in power, Sharon's party after he left Likud who were in power at the time that Hamas was elected in Gaza in 2006, which then led to the hardening of views in Israel and the blockading of Gaza by both Egypt and israel.

There's no doubt that the growth of more extreme views in Israel has grown since 2007, but be under no illusion that that's a direct consequence of Hamas taking over Gaza and compltetely derailing the peace process with rockets and suicide bombs, and that wasn't Netanyahu's doing because he wasn't in charge.

You're trying to attribute far too much blame to Israel for the collapse of the last peace process, and it just isn't true; its 100% a consequence of the Hamas takeover of Gaza, and until Hamas is removed from Gaza, there's barely any point even dreaming about a peaceful resolution, because it doesn't matter how mollifying Israel was, it won't make any difference while Hamas is still there; Hamas has to go.

I did mention twenty odd years but never-mind. You've never been there, walked around (on your own), met the people (both sides) just an Israeli friend. 

I did find this little gem for you for the period arguably before the last two decades - perhaps it illuminates why the Palestinians even after the Oslo accords never thought the Israelis were serious about negotiating a two state solution in good faith which ultimately undermined Fatah. After all - what was it called - 'facts on the ground'. Actions always speak louder than words.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement_timeline

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

On 05/03/2024 at 14:23, Yellow Fever said:

The problem you have is two incompatible extreme positions that we have all allowed to develop in the last twenty odd years fueled by rage and hatred on both sides.

I know full well what you mentioned; it was this sentence here, which is what I was addressing. I'm totally at a loss at having spent a bit of time in Israel makes you an expert on the Arab Israeli conflict, or why you think you can't be well-versed on it without having been to Israel. Have you spent time in Gaza, the West Bank, Jerusalem? Presumably you can't be an expert on black holes without being in one as well? The fact that you seem to pretty persistently boil everything down to Netanyahu doesn't smack of a lot of insight.

You talk about good faith, but the peace process would never have started in the first place without the Israeli people having given Rabin the mandate to pursue one. No arguing there were plenty on the Israeli side who could sabotage it, but they were much easier to deal with, provided the peace process stayed viable at all, which depended on the Palestinians not being so moronic as to abandon a negotiated process for rockets and suicide vests in the face of a more powerful enemy.

Diplomatic pressure would no doubt have dealt with the settler issue had the peace process been sustained. As you can see from the graph, there was a notable slowdown in East Jerusalem and Sharon actively pursued bringing back settlers from the West Bank. What I find fascinating about you and others like you is that you are persistently finding excuses for Palestine sabotaging the peace and pursuing military means while claiming to support peace.

Bottom line is, it was the Palestinian side that went back to terrorism to win their cause, which was what killed the process entirely and led to where we are now.

 

Edited March 6 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

On 05/03/2024 at 11:08, TheGunnShow said:

Exactly, Hamas is the symptom of the problem. The problem is that Netanyahu will not negotiate with Fatah, the peaceable wing of the Palestinian Authority, but their job in maintaining some semblance of order in Palestine is made far harder with Hamas on the horizon and their coup d'etat in Gaza, and it is very well documented that Netanyahu and his ilk have been more than willing to turn a blind eye to Hamas's funding to ensure that the PA was unable to advance the cause of a Palestinian state.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

Meanwhile, more illegal settlements were approved in the West Bank (second link is a long-established Israeli charity)

Israeli plan to expand settlements helped trigger US shift in language | Reuters

Israel to Advance Construction of Thousands of New Housing Units in the West Bank - Peace Now

Hamas is not a symptom of anything. It controls Gaza and is the major source of continued attacks on Israel. Whatever happened with Fatah, it would have no impact whatsoever on attacks on Gaza, which are the biggest issue from the Israeli point of view.

Hamas killed the peace process; its continued presence in Gaza guarantees there won't be another one.

Edited March 6 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 5,983]

12 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Hamas is not a symptom of anything. It controls Gaza and is the major source of continued attacks on Israel. Whatever happened with Fatah, it would have no impact whatsoever on attacks on Gaza, which are the biggest issue from the Israeli point of view.

Hamas killed the peace process; its continued presence in Gaza guarantees there won't be another one.

And Netanyahu/the Israeli far-right were more than happy to let them be financed. That is an open-and-shut case.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

A Brief History of the Netanyahu-Hamas Alliance - Israel News - Haaretz.com

EU's Borrell says Israel financed creation of Gaza rulers Hamas | Reuters

Qatar sent millions to Gaza for years – with Israel’s backing. Here’s what we know about the controversial deal | CNN

Hamas killed the peace process as it suited the likes of Netanyahu, Smotrich and the far right in Israel to do so. The whole idea was to render Hamas an effective counterweight to the PA and make it much harder for a Palestinian state to be formed. So yes, Hamas killed the process, but Netanyahu and his set wanted that.

That's why both have got to go, and now.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

14 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

And Netanyahu/the Israeli far-right were more than happy to let them be financed. That is an open-and-shut case.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

A Brief History of the Netanyahu-Hamas Alliance - Israel News - Haaretz.com

EU's Borrell says Israel financed creation of Gaza rulers Hamas | Reuters

Qatar sent millions to Gaza for years – with Israel’s backing. Here’s what we know about the controversial deal | CNN

Hamas killed the peace process as it suited the likes of Netanyahu, Smotrich and the far right in Israel to do so. The whole idea was to render Hamas an effective counterweight to the PA and make it much harder for a Palestinian state to be formed. So yes, Hamas killed the process, but Netanyahu and his set wanted that.

That's why both have got to go, and now.

When you talk about the Israeli right stoking Hamas, you're going back nearly 50 years to when Hamas was seen as a useful tool to undermine the PLO, who were the main paramilitary threat to Israel at the time; it wasn't supposed to be creating an even worse enemy the way you're misrepresenting it.

Israel's far right didn't didn't make those groups want to undermine the peace process; that was their choice. You can also guarantee they'd have got money one way or the other, as evidenced by the fact they get plenty from Iran and other sources.

As I've said before, the peace process would never have come about if the Israeli people hadn't put their votes behind it, a gesture never reciprocated by the grass roots of the Palestinian cause; they had that opportuity but didn't take it when they thought giving Hamas power in Gaza was the right thing to do.

As I said before, Netanyahu was not at the helm at any point while the peace process was being derailed by suicide bombs and rockets into Israel while the peace process was still alive. This 'growth of extremism on both sides' is bullsh1t; Hamas broke the peace process. That's an open and shut case.

"both have to go now" is a ridiculous statement. One's elected and one isn't. Whoever the Israeli people will to be their leader is what the world has to work with. That's how democracy works. Hopefully, he'll be replaced, but that's by no means a given the way the idiot left is marginalising all Israelis and stoking a sentiment that Israel can only count on itself. Anyway, without Hamas being levered out of Gaza it doesn't matter who's in charge in Israel.

Edited March 7 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 5,983]

3 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

They couldn't make those groups want to undermine the peace process and you can guarantee they'd have got money one way or the other, as evidenced by the fact they get plenty from Iran and other sources.

As I said before, Netanyahu was not at the helm at any point while the peace process was being derailed by suicide bombs and rockets into Israel while the peace process was still alive. This 'growth of extremism on both sides' is bullsh1t; Hamas broke the peace process. That's an open and shut case .

The open-and-shut case is that Netanyahu was happy for them to be funded, and that the reason for this was to prevent Palestinian statehood. Netanyahu might not necessarily have been at the helm during all the attacks, but such financial support by definition is not limited to periods of his own political rule.

Here's a nice excerpt from the last link. Even plenty of protesting Israelis blame him for that.

-- - - - - - - - - 

Has Netanyahu faced a backlash?

Netanyahu has come under increasing criticism as the depth of his government’s involvement in the move, as well as the motivations for it, come to light again.

The funding deal is one reason why many Israelis today place part of the blame for the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Netanyahu personally. Numerous people told CNN they believed that allowing the payments made Hamas stronger and, ultimately, made the brutal attacks worse.

“The premier’s policy of treating the terror group as a partner, at the expense of (Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud) Abbas and Palestinian statehood, has resulted in wounds that will take Israel years to heal from,” wrote Tal Schneider in an opinion piece in the Times of Israel on October 8, a day after Hamas’ devastating attack.

Gilad, the former Israeli defense official, said he was among those to argue against allowing money to reach Hamas, saying the permitted cash flow over the years was a “dramatic, tragic mistake.”

With the funds, “they could take care of the population. They could take care of the military enhancement, and build up their capabilities,” Gilad said last week.

Criticism of Netanyahu among Israelis soared after the attack, with many blaming the prime minister for failing to prevent it.

Not to mention, he may have missed a trick in terms of cutting the supply.

Israeli PM 'missed chance' to cut off Hamas cash, says ex-spy chief - BBC News

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

The open-and-shut case is that Netanyahu was happy for them to be funded, and that the reason for this was to prevent Palestinian statehood. Netanyahu might not necessarily have been at the helm during all the attacks, but such financial support by definition is not limited to periods of his own political rule.

Here's a nice excerpt from the last link. Even plenty of protesting Israelis blame him for that.

-- - - - - - - - - 

Has Netanyahu faced a backlash?

Netanyahu has come under increasing criticism as the depth of his government’s involvement in the move, as well as the motivations for it, come to light again.

The funding deal is one reason why many Israelis today place part of the blame for the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Netanyahu personally. Numerous people told CNN they believed that allowing the payments made Hamas stronger and, ultimately, made the brutal attacks worse.

“The premier’s policy of treating the terror group as a partner, at the expense of (Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud) Abbas and Palestinian statehood, has resulted in wounds that will take Israel years to heal from,” wrote Tal Schneider in an opinion piece in the Times of Israel on October 8, a day after Hamas’ devastating attack.

Gilad, the former Israeli defense official, said he was among those to argue against allowing money to reach Hamas, saying the permitted cash flow over the years was a “dramatic, tragic mistake.”

With the funds, “they could take care of the population. They could take care of the military enhancement, and build up their capabilities,” Gilad said last week.

Criticism of Netanyahu among Israelis soared after the attack, with many blaming the prime minister for failing to prevent it.

Not to mention, he may have missed a trick in terms of cutting the supply.

Israeli PM 'missed chance' to cut off Hamas cash, says ex-spy chief - BBC News

Oh will you f*k off going on and on about Netanyahu. Stop being so stupidly simplistic.

Why can you morons not look beyond distilling everything down to one personality? Trump, Johnson, Thatcher, Netanyahu. You're idiots.

Edited March 7 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

You know what? If you're all so certain that it's as easy as just replacing Netanyahu in the Middle East, why don't you find some Israeli political forums and starting talking to some actual Israelis who get to vote on it and make a difference on that score? You never know; you might learn something in the process.

Edited March 7 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 5,983]

Quite the misrepresentation. No-one said it's about just replacing Netanyahu. However, you have to accept that if you criticise Hamas, you also need to take a long, hard look at the role of the Israeli right/far-right in their rise.

And plenty of Israelis know that. Heck, even a former Israeli PM from the same party as Netanyahu, namely Ehud Olmert, is regularly saying that.

A broken Netanyahu is miscalculating over Gaza, former Israeli PM says – POLITICO

Ex-Israeli PM makes devastating condemnation of Netanyahu’s war in Gazan | The Independent

Former Israeli Prime Minister: “Time to stop the Israel-Hamas war” - New Statesman

Israeli political forum? How about four out of five blame Netanyahu for the war?

Israelis blame gov’t for Hamas massacre, say Netanyahu must resign - Israel News - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

40 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Quite the misrepresentation. No-one said it's about just replacing Netanyahu. However, you have to accept that if you criticise Hamas, you also need to take a long, hard look at the role of the Israeli right/far-right in their rise.

And plenty of Israelis know that. Heck, even a former Israeli PM from the same party as Netanyahu, namely Ehud Olmert, is regularly saying that.

A broken Netanyahu is miscalculating over Gaza, former Israeli PM says – POLITICO

Ex-Israeli PM makes devastating condemnation of Netanyahu’s war in Gazan | The Independent

Former Israeli Prime Minister: “Time to stop the Israel-Hamas war” - New Statesman

Israeli political forum? How about four out of five blame Netanyahu for the war?

Israelis blame gov’t for Hamas massacre, say Netanyahu must resign - Israel News - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)

TL;DR: "It's not just about Netanyahu, but here's another long diatribe obsessing exclusively about Netanyahu anyway, to follow up the last two diatribes about Netanyahu you were responding to, and determinedly ignoring your point that Netanyahu wasn't in power when the election of Hamas in Gaza resulted in the terrorist campaign from Gaza that killed the peace process and prompted the downward spiral."

Netanyahu is a symptom of the deterioration of good will towards Palestinians that demonstrably existed among Israelis when Israelis were voting for peacemakers; that deterioration was caused by Hamas' becoming entrenched in Gaza at the invitation of a significant chunk of the Gazan population when they were given a chance at self-determination on the path to Palestinian statehood.

All that has to happen for Netanyahu to go is for a proportion of Israelis to vote differently; there's no mechanism to remove Hamas from Gaza if you discount removing them by force.

 

Edited March 7 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

Hamas delegation walks away from ceasefire negotiations.

Can someone explain to me how Hamas walking away is the fault of the Israelis? I know there must be an explanation; there always is. Maybe Netanyahu rung them up and asked them to?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68500270

Edited March 7 by littleyellowbirdie

[cambridgeshire canary 6,777]

48 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Hamas delegation walks away from ceasefire negotiations.

Can someone explain to me how Hamas walking away is the fault of the Israelis? I know there must be an explanation; there always is. Maybe Netanyahu rung them up and asked them to?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68500270

Clearly Netanyahu gave them the wrong directions the cheeky scamp

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Clearly Netanyahu gave them the wrong directions the cheeky scamp

Ah, that must be it! Thank you!

[Naturalcynic 648]

8 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Oh will you f*k off going on and on about Netanyahu. Stop being so stupidly simplistic.

Why can you morons not look beyond distilling everything down to one personality? Trump, Johnson, Thatcher, Netanyahu. You're idiots.

The left always need an “Emmanuel Goldstein” bogeyman as a focus for their hate.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,576]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

The left always need an “Emmanuel Goldstein” bogeyman as a focus for their hate.

They're not wrong; Netanyahu's an obstacle, but jeez... change the record.

[Herman 9,819]

Looks like the people that matter are ignoring Netanyahu too. Well done the US, EU and UK. 👍

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

29 minutes ago, Herman said:

Looks like the people that matter are ignoring Netanyahu too. Well done the US, EU and UK. 👍

I think the pier is to embarrass Israel ideally into opening better and faster (simpler) aid routes.

It will also very visibly show to Palestinians belatedly that the US and the West can hear them in their plight and help undermine Hamas's hold. A win-win.

[PurpleCanary 5,579]

In the middle of a conflict that has so far seen tens of thousands killed and many more injured, with war crimes on both sides, a terrible psychological blow on one side and a humanitarian catastrophe on the other, this is the key point that an influential Middle East "expert" takes from it all:

Jared Kushner has praised the “very valuable” potential of Gaza’s “waterfront property” and suggested Israel should remove civilians while it “cleans up” the strip.

The former property dealer, married to Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka, made the comments in an interview at Harvard University on 8 March.

Kushner was a senior foreign policy adviser under Trump’s presidency and was tasked with preparing a peace plan for the Middle East. Critics of the plan, which involved Israel striking normalisation deals with Gulf states, said it bypassed questions about the future for Palestinians.

His remarks at Harvard gave a hint of the kind of Middle East policy that could be pursued in the event that Trump returns to the White House, including a search for a normalisation deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

“Gaza’s waterfront property could be very valuable … if people would focus on building up livelihoods,” Kushner told his interviewer, Harvard’s Middle East Initiative faculty chair, Prof Tarek Masoud. Kushner also lamented “all the money” that had gone into the territory’s tunnel network and munitions instead of education and innovation.

“It’s a little bit of an unfortunate situation there, but from Israel’s perspective I would do my best to move the people out and then clean it up,” Kushner said. “But I don’t think that Israel has stated that they don’t want the people to move back there afterwards.”

Kushner also said he thinks Israel should move civilians from Gaza to the Negev desert in southern Israel. He said that if he were in charge of Israel his number one priority would be getting civilians out of the southern city of Rafah, and that “with diplomacy” it could be possible to get them into Egypt.

“But in addition to that, I would just bulldoze something in the Negev, I would try to move people in there,” he said. “I think that’s a better option, so you can go in and finish the job.”

[Aggy 760]

On 07/03/2024 at 18:45, Naturalcynic said:

The left always need an “Emmanuel Goldstein” bogeyman as a focus for their hate.

Is this supposed to be ironic or have you genuinely just replied to someone whinging about moronic people being stupidly simplistic and distilling things with that?

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

It seems like the US has finally woken up to what everybody else could see was happening a few months ago.

What's worse, Israel is now defiant as to the US - gone rogue.

Netanyahu said on Friday that Israel remained determined to send troops into the southern Gaza city of Rafah and would do so without US backing if necessary. The Israeli prime minister told Blinken during a meeting in Israel that there was no way to defeat Hamas without going into Rafah. In a statement, Netanyahu said: “I hope we will do it with the support of the US, but if we have to - we will do it alone.”

Palestine has condemned Israel’s declaration that an 800 hectare (1,977 acres) section of the occupied West Bank is state land. The Palestinian ministry of foreign affairs said the latest move was “a continuation of the extermination and displacement of our people from their homeland”.

Russia and China enjoying the US isolation too it seems.

Russia and China on Friday vetoed a US-sponsored UN resolution calling for “an immediate and sustained ceasefire” in the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza to protect civilians and enable humanitarian aid to be delivered to more than two million hungry Palestinians. The vote in the 15-member security council was 11 members in favour, three against and one abstention.

Time for the big pointy stick Biden? Get a grip. Either that or you're going to be damned by history!

Edited March 22 by Yellow Fever

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

At last. Never too late...

The UN Security Council has passed a resolution calling for an "immediate ceasefire" in Gaza

[cambridgeshire canary 6,777]

11 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

At last. Never too late...

The UN Security Council has passed a resolution calling for an "immediate ceasefire" in Gaza

*Providing there is unconditional release of all hostages.

 

Which means it won't happen as that's all Hamas have.

Edited March 25 by cambridgeshire canary