movielover said:

---

President Trump's Adminitration signed five ME peace Accords, with Saudia Arabia in the pipeline.

---

And what did that get us?

dajo9 said:

---

movielover said:

---

President Trump's Adminitration signed five ME peace Accords, with Saudia Arabia in the pipeline.

---

And what did that get us?

---

Liberal support for Iran funded Hamas terrorists.

The Abraham Accords

https://www.uae-embassy.org/abraham-accords-sustainable-inclusive-growth

Ghaith al-Omari, Senior Fellow, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Issued 13 August 2020

"The United States, Israel and the United Arab Emirates pulled off the rarest of feats on Thursday: a diplomatic win-win-win in the Middle East. President Donald Trump announced a historic breakthrough in which the UAE will normalize relations with Israel in exchange for Israel dropping its plan to annex parts of the West Bank that Palestinians claim for a future state."

That's on purpose. Not every agreement is suppose to address every issue. The whole point is it's a STARTING place. That is what makes it historic.

It was nothing. A bunch of autocrats and a wannabe autocrat patting themselves on the back and putting out press releases for nothing after ignoring a key group that needs addressing - the Palestinian people.

Cal88 said:

---

The main problem with the Abraham Accords is that they don't address the main issue, Palestine. They give Israel carte blanche to continue their ethnic cleansing of the West Bank.

---

That is the entire point - Palestine is not the main issue. It never was, though the Arab states have used them as a wedge issue for many years. And now there are reasons the Arab states have abandoned the Palestinians.

Much of that has to do with the Palestinians aligning themselves with Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby alienating Egypt, Saudi, and the other Sunni majority nations. Many of the Arab states felt they had other more important national interests (countering Iran) and simply realized that the Palestinians/Hamas were not looking to make peace with Israel in any event. They also probably realized that the Abraham accords would give them more power to influence Israel (at least a little).

The Arab countries' "demands" for a "cease fire" are feckless and not sincere. They want Hamas destroyed almost as much as Israel does. And for good reason.

There are reasons none of the Arab states are offering to resettle Palestinians or even offering much help. And those reason have little if anything to do with Israel. Jordan - which is already 70% Palestinian - doesn't want them despite their queen leading the charge against Israel. And we all know why.

socaltownie said:

---

movielover said:

---

The Abraham Accords

https://www.uae-embassy.org/abraham-accords-sustainable-inclusive-growth

Ghaith al-Omari, Senior Fellow, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Issued 13 August 2020

"The United States, Israel and the United Arab Emirates pulled off the rarest of feats on Thursday: a diplomatic win-win-win in the Middle East. President Donald Trump announced a historic breakthrough in which the UAE will normalize relations with Israel in exchange for Israel dropping its plan to annex parts of the West Bank that Palestinians claim for a future state."

---

except that isreal doesn't likely plan on annexation (at least formally). It is pleased with the "facts on the ground" of settler encroachment. There was very little in the AA for the Palistineans and much for the gulf states who are trying to figure out what a future without oil looks like and NEED to get that $$$ invested into the global market.

---

Earlier in this thread I posted recent polling confirming that a majority of all Israelis favored ending settlement expansion in exchange for peace with Saudi. They don't even require peace with the Palestinians to stop the settlements. That shows you the average Israeli's willingness to stop settlements.

Settlement expansion is problematic - and reflects the disparate political influence of settlers - but it is not the real impediment to peace. Israel has withdrawn settlers in exchange for peace multiple times (including a full withdrawal from Sinai and Gaza). How did the Gaza withdrawal work out?

The impediment to peace is the absence of a Palestinian peace partner that can and would control Hamas/Gaza and other radical elements. Full stop. If you truly want a two state solution and peace, you should be in favor of the current military action to remove Hamas from power. That is the condition precedent to the creation of any Palestinian state. As long as Hamas has the ability to threaten Israel, there can never be peace.

And to expand a bit on Bibi's less than full throttled support of a two state solution. That is a reflection of his stated personal belief that there is no peace partner and the political reality that he needs settler support for his narrow coalition government.

But Bibi is a dead man walking. After the war, there will be a new government - probably center right leaning. If Hamas and other extremists are neutralized as a threat, there will be even greater pressure (both internal and external) on Israel to stop the settler expansion and to revive the now dead peace process. At Oslo, Israel accept a two state solution; Hamas and many Palestinians never have.

Unlike Gaza under Hamas, Israel's internal politics are capable of changing - pretty quickly in fact. And history shows that Israel will trade land for peace under the right circumstances. In contrast, there is no indication that Hamas would ever accept a two state solution.

The Abraham Accords are toothless. Bahrain has already recalled their ambassador and Israel has recalled theirs in protest.

The Abraham Accords have no relevance to Israel & Palestine. They're about the Gulf States getting preferential access to weapons and trade opportunities with us and Israel from leaders that have little concern for popular opinion, with a bonus kick of Israeli tourists visiting the UAE.

There are zero actual tangible enforceable or meaningful conditions within the Abraham Accords regarding anything to do with the Israeli-Palestinian situation.

"Recalling the reception held on January 28, 2020, at which President Trump presented his Vision for Peace, and committing to continuing their efforts to achieve a just, comprehensive, realistic and enduring solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict"

Recalling the Treaties of Peace between the State of Israel and the Arab Republic of Egypt and between the State ofIsrael and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and committed to working together to realize a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that meets the legitimate needs and aspirations of both peoples, and to advance comprehensive Middle East peace, stability and prosperity;"

Is Campus Rage Fueled by Middle Eastern Money?
"A reliable predictor of the intensity of campus antisemitism was the amount of undisclosed money a given university received from Middle Eastern regimes."@bariweiss @ncri_io @TheFP https://t.co/psKmNwUk50

— Israel War Room (@IsraelWarRoom) November 7, 2023

wifeisafurd said:

---

Doesn't sound like anyone is on the same page as to what happens after the IDF finishes its invasion:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/israel-hamas/2023/11/07/netanyahu-israel-plans-to-control-gaza-after-hamas-war-ends/71486260007/


Some quotes:

Netanyahu said his country "will have overall security responsibility" in Gaza for "an indefinite period" after its war with Hamas ends. Sounds to me like an occupation.

Tzipi Livni, who has held several cabinet positions in Israel's government, including roles as foreign minister and vice prime minister, said that she was not willing to "be a commentator on the prime minister's" words but in general the thrust of his remarks reflected that "Israel does not want to reoccupy Gaza."

The Biden administration is talking to Israeli officials and others in the region about what governance in Gaza should look like after the war, according to John Kirby, White House spokesman on national security.
"We're not at a point right now where we can point to a specific solution set here," Kirby told reporters Monday. "Obviously, governance in Gaza post conflict is going to be critically important. What that looks like and who's responsible for what aspect of it, again, are all questions we're asking ourselves, and we're going to be in discussions with our partners about." What is clear, Kirby emphasized, is "Hamas can't be in control of Gaza anymore.""We can't go back to Oct. 6," he said.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has suggested the U.S., in an apparent divergence from Israel's position, would like to see the Palestinian Authority at the center of discussions about Gaza's future. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has said "the Gaza Strip is an integral part of the State of Palestine."

---

All this means is that Israel will militarily occupy the Gaza Strip indefinitely.

Public US criticism of Israel thus far has historically and contemporarily been completely meaningless when it comes to Israel's occupation of land. Israel's Gaza settler population at its height was 7,826 in 2004 and is the only instance of settler population decreasing.

Every single president since LBJ save for Reagan and Trump has been some form of concerned, alarmed, surprised, shocked, dismayed etc. and it hasn't led to any meaningful change. We will public criticize settlements out of one side of our mouth, then we will publicly condemn and veto any US resolutions that do anything about the settlements, and then we will move the goalposts about what constitutes a Palestinian state by further and further carving out existing large bloc Jewish settlements that we had previously condemned and declared illegal as the new starting point for land division for Israel.

What's left of the West Bank isn't a viable Palestinian state, it's a series of apartheid Bantustans. Google the term if you're not familiar with it and are curious, and look at the map of apartheid Bantustans and the current situation in the West Bank.

• LBJ: 1963-1969: "alarmed" at the plans for Israeli illegal settlements on occupied land.

• Nixon: 1969-1974: Secretary of State WIlliam P Rogers submitted the Rogers Plan in 1971 for Israel to return largely to pre-1967 borders in return for peace with Arab neighbors.

In 1971 when the Rogers Plan was written there were less than 10,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land.

By 1974 there were ~40,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land.

• Ford: 1974-1977. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: Israel needed to return to 1967 boundaries, and that settlement boundary adjustment as part of a peace agreement was based on an unfeasible premise.

By 1977 there were ~60,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace.

• Carter 1977-1981: In 1977 Carter categorically concluded Israel's settlements were inconsistent with international law and "contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace"
  
  In 1978 at the conclusion of Camp David Carter believed he and Israeli PM Begin had a deal that further settlements would be frozen.

By 1981 there were ~95,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land inconsistent with international law and contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace.

• Reagan: 1981-1989: Asserted Israeli settlements on militarily occupied Palestinian land was not illegal.

By 1989 there were ~200,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land Reagan thought were not illegal.

• HW Bush: 1989-1993 Secretary of State James Baker: "Our particular opposition today to settlement activity is that it constitutes an obstacle to peace. In the past, the position of the US has been that it was, in fact, illegal"

By 1993 there were 281,800 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land constituting an obstacle to peace.

• Clinton: 1993-2001" Found settlements to be "a setback to peace"

By 2001 there were 400,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land constituting an setback to peace

• Obama 2009-2017: In 2016 Obama was "shocked" at the systemic separation of West Bank Palestinian communities.

By 2017 there were 620,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land creating shocking systemic separation of West Bank Palestinian communities.

• Trump 2017-2021:

By 2021 there were 700,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land

movielover said:

---

Sad day.

Reports from West #Darfur received today unveil that 773 African civilians including mostly teenagers, but women and elderly as well, have been massacred by the Jihadi #Janjaweed in the #Geneina area. Reports talks about hundreds burned and many detained and brutalized on their… pic.twitter.com/2Kw9BDW1UL

— Walid Phares (@WalidPhares) November 7, 2023

---

Where are the protests in the streets of US and European cities? Why the lack of outcry from anyone on BI or for that matter anywhere else in the internet. Like the UN "Human Rights" council, it seems people have a unique obsession with the world's only Jewish state.

KPG said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Doesn't sound like anyone is on the same page as to what happens after the IDF finishes its invasion:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/israel-hamas/2023/11/07/netanyahu-israel-plans-to-control-gaza-after-hamas-war-ends/71486260007/


Some quotes:

Netanyahu said his country "will have overall security responsibility" in Gaza for "an indefinite period" after its war with Hamas ends. Sounds to me like an occupation.

Tzipi Livni, who has held several cabinet positions in Israel's government, including roles as foreign minister and vice prime minister, said that she was not willing to "be a commentator on the prime minister's" words but in general the thrust of his remarks reflected that "Israel does not want to reoccupy Gaza."

The Biden administration is talking to Israeli officials and others in the region about what governance in Gaza should look like after the war, according to John Kirby, White House spokesman on national security.
"We're not at a point right now where we can point to a specific solution set here," Kirby told reporters Monday. "Obviously, governance in Gaza post conflict is going to be critically important. What that looks like and who's responsible for what aspect of it, again, are all questions we're asking ourselves, and we're going to be in discussions with our partners about." What is clear, Kirby emphasized, is "Hamas can't be in control of Gaza anymore.""We can't go back to Oct. 6," he said.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has suggested the U.S., in an apparent divergence from Israel's position, would like to see the Palestinian Authority at the center of discussions about Gaza's future. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has said "the Gaza Strip is an integral part of the State of Palestine."

---

All this means is that Israel will militarily occupy the Gaza Strip indefinitely.

Public US criticism of Israel thus far has historically and contemporarily been completely meaningless when it comes to Israel's occupation of land. Israel's Gaza settler population at its height was 7,826 in 2004 and is the only instance of settler population decreasing.

Every single president since LBJ save for Reagan and Trump has been some form of concerned, alarmed, surprised, shocked, dismayed etc. and it hasn't led to any meaningful change. We will public criticize settlements out of one side of our mouth, then we will publicly condemn and veto any US resolutions that do anything about the settlements, and then we will move the goalposts about what constitutes a Palestinian state by further and further carving out existing large bloc Jewish settlements that we had previously condemned and declared illegal as the new starting point for land division for Israel.

What's left of the West Bank isn't a viable Palestinian state, it's a series of apartheid Bantustans. Google the term if you're not familiar with it and are curious, and look at the map of apartheid Bantustans and the current situation in the West Bank.

• LBJ: 1963-1969: "alarmed" at the plans for Israeli illegal settlements on occupied land.

• Nixon: 1969-1974: Secretary of State WIlliam P Rogers submitted the Rogers Plan in 1971 for Israel to return largely to pre-1967 borders in return for peace with Arab neighbors.

In 1971 when the Rogers Plan was written there were less than 10,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land.

By 1974 there were ~40,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land.

• Ford: 1974-1977. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger: Israel needed to return to 1967 boundaries, and that settlement boundary adjustment as part of a peace agreement was based on an unfeasible premise.

By 1977 there were ~60,000 US and UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace.

• Carter 1977-1981: In 1977 Carter categorically concluded Israel's settlements were inconsistent with international law and "contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace"
  
  In 1978 at the conclusion of Camp David Carter believed he and Israeli PM Begin had a deal that further settlements would be frozen.

By 1981 there were ~95,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land inconsistent with international law and contrary to progress to a comprehensive peace.

• Reagan: 1981-1989: Asserted Israeli settlements on militarily occupied Palestinian land was not illegal.

By 1989 there were ~200,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land Reagan thought were not illegal.

• HW Bush: 1989-1993 Secretary of State James Baker: "Our particular opposition today to settlement activity is that it constitutes an obstacle to peace. In the past, the position of the US has been that it was, in fact, illegal"

By 1993 there were 281,800 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land constituting an obstacle to peace.

• Clinton: 1993-2001" Found settlements to be "a setback to peace"

By 2001 there were 400,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land constituting an setback to peace

• Obama 2009-2017: In 2016 Obama was "shocked" at the systemic separation of West Bank Palestinian communities.

By 2017 there were 620,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land creating shocking systemic separation of West Bank Palestinian communities.

• Trump 2017-2021:

By 2021 there were 700,000 UN asserted illegal Israeli settlers on militarily occupied land

---

FYI - Your numbers are wrong unless you're including Jerusalem as militarily occupied land (which it is not).

Not sure what your point is here. Virtually no-one is claiming settlements are helpful to a peace solution.

I have a set of related questions for you.

If a Palestinian state were formed tomorrow in the West Bank (let's even say 1967 borders) and Gaza, would you agree that the 500k+ settlers should have the option of living in (and presumably becoming citizens of) the Palestinian state? Should Jews be allowed to move from other countries to the newly created Palestinian state and become citizens there?

In my hypothetical Palestinian state, do you think its likely Jews would enjoy equal rights, security and acceptance? If so, what makes you think that? If not, how would that not be an apartheid state?

Jews and Christians have been driven from many Muslim countries and don't enjoy equal rights there. Places like Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Algeria, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, and Turkey.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_the_Muslim_world#Table_of_Jewish_population_since_1948

Why are those not "Apartheid" countries? Are those countries - which knowingly drove out Jews and in some cases Christians, guilty of "genocide"?

Answer: because those oppressors are not Jews.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Answer: because those oppressors are not Jews.

---

If you designate some people as "oppressors" and don't include these individuals then you need to rethink your taxonomy https://t.co/PFAQ2mJKxz

— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) November 7, 2023

BearGoggles said:

---

movielover said:

---

Sad day.

Reports from West #Darfur received today unveil that 773 African civilians including mostly teenagers, but women and elderly as well, have been massacred by the Jihadi #Janjaweed in the #Geneina area. Reports talks about hundreds burned and many detained and brutalized on their… pic.twitter.com/2Kw9BDW1UL

— Walid Phares (@WalidPhares) November 7, 2023

---

Where are the protests in the streets of US and European cities? Why the lack of outcry from anyone on BI or for that matter anywhere else in the internet. Like the UN "Human Rights" council, it seems people have a unique obsession with the world's only Jewish state.

---

I do appreciate that you used a group that conducted an ethnic cleansing to compare to Israel. I agree with you that both groups participate in ethnic cleansing and genocide and I appreciate that you have finally accepted that Israel is led by the same type of people with the same type of aims as the Jihadi.

I can't speak for Europe to their motivations for protesting a genocidal apartheid state that conducts ethnic cleansings. Speaking for myself, the world is full of bad groups of people doing bad things. I don't feel it's the United States' job to be the world police force, so I neither expect nor desire for them to commit American resources and, more importantly, our soldiers' lives so that we can be the moral arbiters of the planet. However, when we're talking about Israel doing the same things that the Jihadi have done, the United States supports them with an obscene amount of money and weapons so I have a very vested interest in protesting when they take our money and our weapons and use them for ethnic cleansing and apartheid.

If you can point to the United States giving money and weapons to the Jihadi, I would be happy to have whatever level of outcry you deem appropriate. Until such time though, feel free to pound sand snowflake.

Israel does not and has never cared about "the hostages".

Anyone who believes drivel needs to explain why Israel already intentionally killed over 100 Israelis on 10/7 with tanks and why they are carpet bombing Gaza and killing people in the West Bank. You also need to explain how carpet bombing is going to get Hamas terrorists if they are hiding in underground tunnels.

You also might want to explain why Israel thought it was a good idea to show up to the UN wearing gold stars.

As a Litvak Jew I despise the IDF and the IOF. It is a state sponsored genocide and what is worse no one is talking about Israel's role in the current genocide in the Congo and the Sudan.

Members of the Israeli Knesset and U.S. Congress supporting this genocide need to taken to The Hague to be prosecuted crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Grigsby said:

---

Israel does not and has never cared about "the hostages".

Anyone who believes drivel needs to explain why Israel already intentionally killed over 100 Israelis on 10/7 with tanks and why they are carpet bombing Gaza and killing people in the West Bank. You also need to explain how carpet bombing is going to get Hamas terrorists if they are hiding in underground tunnels.

You also might want to explain why Israel thought it was a good idea to show up to the UN wearing gold stars.

As a Litvak Jew I despise the IDF and the IOF. It is a state sponsored genocide and what is worse no one is talking about Israel's role in the current genocide in the Congo and the Sudan.

Members of the Israeli Knesset and U.S. Congress supporting this genocide need to taken to The Hague to be prosecuted crimes against humanity and war crimes.

---

Why aren't Hamas allowing civilians into their tunnels for safety and instead using the civilians as cover for their tunnels? Why don't you call for Hamas to be brought to the Hague? Civilians aren't being killed in a vacuum. Both sides are doing horrible things.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Grigsby said:

---

Israel does not and has never cared about "the hostages".

Anyone who believes drivel needs to explain why Israel already intentionally killed over 100 Israelis on 10/7 with tanks and why they are carpet bombing Gaza and killing people in the West Bank. You also need to explain how carpet bombing is going to get Hamas terrorists if they are hiding in underground tunnels.

You also might want to explain why Israel thought it was a good idea to show up to the UN wearing gold stars.

As a Litvak Jew I despise the IDF and the IOF. It is a state sponsored genocide and what is worse no one is talking about Israel's role in the current genocide in the Congo and the Sudan.

Members of the Israeli Knesset and U.S. Congress supporting this genocide need to taken to The Hague to be prosecuted crimes against humanity and war crimes.

---

Why aren't Hamas allowing civilians into their tunnels for safety and instead using the civilians as cover for their tunnels? Why don't you call for Hamas to be brought to the Hague? Civilians aren't being killed in a vacuum. Both sides are doing horrible things.

---

It doesn't happen often, but I agree with you, Minot. I've stayed out of this debate because I don't like what either side is doing. I'm also not seeing any indication that either side is having a change of heart.

BearGoggles said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Doesn't sound like anyone is on the same page as to what happens after the IDF finishes its invasion:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/israel-hamas/2023/11/07/netanyahu-israel-plans-to-control-gaza-after-hamas-war-ends/71486260007/


Some quotes:

Netanyahu said his country "will have overall security responsibility" in Gaza for "an indefinite period" after its war with Hamas ends. Sounds to me like an occupation.

Tzipi Livni, who has held several cabinet positions in Israel's government, including roles as foreign minister and vice prime minister, said that she was not willing to "be a commentator on the prime minister's" words but in general the thrust of his remarks reflected that "Israel does not want to reoccupy Gaza."

The Biden administration is talking to Israeli officials and others in the region about what governance in Gaza should look like after the war, according to John Kirby, White House spokesman on national security.
"We're not at a point right now where we can point to a specific solution set here," Kirby told reporters Monday. "Obviously, governance in Gaza post conflict is going to be critically important. What that looks like and who's responsible for what aspect of it, again, are all questions we're asking ourselves, and we're going to be in discussions with our partners about." What is clear, Kirby emphasized, is "Hamas can't be in control of Gaza anymore.""We can't go back to Oct. 6," he said.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has suggested the U.S., in an apparent divergence from Israel's position, would like to see the Palestinian Authority at the center of discussions about Gaza's future. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has said "the Gaza Strip is an integral part of the State of Palestine."

---

I think you're reading way too much into this.

Israel declared war. If it removes Hamas as the ruling government, under international law, it is an occupying power. With that, comes the "overall security responsibility" per International law. I think Netanyahu is alluding to that as well as the fact that Israel won't relinquish that control (and by extension relieve itself of that obligation) unless and until its security concerns are fully addressed which is the "indefinite period".

The question is for how long will Israel remain in occupation of Gaza? And that, quite candidly, is the problem. I believe it was Colin Powell who said, "you break it you buy it." Personally, I don't believe the Israelis will want to stay but as Kirby stated, they don't have an answer to that.

Israel may have no choice but to accept the PA. Of course, the real challenge is for the PA (or another less violent group, if any exist) to assume power: (i) without looking like the Israeli's puppet; and (ii) with some level of popular support. There may not be such a group . . . so maybe they look to an Arab group comprised of Jordan, Egypt, and other countries who transition control to the PA.

---

Hamas hasn't allowed an election in nearly 20 years. They publicly assert they have no obligation or interest in providing safety, food, or anything else to care for Palestinians in Gaza, that the UN is responsible for these things. Hamas is the definition of an occupying force.

It's not that difficult to understand people. If Hamas hadn't launched their murderous rampage on Oct 7th, there would be no war. When a terrorist group goes nuclear, there is no alternative but to remove them from control of a territory they use to stage attacks. No country on earth would tolerate the kind of savagery committed on that day.

And if you're having trouble figuring out why civilians in Gaza are dying, then you are blind to the fact that Hamas wants them to die. They put their rocket launchers in hospitals and schools to not only cause damage to Israel but to get as many civilians killed as possible. That's their entire strategy.

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Grigsby said:

---

Israel does not and has never cared about "the hostages".

Anyone who believes drivel needs to explain why Israel already intentionally killed over 100 Israelis on 10/7 with tanks and why they are carpet bombing Gaza and killing people in the West Bank. You also need to explain how carpet bombing is going to get Hamas terrorists if they are hiding in underground tunnels.

You also might want to explain why Israel thought it was a good idea to show up to the UN wearing gold stars.

As a Litvak Jew I despise the IDF and the IOF. It is a state sponsored genocide and what is worse no one is talking about Israel's role in the current genocide in the Congo and the Sudan.

Members of the Israeli Knesset and U.S. Congress supporting this genocide need to taken to The Hague to be prosecuted crimes against humanity and war crimes.

---

Why aren't Hamas allowing civilians into their tunnels for safety and instead using the civilians as cover for their tunnels? Why don't you call for Hamas to be brought to the Hague? Civilians aren't being killed in a vacuum. Both sides are doing horrible things.

---

The civilian refugees have gone to places like refugee camps, hospital grounds, churches and mosques, all of which have been heavily targeted and bombed by Israel the last few weeks.

The Hamas tunnels are similar to those made in the Vietnam war, precarious narrow passages that aren't meant to shelter large number of people. In the current Gaza situation, any large underground shelter facility would not provide protection from bunker-busting bombs, to the contrary, people using such facility would be buried alive. The only protection to the civilian population is provided by the international community exerting pressure on Israel, and the Israelis own concern about their image, which they have very carefully managed, especially in the West.

---

Translation: Hamas is allowed to use money to enable their terrorist effort, not to benefit Palestinians. Israel has to accept that Hamas can proceed in that manner but be bound by normal rules of war, which - as terrorists - Hamas is manipulating to their (Hamas') benefit.

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Grigsby said:

---

Israel does not and has never cared about "the hostages".

Anyone who believes drivel needs to explain why Israel already intentionally killed over 100 Israelis on 10/7 with tanks and why they are carpet bombing Gaza and killing people in the West Bank. You also need to explain how carpet bombing is going to get Hamas terrorists if they are hiding in underground tunnels.

You also might want to explain why Israel thought it was a good idea to show up to the UN wearing gold stars.

As a Litvak Jew I despise the IDF and the IOF. It is a state sponsored genocide and what is worse no one is talking about Israel's role in the current genocide in the Congo and the Sudan.

Members of the Israeli Knesset and U.S. Congress supporting this genocide need to taken to The Hague to be prosecuted crimes against humanity and war crimes.

---

Why aren't Hamas allowing civilians into their tunnels for safety and instead using the civilians as cover for their tunnels? Why don't you call for Hamas to be brought to the Hague? Civilians aren't being killed in a vacuum. Both sides are doing horrible things.

---

The civilian refugees have gone to places like refugee camps, hospital grounds, churches and mosques, all of which have been heavily targeted and bombed by Israel the last few weeks.

The Hamas tunnels are similar to those made in the Vietnam war, precarious narrow passages that aren't meant to shelter large number of people. In the current Gaza situation, any large underground shelter facility would not provide protection from bunker-busting bombs, to the contrary, people using such facility would be buried alive. The only protection to the civilian population is provided by the international community exerting pressure on Israel, and the Israelis own concern about their image, which they have very carefully managed, especially in the West.

---

Translation: Hamas is allowed to use money to enable their terrorist effort, not to benefit Palestinians. Israel has to accept that Hamas can proceed in that manner but be bound by normal rules of war, which - as terrorists - Hamas is manipulating to their (Hamas') benefit.

---

There is no amount of Hamas spending that could have protected tens of thousands of Gaza civilians from ~50,000 Israeli bombs launched on a densely inhabited area smaller than Manhattan.

---

Of course there is. If they took every single dollar they stole from the UN and received from Iran and built roads, schools, hospitals, libraries and factories instead of spending it on guns, rockets, bombs and tunnels there would not be 1 dead Palestinian today; they couldn't be more safe.