Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[steve_bank]

Israel is reaping what it sowed from the start. Its troubles go back to its founding.

Perhaps if Europe (before anyone pops up - too many European nations in WW2 acquiesced in the Nazis treatment of their Jews) had not make their lands an unsafe area for Jews we would not be having this discussion.

And so the rationalization ensues.

The facts of what modern Israel has done and is doing are inescapable.

I am not anti Jew by any means, but as a state Israel is a bad actor outside its borders.

Netanyahu said Israel will do whatever it thinks is in its own best interest regardless of what anyone thinks. That is fine, but Israel is responsible for the consequences of its actions. Like declaring Jerusalem its capitol in spite of agreements and the ethnic cleansing, displacements of Arabs for Jews.

Israel is enabled by knowing the USA is its big brother who will support Israel right or wrong.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Well if you read the Al Jazeera articles, that’s how they’re painting it. And we’ll get scant, if any information from any western news service.
I don’t mind people clipping a post when they are only addressing a specific point but the Al Jazeera articles are most relevant as to the religious disrespect perpetrated by these Jewish groups. They’re painting it as the spark for this attack.

1) How they're painting it doesn't make it so.

2) Al Jazeera is owned by terrorist supporters at this point. It is no longer a credible news source.

Extending no validity to your comments, if you have some western source that addresses the issue Al Jazeera does, I'd love to read it. Damned if I could find one. Wikipedia's article on the status quo of the Temple Mount seems to support Al Jazeera's comments.

 

[steve_bank]

You can debate agreements and the British Mandate, bit the bottom line is the Jews armed themselves, tactically illegally, and declared a state. They seized prime business and agriculture prophetess from Arabs without compensation.

The Jews declared a state on the land that was to be allocated to them but which the partition was being stalled.

In the first war Arabs recruited Palest inns to fight against Israel, and when they lost the war they abandoned them. Israel denied right of return for Arabs who had lived in Isreali borders.

Note that most of them were refused return because they would not vow to continue the violence. In other words, traitors to the nation they were in.

After the followig wars which Arabs lost, Plaestinians had no options but terrorism. If Israel had been more magnamous they might have avoided the terrorism.

1) It started with insurgency, not terrorism. Terrorism came after 1973 when it became apparent that destroying Israel on the battlefield was impossible.

2) Israel has never had a meaningful ability to avoid the conflict. There's enough money to fund fighting Israel that there will be fighting.

3) The plight of the Palestinians is mostly due to their own leaders. At one point they were the most prosperous non-oil Arab nation in the world--and blew away 2/3 of their GDP by picking a fight with Israel.

The Arabs did not agree to give up the land they lived on to create Israel.

Jews armed themselves to create a homeland. Over here freedom fighters. Arabs armed themselves to take it back are called terrorists. Today their homes are still being taken by force.

Keep in mind by today's standrds the Jews in Palastine used terroist tactics.

 

[Bronzeage]

A barrage of 100s of rockets, including longer range ones reaching as far as Tel Aviv. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the Squad must be rejoicing.

IDF's response to this must he swift and heavy. Including going after Hamas and Islamic Jihad brass. And the Biden administration should not push Israel into a premature ceisefire.

Hamas and other terrorists must be taught a lesson. As must their masters in Tehran.

This is clearly Hamas's attempt to stop the Israel/Saudi Arabia normalization or peace deal.

This is an astute observation and it invites the "if so, then?" analysis and then it gets weird.

Saudi money supports Palestinians and it goes to many various factions. We can assume this to be a fact. Just as not all Palestinian factions have the same goals, there are also Saudi factions and the Royal court does not control all money flowing to foreign causes. Rockets are expensive and secret rockets cost a premium. Someone paid extra the start this latest round of violence. It's probably easier to create a crisis to steer Saudi policy than to get into the circle that has the steering wheel.

What disadvantage does Hamas suffer if Saudi Arabia and Israel normalize relations? There certainly will be less money for rockets, but just as certainly more money for schools, sewer systems, and parking meters. This is bad news for the men at the top of the military food chain, but continued fighting means it's exactly these men who are the most sought target. A text message sent by one of their less well paid subservient soldiers can give a cruise missile all the information it needs to end his career. It's not totally irrational. A warlord, by definition has to remain at war in order to maintain power. The political instability that creates warlords requires this and there is no place for a warlord in a politically stable environment. It becomes a matter of greatly increasing the risk to one's life in order to insure survival. As I said, it gets weird.

Saudi Arabia is not the only source of warlord financing. Iran's interests run counter to the Saudis and also send money to Palestine. It would definitely be Iran's goal to sabotage any warming of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants to be the big brother in a Middle Eastern hegemony. The Saudis have always maintained this status by judicious distribution of money to European and American interests, not military power. This is probably a better deal all things considered, if one of those things is Sadam Husain.

The final "if so, then?" is stark conclusion that the money sources that fuel this conflict, have no interest in peace between Israel and Palestine, despite what anyone says in public.

I think you have it wrong here. I don't think it's Saudi money. Rather, I think it's Iranian--they're the ones that would be hurt the worst by normalization between the Saudis and Israel.

I do agree about the warlord issue--Hamas becomes meaningless if there were peace. Thus Hamas will not allow a true peace so long as they exist--and they'll exist (or a replacement for them will exist) so long as the money flows.

As I said, there are more sources of Saudi money than just the Royals. There are Saudi factions who would like to see the King and Prince put in a bind. The Iranians are certainly opposed to any country developing better relations with Israel, but they aren't the only ones.

 

[bilby]

The Jews declared a state on the land that was to be allocated to them

By whose authority? Were the current inhabitants of that land consulted about this "allocation"?

 

[Thomas II]

A barrage of 100s of rockets, including longer range ones reaching as far as Tel Aviv. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the Squad must be rejoicing.

IDF's response to this must he swift and heavy. Including going after Hamas and Islamic Jihad brass. And the Biden administration should not push Israel into a premature ceisefire.

Hamas and other terrorists must be taught a lesson. As must their masters in Tehran.

This is clearly Hamas's attempt to stop the Israel/Saudi Arabia normalization or peace deal.

This is an astute observation and it invites the "if so, then?" analysis and then it gets weird.

Saudi money supports Palestinians and it goes to many various factions. We can assume this to be a fact. Just as not all Palestinian factions have the same goals, there are also Saudi factions and the Royal court does not control all money flowing to foreign causes. Rockets are expensive and secret rockets cost a premium. Someone paid extra the start this latest round of violence. It's probably easier to create a crisis to steer Saudi policy than to get into the circle that has the steering wheel.

What disadvantage does Hamas suffer if Saudi Arabia and Israel normalize relations? There certainly will be less money for rockets, but just as certainly more money for schools, sewer systems, and parking meters. This is bad news for the men at the top of the military food chain, but continued fighting means it's exactly these men who are the most sought target. A text message sent by one of their less well paid subservient soldiers can give a cruise missile all the information it needs to end his career. It's not totally irrational. A warlord, by definition has to remain at war in order to maintain power. The political instability that creates warlords requires this and there is no place for a warlord in a politically stable environment. It becomes a matter of greatly increasing the risk to one's life in order to insure survival. As I said, it gets weird.

Saudi Arabia is not the only source of warlord financing. Iran's interests run counter to the Saudis and also send money to Palestine. It would definitely be Iran's goal to sabotage any warming of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants to be the big brother in a Middle Eastern hegemony. The Saudis have always maintained this status by judicious distribution of money to European and American interests, not military power. This is probably a better deal all things considered, if one of those things is Sadam Husain.

The final "if so, then?" is stark conclusion that the money sources that fuel this conflict, have no interest in peace between Israel and Palestine, despite what anyone says in public.

I think you have it wrong here. I don't think it's Saudi money. Rather, I think it's Iranian--they're the ones that would be hurt the worst by normalization between the Saudis and Israel.

I do agree about the warlord issue--Hamas becomes meaningless if there were peace. Thus Hamas will not allow a true peace so long as they exist--and they'll exist (or a replacement for them will exist) so long as the money flows.

As I said, there are more sources of Saudi money than just the Royals. There are Saudi factions who would like to see the King and Prince put in a bind. The Iranians are certainly opposed to any country developing better relations with Israel, but they aren't the only ones.

Do you think Putin was involved in this? Now the US has to help Israel and allocate resources that otherwise would go to Ukraine...

 

[laughing dog]

Nothing in your evidence directly condones any type of violence. Resistance need not mean violence.

Perhaps they do condone violence in resistance. But your post is long on inference and short in evidence.

Don't play stupid. This is obviously in response to Hamas' actions--virtually all of which constitute war crimes. They weren't engaging in combat, they were engaging in mass murder and hostage taking. There is absolutely no question about the hostage taking, do you support hostage taking?

Your hand-waved assertions do not make it so.

As a matter of fact, earlier in the thread there are quotes from members of those groups decrying the violence. So your response is driven by ignorance.

Unlike you, I do not condone violence against civilians if any nation, ethnicity, race or religion.

 

[Bronzeage]

A barrage of 100s of rockets, including longer range ones reaching as far as Tel Aviv. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the Squad must be rejoicing.

IDF's response to this must he swift and heavy. Including going after Hamas and Islamic Jihad brass. And the Biden administration should not push Israel into a premature ceisefire.

Hamas and other terrorists must be taught a lesson. As must their masters in Tehran.

This is clearly Hamas's attempt to stop the Israel/Saudi Arabia normalization or peace deal.

This is an astute observation and it invites the "if so, then?" analysis and then it gets weird.

Saudi money supports Palestinians and it goes to many various factions. We can assume this to be a fact. Just as not all Palestinian factions have the same goals, there are also Saudi factions and the Royal court does not control all money flowing to foreign causes. Rockets are expensive and secret rockets cost a premium. Someone paid extra the start this latest round of violence. It's probably easier to create a crisis to steer Saudi policy than to get into the circle that has the steering wheel.

What disadvantage does Hamas suffer if Saudi Arabia and Israel normalize relations? There certainly will be less money for rockets, but just as certainly more money for schools, sewer systems, and parking meters. This is bad news for the men at the top of the military food chain, but continued fighting means it's exactly these men who are the most sought target. A text message sent by one of their less well paid subservient soldiers can give a cruise missile all the information it needs to end his career. It's not totally irrational. A warlord, by definition has to remain at war in order to maintain power. The political instability that creates warlords requires this and there is no place for a warlord in a politically stable environment. It becomes a matter of greatly increasing the risk to one's life in order to insure survival. As I said, it gets weird.

Saudi Arabia is not the only source of warlord financing. Iran's interests run counter to the Saudis and also send money to Palestine. It would definitely be Iran's goal to sabotage any warming of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants to be the big brother in a Middle Eastern hegemony. The Saudis have always maintained this status by judicious distribution of money to European and American interests, not military power. This is probably a better deal all things considered, if one of those things is Sadam Husain.

The final "if so, then?" is stark conclusion that the money sources that fuel this conflict, have no interest in peace between Israel and Palestine, despite what anyone says in public.

I think you have it wrong here. I don't think it's Saudi money. Rather, I think it's Iranian--they're the ones that would be hurt the worst by normalization between the Saudis and Israel.

I do agree about the warlord issue--Hamas becomes meaningless if there were peace. Thus Hamas will not allow a true peace so long as they exist--and they'll exist (or a replacement for them will exist) so long as the money flows.

As I said, there are more sources of Saudi money than just the Royals. There are Saudi factions who would like to see the King and Prince put in a bind. The Iranians are certainly opposed to any country developing better relations with Israel, but they aren't the only ones.

Do you think Putin was involved in this? Now the US has to help Israel and allocate resources that otherwise would go to Ukraine...

It's entirely possible, but Putin has other things on his mind. Israel doesn't need any military aid unless another country commits ground troops to the fight.

 

[steve_bank]

As I have said many times in the past, the region has always been a mess of ethnic and religious conflict going back centuries.

There is no solution as they are all equally fanatical. War and killing has become endemic. It is all medieval geopolitics.

The cycle is Hamas attacks Israel, Israel bombs Gaze back to the stone age. Punch And Judy.

We have enabled the Saudi atrocities in Yemen.

As we are getting off oil let them slaughter each other until they get sick of it or run out of people. I am sick and tired of hearing about Israel. They have no strategic value for us, Ukraine does.

Israel is playing us like a fiddle.

We metaled in Iraq and ended up strengthening Iranian influence in the region.

 

[steve_bank]

Biden is sending a carrier, he has no authority to arbitrarily engage in combat where we have no mutual defense treaty.

 

[Bomb#20]

In Gaza, Hamas officials have defended the demonstrations, ostensibly held to protest issues including the treatment of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and Jewish visits to the Al Aqsa mosque compound, a site holy to both Muslims and Jews, who know it as the Temple Mount.

I knew I could find some mention of it in a western news source if I put my nose to it.
What I'm getting out of all of this is these ultranationalist Jewish groups are emboldened by Trump.il
So I'm guessing this is how it all started... this time.

Yep. Whenever we trace the chain of cause and effect leading to an unfortunate event, since it would be boring to follow the chain all the way to the Big Bang, we're going to stop somewhere. Where? The correct place to stop is at an act of choice by the oppressors. The oppressors are moral agents with free will; the oppressed are just doing what they're deterministically caused to do by the oppressors' actions. The oppressed are automatons. (Presumably, pushdown automatons.)

 

[Bomb#20]

Don't be absurd. Israel was imposed upon people whether they liked it or not.

Every country was imposed upon people whether they liked it or not.

They have fought against the eradication of their polity

They never had a polity. The Turks had a polity, and then the British had a polity, and then the Egyptians had a polity, and then the Israelis had a polity, and then Fatah had a polity, and then Hamas had a polity, but the Palestinians, never.

by the imposition of an entirely artificial state

Every state is entirely artificial.

on their land ever since it happened.

Why is it "their" land? Because the robbers they succeeded to it from were the 37th nation that stole it rather than the 38th?

Both sides are fighting for survival against an enemy who are hellbent on their destruction.

That's so oversimplified as to be useless. Both sides contain internal power struggles between moderates who'd be willing to accept a two-state solution and extremists who are hellbent on a one-state solution involving destruction of the other side. Both sides are fighting for survival against an enemy who are ruled by their respective extremists because their respective moderates have been sidelined. Any description worth the electrons it's printed on needs to consider why it is that the moderates lost the respective internal power struggles.

From out here it looks like Israelis who'd accept a two-state solution lost to the extremists because they have nothing to offer, because any land-for-peace deal will lose the land without gaining the peace, and the Palestinians who'd accept a two-state solution lost to the extremists because the Palestinian extremists will always torpedo any deal by committing war crimes and torpedo any attempt to remove them from power by never holding another election.

Israel has all the advantages; Palestinians are left with terrorism or defeat as their only options.

Depends on how you define "defeat". If you're a Palestinian extremist who sees a two-state solution as defeat, then yes. But if you're a Palestinian moderate who sees a two-state solution as a draw, then no. The Palestinians can defeat Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories and be "defeated" only in Israel any time they make up their collective minds to accept a two-state solution and do what they need to do to make it happen: adopt Gandhi-style nonviolent civil disobedience tactics.

"Palestinians are left with terrorism or defeat as their only options" is an artifact of Gandhi-tactics not being part of their cultural toolkit. Culture is destiny.

 

[JohnG]

They weren't just any Jews that reformed Israel, they were BRITISH Jews - the same British colonizers that colonized, India, Australia, Canada, The USA, etc...places where most of us are posting.

In North America, disease wiped out a huge percentage of the native population, so we don't really have a Gaza here, just tiny pockets of recovering indigenous peoples. If not for disease we would possibly have huge, Gaza-like areas.

I'm no expert - I am an ethnic Jew and I don't hold out hope for the future of Israel as long as far right wing parties run it. It was a given than another term for Netanyahu would be catastrophic. 80 000 protesters were right.

 

[Arctish]

Don't be absurd. Israel was imposed upon people whether they liked it or not.

Every country was imposed upon people whether they liked it or not.

They have fought against the eradication of their polity

They never had a polity. The Turks had a polity, and then the British had a polity, and then the Egyptians had a polity, and then the Israelis had a polity, and then Fatah had a polity, and then Hamas had a polity, but the Palestinians, never.

That depends on how you define polity. The Palestinians had a lot of autonomy under the Ottoman millet system. When the empire fell, they were eager to form their own modern republics. The British and French thwarted those ambitions by imposing military rule, favoring Christians and Jews (especially recent immigrants from Europe) over Muslims and religious minorities like the Druze, and drawing borders that favored European interests.

People who are used to handling their own affairs don't like it when outsiders butt in and try to tell them how to run things, especially when the outsiders are clearly setting things up to favor their own outside interests.

by the imposition of an entirely artificial state

Every state is entirely artificial.

on their land ever since it happened.

Why is it "their" land? Because the robbers they succeeded to it from were the 37th nation that stole it rather than the 38th?

Because indigenous people have a Right to call the place where they and their ancestors have lived for thousands of years "their" homeland.

At least they do in modern societies. Some folks that still hold to the 'might makes right' way of thinking believe if you can take land from people unable to fight you off, you get to keep it and they have no right to complain.

Both sides are fighting for survival against an enemy who are hellbent on their destruction.

That's so oversimplified as to be useless. Both sides contain internal power struggles between moderates who'd be willing to accept a two-state solution and extremists who are hellbent on a one-state solution involving destruction of the other side. Both sides are fighting for survival against an enemy who are ruled by their respective extremists because their respective moderates have been sidelined. Any description worth the electrons it's printed on needs to consider why it is that the moderates lost the respective internal power struggles.

From out here it looks like Israelis who'd accept a two-state solution lost to the extremists because they have nothing to offer, because any land-for-peace deal will lose the land without gaining the peace, and the Palestinians who'd accept a two-state solution lost to the extremists because the Palestinian extremists will always torpedo any deal by committing war crimes and torpedo any attempt to remove them from power by never holding another election.

The closest Israelis and Palestinians came to peace was when the Oslo Accords were first being implemented.

The Accords failed because Zionists began seizing land and building settlements as fast as they could so they could take even more land for their State which undermined trust, the Israeli Prime Minister who signed the Accords was assassinated by a Zionist for "betraying Zionism" and was replaced by a man too afraid to stand up to the murderers' supporters to stick to the plan, and if you believe Benjamin Netanyahu, because Bibi sabotaged it by insisting on the building of roads that rendered the proposed Palestinian State nothing more than a series of isolated enclaves surrounded by Israelis and the IDF.

Palestinians wanted an actual State with control of their own borders, airspace, resources, commerce, taxes, etc.

Israeli Zionists wanted to keep right on colonizing all of the West Bank and Gaza, and were willing to kill their fellow Israelis to achieve that end.

We all know which side prevailed.

Israel has all the advantages; Palestinians are left with terrorism or defeat as their only options.

Depends on how you define "defeat". If you're a Palestinian extremist who sees a two-state solution as defeat, then yes. But if you're a Palestinian moderate who sees a two-state solution as a draw, then no. The Palestinians can defeat Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories and be "defeated" only in Israel any time they make up their collective minds to accept a two-state solution and do what they need to do to make it happen: adopt Gandhi-style nonviolent civil disobedience tactics.

"Palestinians are left with terrorism or defeat as their only options" is an artifact of Gandhi-tactics not being part of their cultural toolkit. Culture is destiny.

Question: Where can Israel find the Palestinian Gandhi? Answer: Exactly where they put him, in administrative detention.

The Palestinians have plenty of Gandhis. The Israelis lock them up, the same way the British locked up Gandhi himself.

 

[TV and credit cards]

The US will send a carrier strike group to the Eastern Mediterranean in support of Israel

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin says he's ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel after the surprise attack by Hamas that has left more than 1,000 dead and thousands wounded on both sides.

apnews.com

Senior officials from the Pentagon and State Department briefed senators Sunday night, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said they were assured that the United States was giving Israel “everything they need.”

“I asked the representatives of our Defense Department if they are giving Israel everything they need, and I was heartened that they said yes and that they are surging support,” the New York Democrat said in a statement after the unclassified briefing.

“I asked them if they have denied any requests that Israel has made, and they said no. I urged them to ensure Israel has everything it needs to protect itself, and reiterated that the Senate stands ready to deliver on additional needs,” he said.

So how does this work? After watching Ukraine and the appropriation process and all of Biden's hemming and hawing therein, Israel gets attacked and the doors to Weaponsmart just fly open?

 

[TV and credit cards]

It’ll be interesting to see Israel’s response. And the US will have to wear it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Hard to gauge things as they are, but it seems that a rather escalated fight has broken out in Israel/Palestine after Hamas launched a particularly bloody assault on Israel. Israel's response has been intense, BiBi could really use a distraction, and the Israeli intelligence system somehow missed this.

Israel has called for a siege on Gaza, which I'm sure will do a lot to help prevent attacks like this in the future by piling all of the civilians in on the suffering. Israel hasn't been Russia'ing it up with completely random assaults, but I wouldn't exactly call the military effort surgical either. The blatant targeting of civilians, as well as capturing hostages has raised this to a level in the region that I am unfamiliar with, and will only lead to Israel responding with a great ferocity.

The Palestinians are a second (third?) class citizen in their own homes. But that doesn't justify the brutality. This just feels like a car wreck that just won't stop happening. And a lot of people are suffering for it right now, with noted suffering being on top of the already existing suffering.

 

[Swammerdami]

The Palestinians have suffered a lot, for many decades, under Israeli oppression. They are routinely evicted from their land; their homes are destroyed; they are fenced off; embargoed; and so on. Israel's depravities are too obscene and despicable for me to read about, but I did notice that Israel has turned off the electricity in Gaza. Heaven forbid that hospitals be capable of tending to the women and children Israel military is maiming.

If Derec and other apologists for these brutalities were alive in 1944 I suppose they'd be condemning the Warsaw Uprising as "unprovoked," conveniently ignoring what the Uprising was in response to. The Poles managed to kill several thousand Germans, but the Poles eventually lost three times that number in retaliation.

That's one difference between Hitler's response to the Warsaw Uprising and Israel's response to Hamas' desperate stab at equal treatment. Poland lost only three times the number of Germans they killed. Yetanyahu won't stop until the Palestinian men, women and children he slaughters outweigh Israeli victims by at least a factor of ten.

Now watch the Yahoos call me "anti-Semitic" for calling Israel's atrocities what they are. Does condemning Hitler's Germany make me anti-Christian?

 

[Thomas II]

A

A barrage of 100s of rockets, including longer range ones reaching as far as Tel Aviv. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and the rest of the Squad must be rejoicing.

IDF's response to this must he swift and heavy. Including going after Hamas and Islamic Jihad brass. And the Biden administration should not push Israel into a premature ceisefire.

Hamas and other terrorists must be taught a lesson. As must their masters in Tehran.

This is clearly Hamas's attempt to stop the Israel/Saudi Arabia normalization or peace deal.

This is an astute observation and it invites the "if so, then?" analysis and then it gets weird.

Saudi money supports Palestinians and it goes to many various factions. We can assume this to be a fact. Just as not all Palestinian factions have the same goals, there are also Saudi factions and the Royal court does not control all money flowing to foreign causes. Rockets are expensive and secret rockets cost a premium. Someone paid extra the start this latest round of violence. It's probably easier to create a crisis to steer Saudi policy than to get into the circle that has the steering wheel.

What disadvantage does Hamas suffer if Saudi Arabia and Israel normalize relations? There certainly will be less money for rockets, but just as certainly more money for schools, sewer systems, and parking meters. This is bad news for the men at the top of the military food chain, but continued fighting means it's exactly these men who are the most sought target. A text message sent by one of their less well paid subservient soldiers can give a cruise missile all the information it needs to end his career. It's not totally irrational. A warlord, by definition has to remain at war in order to maintain power. The political instability that creates warlords requires this and there is no place for a warlord in a politically stable environment. It becomes a matter of greatly increasing the risk to one's life in order to insure survival. As I said, it gets weird.

Saudi Arabia is not the only source of warlord financing. Iran's interests run counter to the Saudis and also send money to Palestine. It would definitely be Iran's goal to sabotage any warming of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran wants to be the big brother in a Middle Eastern hegemony. The Saudis have always maintained this status by judicious distribution of money to European and American interests, not military power. This is probably a better deal all things considered, if one of those things is Sadam Husain.

The final "if so, then?" is stark conclusion that the money sources that fuel this conflict, have no interest in peace between Israel and Palestine, despite what anyone says in public.

I think you have it wrong here. I don't think it's Saudi money. Rather, I think it's Iranian--they're the ones that would be hurt the worst by normalization between the Saudis and Israel.

I do agree about the warlord issue--Hamas becomes meaningless if there were peace. Thus Hamas will not allow a true peace so long as they exist--and they'll exist (or a replacement for them will exist) so long as the money flows.

As I said, there are more sources of Saudi money than just the Royals. There are Saudi factions who would like to see the King and Prince put in a bind. The Iranians are certainly opposed to any country developing better relations with Israel, but they aren't the only ones.

Do you think Putin was involved in this? Now the US has to help Israel and allocate resources that otherwise would go to Ukraine...

It's entirely possible, but Putin has other things on his mind. Israel doesn't need any military aid unless another country commits ground troops to the fight.

Are you worried?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

This is going to suck the oxygen out of a lot of news cycles for the coming year. And it is going to become a major political issue in the U.S. up to 2024. Meanwhile Hezbollah is attacking Israel from the Golan Heights and Lebanon. In Israel, we will see Israelis arming themselves. Those Haredi who have been refusing to serve in Israel's military are going to finally change their ways. This is all going to get insane. And now, what to do about Iran. Who arms these militants.