Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

Israel could be a lot more surgical if they wanted. But they aren't.

No. Being surgical takes time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Also, Arafat may have wanted 100% of Palestine under Palestinian control and a return of all Palestinian refugees it but it is clear he was willing to accept much less. The evidence that supports my claim can be found here.

Except for the fact that Oslo was an exercise in kicking the can, it didn't actually resolve anything.

The reason is because none of the alleged offers were written down.

And your evidence is?

Under the Oslo Accords the transfer of control of land took place in stages with final borders to be determined at the end of the transfer process, in about 20 years or so. And during that time, settlements could still be built, leading to a land grab by Zionists as the Accords were being implemented. You seem to think settlement building was going to stop and the borders would be decided right then and there at Camp David. Not only is that not likely, it's contrary to Israeli policy all the way back to the founding of the State of Israel.

Exactly--it didn't set the border so Arafat could agree.

There were others. Disengagement from Gaza was a concession.

Israel did not disengage. It built a wall around the concentration camp and stationed its soldiers there. That's repositioning the troops so provide greater advantage and clear lines of fire, not a disengagement.

Pulling out is a disengagement. It's perfectly legal to fortify your border all you want. When Hamas kept trying to sneak across Israel cleared a zone to keep them from having cover. Even then they held their fire until people actually were climbing the fence--and tried to make the shots non-lethal at that. Hamas used that to probe the Israeli defenses and launch the 10/7 attack.

Giving Gazans work permits inside Israel is a concession.

Okay, I'll accept that as a concession.

It's not much of a concession, but it's a start.

It's a pretty major concession. One that hurt Hamas because they can't have their people prosperous.

It is the Palestinians who are preventing the peace process, not Israel.

Also, you really should look into the origin and growth of the Second Intifada. You are utterly wrong in thinking Arafat "proclaimed" it.

Then who did? Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in any case was an excuse, not a reason, for the terrorist violence of the so-called "Second Intifada".

You really should look into the origin and growth of the Second Intifada.

You can start here if you'd like.

The problem is that the Second Intifada, like every big event they do, was clearly planned long before the incident that supposedly triggered it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

[

And your evidence that they aren't simply defending themselves from attacks is...

Reality.

The ratio of civilian to combatant kill ratios. The fact settlers go unpunished when they kill or attack Palestinians.

What data do we have on recent West Bank conflict?

And note that:

1) Because the Palestinians won't work with the Israeli police it's effectively impossible to prosecute unless they're caught in the act.

2) Again and again there are claims of settler actions that simply don't make sense. Pretty obviously they're being blamed for things they didn't do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Tlaib Statement on Funding Netanyahu’s Genocide - Rashida Tlaib

The American people do not support funding for war crimes—like the use of white phosphorus bombs—and are calling for a ceasefire. As the Israeli government carries out ethnic cleansing in Gaza, President Biden is cheering on Netanyahu, whose own citizens are protesting his refusal to support a ceasefire. We must be laser focused on saving lives, no matter their faith or ethnicity. The number of children killed in Gaza in just three weeks has surpassed the annual number of children killed across the world’s conflict zones since 2019—yet instead of helping end this violence, President Biden baselessly casts doubt on the Palestinian death toll. U.S. funding for the Israeli military with no humanitarian conditions will take us farther away from ending the violence and reaching peace. Achieving a just and lasting peace requires lifting the blockade, ending the occupation, and dismantling the dehumanizing system of apartheid. Not only do some of my colleagues want to send more weapons to carry out war crimes and violations of international law, but they want to do it by providing tax breaks to billionaires and undermining crucial investments in our communities. Instead of funding more bombs with American taxpayer dollars, our leaders should be calling for a ceasefire now, before this violence claims thousands more lives.

So achieving peace requires the genocide of the Jews.

Israel would push the red button before agreeing to her conditions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Says who?

You?

The One State solution couldn't possibly be the Union of Israel and Palestine? It couldn't be a secular state with equal rights guaranteed in its Constitution and enforced by its courts? It has to be winner-take-all ethnic cleansing and genocide?

Hamas explicitly wants a genocide. Why in the world do you think they wouldn't do what they say they want to do?

And your evidence that supports this claim is...?

Derec and I both posted a video from them.

And before you start with your usual bullshit, I'll just remind you that wanting Israel to be reformed is not the same thing as wanting it to be destroyed, and wanting Israel to be defeated is not the same thing as wanting genocide.

You can pretend it's not a call for genocide but it is. They know the end result of what you are asking for is every Jew in the area dead or fled. Both sides know it.

ETA: I'm still waiting for a list of concessions Israel has made to the Palestinian people. Don't rely on Derec to support your claims for you. You have to do it yourself.

This is completely unreasonable. It doesn't matter who provides the information. He already gave one example.

 

[Arctish]

What concessions has Israel offered?

Like 98% of the West Bank right before Arafat said "no" to any further negotiations and proclaimed the 2nd Intifada where many Israelis got murdered by terrorists.

I've heard it was 92%.

I've also heard it was 78%.

And I've heard it was ~90% of whatever parts of the West Bank that had not been claimed by Israel, occupied by settlers (both legal and illegal), or set aside for the IDF at the time of the implementation of the plan.

What I have not heard is the proposed borders, when and how the land would be formally recognized as not a part of Israel, the method of transfer of control (the one used in the Oslo Accords failed), or anything other than rumors, and neither have you. Do you want to know how I know that? I'll give you a hint. It has to do with the way the Camp David talks were conducted.

None of that is relevant. If he didn't like the details he could have made a counter-offer.

He did make a counter offer. He offered to resume following the steps spelled out in the Oslo Accords.

I know you really, really want to shift the blame for the failure of the peace process following Rabin's assassination onto Arafat, but it was Ehud Barak and the Israelis who wanted to abandon the Accords and get a different deal. Arafat and the Palestinians were under no obligation to agree to a new deal, much less come up with one themselves.

The important point is that he walked in the face of an offer that was pretty close to what he was supposedly asking for. He couldn't make a counter-offer because it might be accepted and that would throw a major monkey wrench into their desire for ethnic cleansing of all of Israel.

How do you know it was "pretty close to what he was supposedly asking for"?

What made Barak's offer different from the Oslo Accords?

Oh, yeah, that's right. You don't know.

How was his plan going to be implemented?

Oh, yeah. You don't know that either.

What guarantees was Barak offering that the Knesset would honor whatever agreement he made with Arafat?

No idea? None whatsoever?

Well then, how do you know how close it was to what Arafat was asking for? Do you simply have faith that it was?

I think the answer to my last question is "yes" but feel free to prove me wrong. Show me the evidence. And while you're at it, please show me the llist of concessions Israel has made to the Palestinians.

 

[Arctish]

Also, Arafat may have wanted 100% of Palestine under Palestinian control and a return of all Palestinian refugees it but it is clear he was willing to accept much less. The evidence that supports my claim can be found here.

Except for the fact that Oslo was an exercise in kicking the can, it didn't actually resolve anything.

Please stop trying to shift the goalpost. Derec claimed Arafat wanted 100% pf Palestine under Palestinian control and for all of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and communities within Israel. I pointed out that regardless of what he may have wanted, he was willing to accept much less as evidenced by his agreement to the Oslo Accords. Either you understand that point or you don't.

The reason is because none of the alleged offers were written down.

And your evidence is?

Here for starters.

If you don't remember our discussion of the Oslo Accords, the Camp David Summit, the Wye River Agreements, etc. I can look for the thread where a lot of really good material was shared with you. But if all you're going to do is refuse to read the linked articles, I won't bother. If you're bound and determined to still be clueless after all these years, I won't stop you.

Under the Oslo Accords the transfer of control of land took place in stages with final borders to be determined at the end of the transfer process, in about 20 years or so. And during that time, settlements could still be built, leading to a land grab by Zionists as the Accords were being implemented. You seem to think settlement building was going to stop and the borders would be decided right then and there at Camp David. Not only is that not likely, it's contrary to Israeli policy all the way back to the founding of the State of Israel.

Exactly--it didn't set the border so Arafat could agree.

There were others. Disengagement from Gaza was a concession.

Israel did not disengage. It built a wall around the concentration camp and stationed its soldiers there. That's repositioning the troops so provide greater advantage and clear lines of fire, not a disengagement.

Pulling out is a disengagement. It's perfectly legal to fortify your border all you want. When Hamas kept trying to sneak across Israel cleared a zone to keep them from having cover. Even then they held their fire until people actually were climbing the fence--and tried to make the shots non-lethal at that. Hamas used that to probe the Israeli defenses and launch the 10/7 attack.

Except, removing your country's civilians who shouldn't be building illegal settlements in the first place and putting your soldiers on barriers built on land that doesn't belong to your country so that you can fire at will at the civilians inside the giant prison you constructed isn't disengagement.

Giving Gazans work permits inside Israel is a concession.

Okay, I'll accept that as a concession.

It's not much of a concession, but it's a start.

It's a pretty major concession. One that hurt Hamas because they can't have their people prosperous.

I have no idea where you get your information (mostly because you don't link to your sources) but if you actually believe Israel wants to foster prosperity in Gaza, you're drinking virtual Kool-Aid.

The reality is much less rosy.

It is the Palestinians who are preventing the peace process, not Israel.

Also, you really should look into the origin and growth of the Second Intifada. You are utterly wrong in thinking Arafat "proclaimed" it.

Then who did? Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in any case was an excuse, not a reason, for the terrorist violence of the so-called "Second Intifada".

You really should look into the origin and growth of the Second Intifada.

You can start here if you'd like.

The problem is that the Second Intifada, like every big event they do, was clearly planned long before the incident that supposedly triggered it.

You and Derec should get together and discuss it. Maybe you could start a thread where you lay out the events that led up to the rioting that preceded the bombings. I'll supply the reliable sources of information and try to keep the bullshit to a minimum.

 

[jonatha]

Israel could be a lot more surgical if they wanted. But they aren't.

No. Being surgical takes time.

And they're in such a hurry because....

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/02/...e_code=1.7kw.H95Y.CQC9jLrjCYC3&smid=url-share

Read the above article I'm sharing and then tell me why what Israel is doing aren't war crimes, not to mention cutting off water, food and electricity seems rather horrific. How would you feel if you were trapped in Gaza, watching children and family members die. Nothing good can come of the Israeli response to the horrific Hamas attack.

The Jabaliya neighborhood north of Gaza City was pummeled with Israeli airstrikes for a third consecutive day on Thursday, while doctors treating the victims described nightmarish scenes of operating without basic supplies or anesthesia.
Dr. Hussam Abu Safyia, director of the pediatric ward at Kamal Adwan Hospital, where many of the casualties from the Jabaliya strikes were taken, said the majority of the people arriving were children. Many were severely burned or were missing limbs.
On Tuesday, after the first strike in Jabaliya, the hospital received about 40 people who did not survive, and 250 others who were wounded, he said. The numbers were nearly the same on Wednesday, when another strike hit. On Thursday, a strike damaged a United Nations school being used as a shelter and sent in another wave of patients: 10 dead and 80 others wounded.
“I’ve never in my life seen injuries this bad,” Dr. Abu Safyia said on Thursday by phone, adding, “We saw children without heads.”
The U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, which runs the school, said that the school had been among four of its shelters — housing nearly 20,000 people total — that had been damaged in the previous 24 hours. Twenty people were reported to have been killed at the Jabaliya shelter, the agency said, along with three people in other strikes at the Shati and Bureij camps.

 

[lpetrich]

Blinken seeks pauses in Gaza war as Israeli troops claim advances | Reuters

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was meeting Israeli leaders on Friday to push for humanitarian pauses in the Gaza war as Israeli troops surrounded the Palestinian enclave's biggest city, the focus of its drive to wipe out Hamas.

Israeli forces pounded the Gaza Strip from ground, sea and air throughout the night amid global alarm over scarcities, collapsing medical services and the rising civilian death toll.

Hamas and its Islamic Jihad ally said their fighters had detonated explosives against advancing troops, dropped grenades from drones, and fired mortars and anti-tank rockets in fierce urban warfare around destroyed buildings and heaps of rubble in Gaza City.

Blinken, on his second trip to Israel in a month, was to discuss with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu steps to minimise harm to civilians in Hamas-ruled Gaza, where food, fuel, water and medicine are running out, buildings have been flattened, and thousands of people have fled homes to escape relentless bombing.

The health authorities there are now claiming that 9,061 Gazans have been killed.

Gaza City - traditionally a Hamas stronghold - was surrounded, military spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari said. "The soldiers are advancing in battles, during which they are destroying terror infrastructure above ground and below ground and eliminating terrorists," he told a briefing.

Overnight they found large caches of weapons, protective gear, communication equipment and maps, he said.

I'd like to see some independent sources, but if they are as successful as they say, then that would be welcome. It's better than bombing civilians just because some Hamas goons might be among them.

In one of the strongest criticisms of Israel from a European leader, Ireland's Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said it had the right to defend itself and chase Hamas but the assault on Gaza also looked like it was turning into "revenge".

The United Arab Emirates, one of a handful of Arab states with diplomatic ties to Israel, said on Friday it was working "relentlessly" for an immediate ceasefire, warning that the risk of regional spillover and further escalation was real.

...
Blinken is due to meet Jordan's Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi in Amman on Saturday. Safadi said in a statement Israel must end the war on Gaza, where he said it was committing war crimes by bombing civilians and imposing a siege.

 

[lpetrich]

Some Democrats question Israel’s Gaza offensive as humanitarian crisis grows - POLITICO - "Despite uniting behind Israel, they have begun to express skepticism about its military tactics."

After weeks of uniting behind Israel’s right to defend itself following Hamas’ initial attack, mainstream Democrats are beginning to raise concerns about the increasingly harsh toll on Palestinians in the Gaza offensive as the conflict approaches the one-month mark.

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado are among those who have backed away from a full-throated endorsement of Israel’s military operations — a notable shift because they’re not from the progressive wing and had almost uniformly backed Israel and military aid. They are starting to express discomfort with the impact that Israel’s current course of military operations is having on noncombatants.

Pro-Israel Democratic group releases ad criticizing Rashida Tlaib - POLITICO - "Rashida Tlaib co-sponsored a resolution that calls for a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war, which the ad argues “would allow the terrorists to rearm themselves.”"

The six-figure TV ad bought by the Democratic Majority for Israel airs in Tlaib’s district in Michigan and points to her vote against a bill to replenish Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system in 2021 and against a resolution to stand with Israel amid the war last week.

Tlaib was also one of the five House Democrats who co-sponsored a resolution in October that calls for a cease-fire in “Israel and occupied Palestine,” which the ad argues “would allow the terrorists to rearm themselves.”

A RT staffer's response was to note Tlaib Statement on Resolution That Doesn’t Mourn Palestinian Lives - Rashida Tlaib

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sure, Hamas most likely was there, taking advantage of the protection a refugee camp is supposed to provide refugees (you know... refuge). But it is still a refugee camp! I can't imagine attacking a refugee camp being anything but a war crime. The term war crime sometimes can be exaggerated, but a refugee camp can't possibly be on the list of acceptable military targets as far as treaties are concerned.

Sure, the Gazan officials will exaggerate the death toll, but is 50 to 100 dead REFUGEES a "tragedy of war" or a complete and utter disregard for civilian life? Civilians displaced in the camp by the actions of the Israeli military. Was targeting another "senior" Hamas official worth the lives of many refugees lost? How in the heck can anyone expect such an attack not to breed extremism and a dozen more future "senior" Hamas officials?

Your lack of imagination does not make it so.

Dude, my imagination is quite exceptional thank you very much. Seeing my post is about something that is real, my imagination is not exactly relevant.

1) It's a "refugee camp" that looks an awful lot like a city, not like what you imagine.

Israel didn't contend it wasn't a "refugee camp". It likely isn't typical because Gaza doesn't exactly have much in the way of sprawling open areas for camps.

2) Note they got the guy they were shooting at. It was a war crime--but on the part of Hamas in using human shield tactics. Not on Israel.

They shot at one Hamas commander. Was his value that high? How much was the atrocity by Hamas his doing?

And a back-of-the-envelope estimate of casualties is to divide what Hamas says by 10.

Not exactly a bad idea... but you can't divide the number of times someone fires missiles into a Refugee Camp by 10.

War is hell, Hamas is exploiting that to deceive you.

Talk about a lack of imagination. How many Hamas fighters do you think that missile strike created verses how many it killed? You are so analytical, you have zero appreciation for optics. How hard will it be for Hamas to spin an actual Israeli missile strike on a refugee camp into media to convince young teens to grab guns?

This is supposed to be about making Israel SAFER, not retribution.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Says who?

You?

The One State solution couldn't possibly be the Union of Israel and Palestine? It couldn't be a secular state with equal rights guaranteed in its Constitution and enforced by its courts? It has to be winner-take-all ethnic cleansing and genocide?

Hamas explicitly wants a genocide. Why in the world do you think they wouldn't do what they say they want to do?

And your evidence that supports this claim is...?

Derec and I both posted a video from them.

And before you start with your usual bullshit, I'll just remind you that wanting Israel to be reformed is not the same thing as wanting it to be destroyed, and wanting Israel to be defeated is not the same thing as wanting genocide.

You can pretend it's not a call for genocide but it is. They know the end result of what you are asking for is every Jew in the area dead or fled. Both sides know it.

And yet, all of these hard line, far right-wing plans on how to deal with the threat of Hamas still led up to the atrocities of October 7th. You can't defeat terrorism and an insurgency with bombs and isolation. You defeat Hamas by reducing its ability to recruit. There is no utopian solution here, just one that reduces the damage Hamas can inflict.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some Democrats question Israel’s Gaza offensive as humanitarian crisis grows - POLITICO - "Despite uniting behind Israel, they have begun to express skepticism about its military tactics."

After weeks of uniting behind Israel’s right to defend itself following Hamas’ initial attack, mainstream Democrats are beginning to raise concerns about the increasingly harsh toll on Palestinians in the Gaza offensive as the conflict approaches the one-month mark.

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado are among those who have backed away from a full-throated endorsement of Israel’s military operations — a notable shift because they’re not from the progressive wing and had almost uniformly backed Israel and military aid. They are starting to express discomfort with the impact that Israel’s current course of military operations is having on noncombatants.

It comes down to "How does this make Israel safer?" Currently, they are either ensuring another generation of Hamas fighters or are trying to permanently displace the Gazans to take the territory.

Pro-Israel Democratic group releases ad criticizing Rashida Tlaib - POLITICO - "Rashida Tlaib co-sponsored a resolution that calls for a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war, which the ad argues “would allow the terrorists to rearm themselves.”"

The six-figure TV ad bought by the Democratic Majority for Israel airs in Tlaib’s district in Michigan and points to her vote against a bill to replenish Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system in 2021 and against a resolution to stand with Israel amid the war last week.

Tlaib was also one of the five House Democrats who co-sponsored a resolution in October that calls for a cease-fire in “Israel and occupied Palestine,” which the ad argues “would allow the terrorists to rearm themselves.”

A RT staffer's response was to note Tlaib Statement on Resolution That Doesn’t Mourn Palestinian Lives - Rashida Tlaib

Tlaib isn't particularly skillful. The trouble with a ceasefire is that Israel has every right to strike at the high level commanders of Hamas for the attack. What Israel shouldn't have is carte blanche to just drop an endless amount of munitions on Gaza.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

US appears to be trying to temper Israel. Israel had a grace period, where the First World would be willing to "look the other way", and Netanyahu has come close to exceeding it, with what appears to be almost no progress. This shouldn't be a surprise, Netanyahu is an authoritarian dimwit, who can scam his people, but not lead effectively. He and his government were caught with their pants down and nearing a month after the awful events of October 7th, Israel is no closer to defeating Hamas than it was in September... all while killing at least the same number of Gazans as Israelis died at the hands of the Hamas' barbaric attack.

Where does Israel go now? Obviously Netanyahu is a radical, and he could very possibly see this an opportunity to take Gaza and shove the Gazans closer to Egypt, hence attacking the North. But not enough Gazans bit at the call to evacuate. So a President that lost a lot of face in failing to help protect Israel, will need to decide what the end game is... isolation of Israel from the world South Africa style or tail between the legs retreat and an effective victory for Hamas. He has left his country with few options due to his dreams of dictatorship and failed military response.

Only Netanyahu had the ability to take near unanimous global support/currency and turn it into dissent in less than two months.

 

[laughing dog]

This is supposed to be about making Israel SAFER, not retribution.

It was always about retribution first - look at the initial rhetoric. The "safer" part is the cover and it allows for genocidal policies under the rubric "its not a war crime to kill 1,000 civilians if we are aiming at a terrorist". Hell, just look at the language used by the apologists for the IDF in this thread.

 

[barbos]

Someone made a count and in couple of weeks Israel managed to kill more civilians than in 2 years of war in Ukraine. So where is outrage and sanctions already? And keep in mind most civilians died in Ukraine are because of Ukrainian regime army.

 

[Copernicus]

The US seems to be joined at the hip with Israel, as its staunchest ally, but that makes us a party to what the orgy of revenge against Palestinian civilians. Biden and Blinken keep calling for "pauses" in the bombardment and warning against ground operations that could endanger civilians, but Netanyahu simply ignores them. What are they going to do? Stop supporting Israel after giving its full-throated support after the terrorist attack on October 7? Blinken now appears to be surprised at how quickly people have forgotten the brutality of the Hamas attack, but I suspect that that was part of Hamas's strategy. They knew the retaliation would be brutal and that it would tend to work in their favor. The longer Israel takes revenge on the civilian population of Gaza, the harder it is for their allies to support them.

 

[Harry Bosch]

This is supposed to be about making Israel SAFER, not retribution.

It was always about retribution first - look at the initial rhetoric. The "safer" part is the cover and it allows for genocidal policies under the rubric "its not a war crime to kill 1,000 civilians if we are aiming at a terrorist". Hell, just look at the language used by the apologists for the IDF in this thread.

I wouldn’t call it retribution. Israel wants the more than 200 hostages returned! 13 of them are Americans.

 

[Derec]

More AI Pallywood.


Not just the six-fingered AI child, but the Balestinian flag was rendered wrong too.

Epic fail!