Israel-Hamas War 2023

[viper37]

My idea only addresses one issue: the moral absurdity of making peace with people who have no interest in peace.  So it takes those people out of the equation.  The inhabitants of the WB should not pay for the sins of Gaza.

Israel has no interest in peace: it is winning the war.  There's about 11% left of what was the West Bank.  Gaza was to be left for later, but now he time table has accelerated drastically.  It  will be made irrelevant by January/February of next year.

[viper37]

How Hamas's carefully planned Israel attack devolved into a chaotic rampage

Good text from the WaPo.  Hamas was surprised by its own attack.

[Admiral Yi]

Israel has no interest in peace: it is winning the war.  There's about 11% left of what was the West Bank.  Gaza was to be left for later, but now he time table has accelerated drastically.  It  will be made irrelevant by January/February of next year.

I get the impression you think I am making a prediction about how peace will be achieved in the region.  I am not.  I am conducting a thought experiment on what sort of arrangement I would find acceptable and through which a theoretical Israeli government that was interested in gaining my approval would act.

[Valmy]

And I would never agree to what was proposed in the Camp David accord as it wasn't a viable territory.

Dude, Israel is barely a viable territory. I am not sure what you would expect as a defeated and occupied country without a military totally at the mercy of your enemy.

And there was no guarantee Israel wouldn't just invade Palestine in a few years under any pretext to start a new war and deport Palestinians again.  Between 1993 and 2000, Israel kept colonizing the West Bank and part of Gaza.  Then it withdrew from Gaza so it could further build in the West Bank.

Sure. But there was no deal. Palestine did not get a deal to even partially end the occupation. That was the cost of intransigence.

And the Palestinian side kept launching rockets and launching terror attacks against Israel.  And Israel never for once envisioned to stop colonization of the territories because it sees this lands as belonging to them.

Indeed. Both sides are dominated by insane nationalists dreaming of total victory. Neither can be trusted. I am pleased that you agree that nationalists are dangerous assholes after all this time

A peace treaty would not change that if it does not include a clear and defined border that is internationally recognized and supported by major powers.

Well obviously that is the goal. But you have to start someplace. And if you are serious about eventually reaching a peaceful solution you will take whatever crumbs you can get, especially in a situation as shitty as Palestine's.

I don't think Israel ever negotiated in good faith.  And that's why Sharon visited Temple Mount during the 2000 Camp David negotiations, to make sure the Israeli position was made clear, that no ground would ever be ceded.  And that's the reason he won his elections, because a majority of Israelis did not want peace at the price of land.  No matter what concession the Palestinians would have made, Israel would have found a pretext to renege on the deal and not transfer sovereignty on the promise territory, keep building colonies and/or invade the remaining parts of Palestine after some clash with the Palestinians.

You can't have peace unless both sides want it, and the majority position in Israel is that Transjordan is a vital part of the territory, Palestinian or no Palestinian.  Now, Gaza has become a clear and present danger and it must cleansed of Palestinians quickly to avoid a repeat of the events of October 7th. 

The Israeli govt is not even hiding its game anymore, they can't be clearer than that: There is no distinction between a Hamas supporter and a Palestinian civilian.  It's their own fault if they didn't overthrew the Hamas before, dixit the President.  No politician from any party even bothered to contradict him.

I basically agree. I don't know if neither side was negotiating in bad faith all of the time but I am pretty certain neither was negotiating in good faith at the same time. But, especially with regards to the Israeli Nationalist Right and Hamas, I think fundamentally it was about using the negotiations to secure some kind of advantage.

Anyway.  Back to the topic at hand, by your logic, Ukraine should have surrendered to Russia long ago.

They did surrender to Russia long ago. Several times. They surrendered when they had no chance of victory.

Avoiding all these unnecessary deaths.  Give Russia what they wanted: Crimea and the Eastern part of the country.  Give them territory for peace, the best deal they could get at the time.

If Ukraine lost and was militarily occupied I think they would have to do that, yes.

I don't think that currently giving Russia what they want is the best deal they can get at the time. That is an insane comparison that makes no sense. Ukraine has a military that is still in the field and still controls most of its territory and has driven Russia back from its major cities. None of this even begins to approximate the current situation for Palestine so how my logic extends to current day Ukraine I have no idea.

[Legbiter]

Article about Israeli Apache helicopter pilots on the day of the attack.

Hamas terrorists deliberately played a cunning game with the helicopter pilots and special forces operatives. briefings revealed that the terrorists were advised to advance cautiously into the settlements and military outposts, to walk and not run, in order to appear like they were Israeli. This deception tactic persisted for some time until the Apache pilots realized that all constraints should be disregarded.

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/hkanmp5w6#autoplay

[viper37]

Indeed. Both sides are dominated by insane nationalists dreaming of total victory. Neither can be trusted. I am pleased that you agree that nationalists are dangerous assholes after all this time

There'd be much less problems if they were all atheists.  Atheists have no chosen lands and holy cities.

[HVC]

Indeed. Both sides are dominated by insane nationalists dreaming of total victory. Neither can be trusted. I am pleased that you agree that nationalists are dangerous assholes after all this time

There'd be much less problems if they were all atheists.  Atheists have no chosen lands and holy cities.

We find other things to fight about.

[Syt]

ORF quotes Israeli military spokesperson saying they evacuated 500,000 people from Southern Israel for the time being.

[Syt]

Oh, and:

Hugo Bachega

BBC Middle East correspondent, Lebanon

In recent days, Iran has repeatedly talked about the risk of an escalation in the Israel-Hamas war. But the comments by the country's foreign minister are the strongest warning yet that the fighting might spread, making it into a regional conflict.

Hossein Amirabdollahian said the "resistance front" could carry out a "pre-emptive action" in the coming hours" - if Israel's "war crimes against Palestinians" in Gaza did not stop.

The "resistance front" is an alliance of forces in the region that includes Hezbollah, the powerful Lebanese group backed by Iran.

In the past week, Hezbollah and the Israeli military have exchanged fire along the Lebanese-Israeli border, raising fears that this could become another frontin the war.

Hezbollah has a vast arsenal of weapons, with missiles capable of striking deep into Israeli territory, as well as tens of thousands of well-trained, battle-hardened fighters.

The "resistance front" also includes groups Iran supports in Syria - which borders Israel - and Iraq.

Western countries have warned Tehran against escalating the situation and, so far, the cross-border violence has been contained. But some believe this could change if Israel goes ahead with a ground offensive into Gaza, and militants here decide they must respond.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Might be an opportune moment for Lebanon to get rid of hezbollah, assuming it'll be more of a fustercluck anyway given those religious fanatics in the various terrorist groups and iran

[Josquius]

Indeed. Both sides are dominated by insane nationalists dreaming of total victory. Neither can be trusted. I am pleased that you agree that nationalists are dangerous assholes after all this time

There'd be much less problems if they were all atheists.  Atheists have no chosen lands and holy cities.

They just have a pathological hate of everyone elses.

[Iormlund]

There'd be much less problems if they were all atheists.  Atheists have no chosen lands and holy cities.

They just have a pathological hate of everyone elses.

We do?

I'd love to visit Jerusalem or Kyoto.

[Tamas]

One of the criticism levelled by the "but it is an occupation!" crowd is European leaders being too pro-Israel, SHOCKINGLY taking the attacked side in a case of mass murder and kidnapping. Well that basic logic aside it has just sunk in that many of the victims and the kidnapped people are citizens of these various countries. Like one of the trophy slaves hostages showcased in a recent Hamas video was a young French-Israeli girl. So I really don't know how e.g. Macron can be expected to go all "well yeah our citizens have been murdered and kidnapped, but there are two sides to this thing you know".

My favourite example was a pair of articles on the Guardian put almost next to each other. One was the news about some Labour councillors quitting in protest of Starmer being not enough "but it's an occupation", including the first Muslim lady councillor of Manchester, and the other article was photos of two British-Israeli teenagers assumed to have been kidnapped by Hamas, since they have not been found unlike their parents in their 80s (including a pro-Palestinian pacifist journalist father) who were found murdered.

[Josquius]

There'd be much less problems if they were all atheists.  Atheists have no chosen lands and holy cities.

They just have a pathological hate of everyone elses.

We do?

I'd love to visit Jerusalem or Kyoto.

If you don't stroll around the place screaming den of ignorance, should be razed to the ground, then you're not fit to call yourself an atheist.

[The Brain]