Defiant Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on opposition to Palestinian statehood, deepening the divide with Israel’s closest international allies, as cracks in his wartime “unity” government became increasingly evident.
Anger with Netanyahu is also increasingly visible on the streets, even though there is broad public support for the war. On Saturday, protesters gathered in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Caesarea and Kfar Saba, some calling for bolder action to secure the release of hostages, and others demanding the prime minister step down.
One in Jerusalem held a placard that read: “Mothers’ cry: we will not sacrifice our children in the war to save the rightwing.”
The really tragic thing is that this is a unique opportunity to establish a Palestinian state with the kind of global support and Arab investment that it would need to succeed.
Most Israelis want nothing to do with an extended stay in Gaza. Another leader in Israel would be able to make it happen, along with ANY serious leadership from Palestine. Abbas is useless, and Haniyeh is delighted to send wave after wave of martyrs at Israel while cashing the aid checks.
I just wish there was some historical example to show how it’s wrong to eliminate an entire group of people. Then, they could teach the Israeli government that the systematic removal of a group of people is wrong. But none such example exists. We need to build a great hall that tells of the cost of life by war and hatred. It will be called the great Hall of Cost.
There were Zionists in Israel who were actually supportive of the Nazis, both because they hated the British that much, and because they thought that if the Nazis forced the Jews out of Europe, those Jews would move to Mandatory Palestine to take up arms and exterminate the Arabs.
The Stern Gang, otherwise known as the Lehi terrorist organization (and later integrated directly into the IDF as it formed) actually used Nazi race “science” to claim that Jews were a superior race and should exterminate the Arabs who lived in the area. The Stern Gang actually tried to field troops in support of the Nazis in Europe. They tried repeatedly until 1942. The Nazis said no.
Fun fact; Netanyahu’s political party formed in the 1980s, as a fusion of two other right-wing parties. The first part leader and Netanyahu’s mentor was a former member of Lehi, and as prime minister gave all surviving terrorists medals “for their service in creating the State of Israel”.
The other two paramilitary organizations that folded into the IDF were also full of terrorists.
Darn. now surely Biden is going to do something about it. Any second now…
Like what?
You overestimate what one person (even the leader of a powerful country) can legitimately do to force another country to bow to his will.
Maybe he will try to up the aid package to 16 bil
His true colours are on full display, yet many still try to say this is not genocide.
It’s sick to the core.
UK’s David Cameron: “to suggest there’s genocidal intent? I do believe that’s wrong”
They’ll bend over backwards to support Israel, and people are asking what Israel has over the UK to make it so. At some point, answers will have to be given.
Read some British history. This is their last colony and they are very determined to keep it
Why does the “sole remaining Superpower nation” bow to a small onery loud mouthed pseudo-nation? Which one is in charge? Curious.
Because taking them to task implies that supporting them for the last seventy years might have been a mistake.
One reason is that they’re a militarily important foothold for our presence in the middle east. Same goes for the UK.
It seems like people genuinely do not know about the nukes that Israel definitely does not possess wink wink. Kinda changes the dynamic a little bit, I think.
Israel has spent decades building a powerful lobbying bloc in Washington. American-Israel PAC is one of the top 3 donors of Congress competing with NRA. They made ties with evangelicals and give free vacations to Israel for every politician. They establish ties with both major political parties and spend millions to defeat any congressman who criticizes Israel.
It seems weird that another country can lobby our government. Are there any others doing that? Russia? China? Like do they all have officially recognized lobbying groups?
Foreign countries are legally banned from donating to US politicians and any foreign lobbyists have to be registered. AIPAC has skirted around those laws and even been caught in some scandals over it (e.g. Larry Franklin passing classified documents to the Israeli ambassador) but has made powerful friends and avoided law enforcement.
Because they have nukes and would use them on their neighbors.
While screaming and crying about how all those neighbors hate them
To be fair, they do. Iran, Jordan, and Egypt have tried repeatedly to eliminate Israel entirely.
It was because they started illegally stealing land, causing havoc in the region, you don’t steal others house and then wonder why they want to destroy yours
No it’s because they hate Jews.
Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iran, and Lebanon do not give a single fuck about Palestine or Palestinians. They want the land for themselves.
From 1948 to 1967 Jordan owned the West Bank. And Egypt controlled Gaza.
No Palestinian state was created then when it could have been. Jordanians and Egyptians built settlements of their own and displaced Palestinians.
Egypt refuses to take in Palestinians now.
For hundred of years, the French tried to make the Muslims attack the Jews of North Africa. They wouldn’t. Eventually Israel kidnapped them.
Israel kidnapped the Yemeni Jews. They hope to return but they can’t because Saudi/US is trying to destroy Yemen.
Iraqi Jews refuse to leave Badhdad. They love it there.
Iranian Jews refuse to leave the "evil Iran who wants to kill all Jews.
White people killed millions of their own Jews.
Who hates “the Jews”?
I am afraid those conspiracy theorists were somewhat right, just replace jews with Israel
Your fears are unfounded, and your quickness to jump to them is unsettling.
The US and UK rely on israel playing nice in order to maintain a base and foothold in the region.
If israel did or does anything that actually threatened either nation, the soft hand would firm up quickly. But to these leaders, the genocide of brown people is little more than a minor PR problem. Not an actually threatening problem for their countries. So they see no reason to risk their foothold.
Netanyahu himself has said that US is easily manipulated, biden is (seemingly) constantly trying to pressure him to stop, but constantly sending support, and UK is doing no shit
My point is that if Israel has this much power, it is definitely a worry-some situation for anyone who is not in the US and UK, which is like 95% of the people, this situation has destabilized the middle east, putting so many lives at stake, but no one seems to give a fuck
If Israel did anything that threatened either nation, the soft hand would firm up
Israel is probably not gonna drop bombs on the US, so idk about that, but the thing Israel can influence the US, but the US can’t seem to be able to influence Israel
I don’t see why they continue to give weapons to Israel. Just cut them off.
Many US voters see Israel as the way to get to the end times, Judgement Day. Not doing whatever Israel wants is political suicide.
That we allow religion to hold such massive sway is such a point of shame for our species, and out countries.
Not only that, it’s also a complete crazy pants interpretation of the Christian Bible. US politics is held captive by lunatics.
huh?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/us-evangelical-christians-israel-hamas-war
“What will come soon [is] the antichrist and his seven year empire that will be destroyed in the battle of armageddon. Then Jesus Christ will set up his throne in the city of Jerusalem. He will establish a kingdom that will never end,” Hagee said.
TLDR; Hamas massacre was a wrong move that delays the establishment of a Palestinian state.
after Hamas is destroyed, Israel must retain security control over Gaza to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel, a requirement that contradicts the demand for Palestinian sovereignty
Israel would need to keep security control of all land west of the River Jordan. “That’s a necessary condition. It clashes with the principle of sovereignty but what can you do.
Netanyahu is doing the right move by putting his country’s security above all.
A Palestinian sovereignty cannot be established because by all means it’s a threat to Israel’s security.
As an example, Hamas 07/10 massacre launched from a Palestinian sovereignty, called Gaza (Gaza received it’s sovereignty just 18 years ago).
The peaceful quest for a Palestinian state is a just cause.
The quest for a Palestinian state is by all means not peaceful. It’s brutal full of bloodshed from both sides.
As Keir Starmer has said, it is the undeniable right of the Palestinian people, and the only path to guarantee a just and lasting peace for both Israelis and Palestinians.”
Palestinians don’t look for peace, and as a consequence of this war, Israel is also don’t.
The Palestinians only look for undoing the what so called “Nakba”, a thing that will never happen, as long as Israel exists.
And Israel is looking for a security, by all means.
The UK’s position is very clear. A two-state solution, with a viable and sovereign Palestinian state living alongside a safe and secure Israel, is the best route to lasting peace.
Palestinian sovereign living alongside Israel = Israel is NOT safe and NOT secure.
As I wrote earlier, the Palestinians are not looking for peace.
The US has repeatedly said that the establishment of an independent Palestinian state is the only path to rebuilding Gaza and ensuring Israel’s long-term security.
Palestinian state is NOT the only path to Israel’s long-term security.
After more than three months, Israeli attacks have killed nearly 25,000 Palestinians
This is a clue for this article bias, as they didn’t separated the number of Hamas militant casualties from Palestinian civilians casualties.
You know, I’m not actually taking your nonsensical take seriously, but lemme just say a few things:
Israel will never give Palestinians a state willingly; they’ll need to be forced by either Palestinians themselves, the Arab world or the international community. This became obvious in 1996.
Gaza is still considered occupied by the UN.
Israel has never looked for peace. Again see 1996.
Stop shilling for Zionists.
they’ll need to be forced by either Palestinians themselves, the Arab world or the international community.
It didn’t work for 75 years, and only causes bloodshed from both sides, and the delay of a Palestinian state.
This became obvious in 1996
Unfortunately I don’t understand the 1996 reference.
Israel has never looked for peace. Again see 1996.
Per by this comment, here is a list of peace offers which would grant the Palestinians a country of their own, they refused all of them (total of 22 offers):
1937 - Peel commission, rejected
1947 - Partition resolution, rejected
2000 - Camp David, rejected
2001 - Taba, rejected. Arafat starts the second intifada and a year later changes his mind.
2008 - Olmert offer, rejected
Hamas have tried to agree to boundaries Despite media attempts to portray it as a new Hamas charter, it is not. The new ‘policy document’ accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in 1967 borders, but still rejects Israel and claims its territory. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39775103
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
Not gonna link Trump’s imbecilic peace plan as an example.
Here is a list of peace offers the Palestinians offered to Israel -
None
It didn’t work for 75 years, and only causes bloodshed from both sides, and the delay of a Palestinian state.
“Delay” you’re speaking like Palestinians were promised a state at any time after 1948.
Unfortunately I don’t understand the 1996 reference.
When Netanyahu just decided to ignore the Oslo accords after Rabin was assassinated.
1937 - Peel commission, rejected
1947 - Partition resolution, rejectedI wonder why Palestinians didn’t want their land to be stolen and used to build an Apartheid state.
2000 - Camp David, rejected
2001 - Taba, rejected. Arafat starts the second intifada and a year later changes his mind.Okay this is just a bad faith take. These two are extensions of the same negotiations, and let’s see what Israel’s then foreign affairs minister had to say about them:
Shlomo Ben-Ami, then Israel’s Minister of Foreign Relations who participated in the talks, stated that the Palestinians wanted the immediate withdrawal of the Israelis from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, and only subsequently the Palestinian authority would dismantle the Palestinian organizations. The Israeli response was “we can’t accept the demand for a return to the borders of June 1967 as a pre-condition for the negotiation.”[61] In 2006, Shlomo Ben-Ami stated on Democracy Now! that “Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David, as well. This is something I put in the book. But Taba is the problem. The Clinton parameters are the problem” referring to his 2001 book Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy.
TL;DR: Israel’s Camp David terms were so horrible that as long as they didn’t budge on them (which they didn’t; the idea that Arafat didn’t compromise is Israeli propaganda) no sane Palestinian would accept them.
2008 - Olmert offer, rejected
Since the offer went on behind the scenes, nobody actually knows what happened, so I won’t comment on it.
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
I know you copy pasted this, because I’ve sent his exact nonsense list before, and lemme just say this: Check what you copy before you copy it. Two of these are UN resolutions that Israel refuses to follow, and the 2014 offer is one where Netanyahu wasn’t even trying. According to the American Envoy he was unquestionably at fault.
First, thank you for the detailed response, which I’ll response to as such.
When Netanyahu just decided to ignore the Oslo accords after Rabin was assassinated.
At that time, Shimon Peres was the prime minister of Israel, so Netanyahu’s stand wasn’t even relevant. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Israel)
Anyway,
Negotiations on further terms continued, with Peres continuing to be an integral player. On 28 September 1995, Rabin and Arafat jointly signed a second major agreement, which has popularly been referred to as “Oslo II”
(“Oslo II” created the Areas A, B and C in the West Bank, Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_II_Accord. However, these areas still have Palestinian terror acts)
I wonder why Palestinians didn’t want their land to be stolen and used to build an Apartheid state.
Palestinians, at that time, didn’t had ownership over the area of Palestine. because it was an official Mandate of the United Kingdom. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine)
Apartheid state
How’s Israel an apartheid state when it has 21% Arabs citizens from the Palestinian origin?
The “1937 - Peel commission” is an Investigation of the causes of the 1936 Arab revolt in Palestine, which in short was an uprising by Palestinian Arabs in Mandatory Palestine against the British demanding Arab independence and the end of the policy of open-ended Jewish immigration.
The Arabs of that time didn’t have any stand of the Jewish immigration, as it was under the British auspices.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936–1939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine
Same argument is relevant for “1947 - Partition resolution”.
TL;DR: Israel’s Camp David terms were so horrible that as long as they didn’t budge on them (which they didn’t; the idea that Arafat didn’t compromise is Israeli propaganda) no sane Palestinian would accept them.
In 2000 Camp David Summit, “The Palestinian negotiators indicated they wanted full Palestinian sovereignty over the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip”. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit)
The Palestinians received sovereignty over Gaza strip at 5 years later in 2005. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza).
Guess what happened just 18 years later, from that Palestinian sovereignty? You guessed right, Hamas 07/10 massacre.
Since the offer went on behind the scenes, nobody actually knows what happened, so I won’t comment on it.
OK.
You didn’t reply on the rest of the peace rejection, so I’ll consider them to be agreed otherwise stated.
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
This sentence, and the list you provided, strengthening and supporting what I wrote on my comment above:
Palestinians don’t look for peace.
They only look for undoing the what so called “Nakba”, a thing that will never happen, as long as Israel exists.
It seems like the state of Israel is threatening the security of the whole region. Better to get rid of Israel for the security of her region.
I don’t agree. Especially when your comment isn’t article post based nor sources based.
And Israel is an established independent country, you can’t just “rid of” a country.
But it would be doing the right thing by placing the security of the Palestinians and neighboring countries above all else.
Neighboring Jordan and Egypt are secured, so your comment is false. Why they are secured you asked? Because they want peace and accept it, in contrast to the ones who don’t want it.
Even though your comment is false, let give it a try.
In Israel there are 21% Arabs with Palestinian origin, do you want to get rid of them as well? If not let me know your sophisticated “getting rid of” partition (hint: antisemitism will be reported).
All of the Palestinian economy and Arabs living in Israel are based on the Israeli economy and currency (New Israeli Shekel), getting rid of Israel meaning destroying these people economy (which will only lead to more crime and terror, see Syria as an example).
The United States and Israel have signed multiple bilateral defense cooperation agreements, to include: a Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (1952); a General Security of Information Agreement (1982); a Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (1991); and a Status of Forces Agreement (1994).
So “getting rid of Israel” will be required to win also the US army. Source: https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/
Oh, and Israel has a nuke, so the ones that will try to “get rid of it” will be nuked immediately as a last resort solution, which is a loose-loose situation.
You seem to be missing their entire point so I’ll state it in plane language to you.
You are advocating demolishing Palestine being justifiable because it places the security of Israel above all. The above poster is flipping your logic on you and saying demolishing Israel is justifiable as it places the security of Palestine above all.
Thanks for the explanation.
Let me rephrase my comment:
Netanyahu is doing the right move by putting his country’s security above all by delaying the establishment of Palestinian state or sovereignty.
I didn’t advocate for Palestinian demolish.
This is why I didn’t agree with the above post sophisticated “flipped logic” comment.
I’ll state again: Palestinians don’t look for peace nor a state. They look to undo the what so called “Nakba”, a thing that will happen as long as Israel exists.
