Hamas attacks southern Israel

[PointOfViewGun]

For a war thats supposedly waged against Hamas we're getting different pictures from the ground. Israeli army demolishing the Gazan parliament building and planting flags are two examples. The evident destruction in Gaza and its stated intent does not much to battle Hamas either. It merely contributes to the factors that breed Hamas. It's clear that Israel might claim that Hamas is their target but they're actually battling Palestinians presence in Gaza and West Bank as much as they think the international community will allow them.

Prominent settler leader pushes Netanyahu to rebuild Israeli homes in Gaza

While the world tries to work out what Israel’s goals are in Gaza, a prominent settler from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s party is seizing on a moment of national crisis to tell him to reintroduce West Bank-style settlements in the coastal enclave as a defensive belt. Yossi Dagan, an influential figure on Israel’s right wing who leads a settler community in the occupied West Bank, told POLITICO in an interview it was time to turn the clock back to before 2005 and rebuild settlements in Gaza. These would, he explained, act as well-guarded outposts to prevent the recurrence of attacks like the onslaught on October 7, in which Hamas Islamist militants murdered some 1,200 people.

Still, Dagan is not a total outlier. Some in Israel’s defense establishment are also lobbying for a permanent change in Gaza. In mid-October, the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, an Israeli think tank founded by former security officials, urged Netanyahu to seize the “unique and rare opportunity to evacuate the whole Gaza Strip”. That’s been echoed by the Israeli Intelligence Ministry, a think tank within the government, which has recommended Gazans be relocated to Egypt’s northern Sinai.

Palestinians may chant "from river to the sea" more than the Israelis do but it is Israelis that work to make it a reality for their own.

[Infidel144]

HRW has issued its findings on the al-Ahli hospital 'explosion':
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/...ital-explosion

[Muizer]

You clearly do not see how much arbitrariness you're relying to to keep your stance standing.

The 1988 borders agreed between Israel and the PLO seem like a logical point of reference. Whatever you may think of them, they were part of a compromise. The only one ever, if I'm not mistaken.

[PointOfViewGun]

The 1988 borders agreed between Israel and the PLO seem like a logical point of reference. Whatever you may think of them, they were part of a compromise. The only one ever, if I'm not mistaken.

What agreed borders are you referring to? They never agreed on a border.

[Muizer]

What agreed borders are you referring to? They never agreed on a border.

The reference point for me is that of a two state solution, in which the Palestinian state would consist of the Gaza strip and the West Bank, with special provisions for Jerusalem. That, as far as I can tell is the closest thing both sides ever got to agreeing and it had broad international support outside of the region. Is that arbitrary?

[PointOfViewGun]

The reference point for me is that of a two state solution, in which the Palestinian state would consist of the Gaza strip and the West Bank, with special provisions for Jerusalem. That, as far as I can tell is the closest thing both sides ever got to agreeing and it had broad international support outside of the region. Is that arbitrary?

It really is arbitrary as its not based on any reality. They never agreed to that. Israel has always rejected the concept of 1967 borders.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Funnily enough, it was the Arabs who initially insisted that those would not be final borders. Now they insist they are. How the turn tables.

The PA had recieved and refused several offers that were pretty much 67 borders, with land compensation from Israel in return for land being taken. All were either refused or not answered.

[PointOfViewGun]

Funnily enough, it was the Arabs who initially insisted that those would not be final borders. Now they insist they are. How the turn tables.
The PA had recieved and refused several offers that were pretty much 67 borders, with land compensation from Israel in return for land being taken. All were either refused or not answered.

That's one way to lie, by twisting a half-truth. They don't really insist on 1967 borders. Those borders still favor Israel much more. Any offer refused by Palestinians were not pretty much 1967 borders. They were even less than that and was never a fair one.

[Kyriakos]

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/...-over-gaza-war

"We don't owe anything to Israel (unlike Germany etc) and so can talk freely". That's nice, considering Turkey had an actual treaty of friendship with nazi Germany, and was Hitler's favorite country in the region. Too bad they didn't end up becoming part of the axis.

[Muizer]

It really is arbitrary as its not based on any reality. They never agreed to that. Israel has always rejected the concept of 1967 borders.

That is a different 'arbitrary' than the 'arbitrary' that would result from me inventing reference points just to keep my arguments alive, which is what you strongly suggested before.

The 'arbitrary' here is that there have been solutions on the table that were the result of negotiations. Of course those proposals aren't going to be logical or just according to the perspective of either party. That never happens when compromises are made.

[PointOfViewGun]

That is a different 'arbitrary' than the 'arbitrary' that would result from me inventing reference points just to keep my arguments alive, which is what you strongly suggested before.

The 'arbitrary' here is that there have been solutions on the table that were the result of negotiations. Of course those proposals aren't going to be logical or just according to the perspective of either party. That never happens when compromises are made.

You keep downgrading your basis without acknowledging the failure of your earlier claims. That's a very tedious argumentation tactic.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

That's one way to lie, by twisting a half-truth. They don't really insist on 1967 borders.

Depends who you mean by they. Fatah insists on 67 borders, Hamas insists on 48 borders. Semantics aside, the only relevant "they" here is Fatah.

Those borders still favor Israel much more. Any offer refused by Palestinians were not pretty much 1967 borders. They were even less than that and was never a fair one.

The Olmert proposal in 2008 offered 100% of Gaza and 94% of the west bank, with land compensation for the remaining 6% that would be equal to 5.8% of Israeli territory. One would think that that does translate to "pretty much 1967 borders".

[Muizer]

You keep downgrading your basis without acknowledging the failure of your earlier claims. That's a very tedious argumentation tactic.

I don't even know what you're talking about. Are those claims that I made, or claims that you assumed that I made?

[PointOfViewGun]

The Olmert proposal in 2008 offered 100% of Gaza and 94% of the west bank, with land compensation for the remaining 6% that would be equal to 5.8% of Israeli territory. One would think that that does translate to "pretty much 1967 borders".

Except it had no provisions to share Jerusalem while the Palestinians would not even have control over their own borders. Olmert asked Abbas to accept the offer right there on the spot. The offer had no relation to any negotiation.

I don't even know what you're talking about. Are those claims that I made, or claims that you assumed that I made?

Claims you made. From "1988 borders agreed between Israel and PLO" to "closest thing both sides ever got to agreeing" and "solutions on the table" ... If we continue this for a few more rounds you'll downgrade it to "things they spoke to their relatives in closed doors" level. Just like with the settlements issue you keep moving the goal post. You couldn't even acknowledge that there is no such thing as 1988 borders.

[Muizer]

Except it had no provisions to share Jerusalem while the Palestinians would not even have control over their own borders. Olmert asked Abbas to accept the offer right there on the spot. The offer had no relation to any negotiation.




Claims you made. From "1988 borders agreed between Israel and PLO" to "closest thing both sides ever got to agreeing" and "solutions on the table" ... If we continue this for a few more rounds you'll downgrade it to "things they spoke to their relatives in closed doors" level. Just like with the settlements issue you keep moving the goal post. You couldn't even acknowledge that there is no such thing as 1988 borders.

I grant you there's more to the 1988 agreement than I though. Quite a bit was left open, it seems. If you want to score on technicalities, point to you. But IMHO it doesn't really impact the validity of marking the Gaza strip and West bank as most widely accepted territorial claim for a Palestinian state. It's a solid reference point to judge attitudes towards a two-state solution by. Israel violates it with its colonies in the West Bank. Hamas violates it by attacking civilian targets in Israel proper. They are two wrongs that don't make a right. The one does not justify the other and they do not cancel each other out, evidently not wholly, but also not partially. That one side's transgressions are bigger than the other makes neither party 'good'. That is why I don't involve the West Bank in a discussion about the Hamas attacks: because they are only linked by a false idea that one can offset the other. The right conclusion to draw from the assessment that two sides are wrong is to side with neither, not with the side that lost out.

[PointOfViewGun]

I grant you there's more to the 1988 agreement than I though. Quite a bit was left open, it seems. If you want to score on technicalities, point to you. But IMHO it doesn't really impact the validity of marking the Gaza strip and West bank as most widely accepted territorial claim for a Palestinian state. It's a solid reference point to judge attitudes towards a two-state solution by. Israel violates it with its colonies in the West Bank. Hamas violates it by attacking civilian targets in Israel proper. They are two wrongs that don't make a right. The one does not justify the other and they do not cancel each other out, evidently not wholly, but also not partially. That one side's transgressions are bigger than the other makes neither party 'good'. That is why I don't involve the West Bank in a discussion about the Hamas attacks: because they are only linked by a false idea that one can offset the other. The right conclusion to draw from the assessment that two sides are wrong is to side with neither, not with the side that lost out.

What 1988 agreement? You keep trying to be as vague as possible about that... This is not you being wrong on a basic of technicality but you being fundamentally wrong about your own basis and deflecting from acknowledging it. What we think is right has no value. Neither side recognizes the borders you speak of. The narrative tries to paint a picture as if only Palestinians do not recognize these lines but its actually Israel that pushes these lines further and further on a daily basis. We're not even discussing whataboutism here. You yourself justified raids on West Bank settlements. It's only natural to ask why the ones near Gaza, that were incidentally been created in the past as part of Nakba, create a different case. We have now completed our full circle.

[Muizer]

Sorry my bad, I meant the Oslo accords. Confused with the Palestinian declaration of Independence . Though that seems to have been an important step on the way. Anyway, the Oslo accords clearly took UN resolution 242 as starting point.

[PointOfViewGun]

Sorry my bad, I meant the Oslo accords. Confused with the Palestinian declaration of Independence . Though that seems to have been an important step on the way. Anyway, the Oslo accords clearly took UN resolution 242 as starting point.

Oslo Accords did not address the border issue at all. The Resolution 242 didn't really define borders either, in fact, it was intended to be vague by design.

[Ludicus]

When was the last time Israel annexed land?

Every single day: it is part of an ongoing process, since the 1967 War. 700,000 Israeli Settlers are now living illegally in the occupied West Bank. And many more are expected: "I am shocked to learn that in the midst of war, the Israeli government is willing to allocate new funds to build new illegal settlements.”, Borrel said, three days ago.

When and how will this story end, which is not from the Thousand and One Nights, where the daily exchange of prisoners replaces Scheherazade's daily tales to the Sultan, who in this case is Netanyahu?

The "butcher of Gaza", as someone called him, is famous for saying that he knows the Americans very well and can manipulate them. He continues to say that he will never accept the existence of an independent Palestinian state, mocks Biden's proposals, just as he laughed at Obama years ago when he went to address the US Congress in order to sabotage the negotiations underway between the US government and Iran at the time. He was not successful then; the nuclear deal with Iran was signed. However, Trump's election as president was enough to immediately undo the agreement.

In a ridiculous bravado, the Israeli government shamelessly claims that after this war, they will "settle acounts" with Qatar. Israel said it will “settle accounts” with Qatar after war is ...

Right now we need them. But when this thing passes from the world, we will settle accounts with them

Qatar not only has the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, but it was also to Qatar that the U.S. requested to host the leaders of the political wing of Hamas.

The Palestinian people do not feel represented by the Palestinian Authority, not now and not ever. Hamas has 100,000 supporters in Palestine. It is therefore a mistake to exclude it from any future negotiations that would allow for a two-state solution. It is also a false illusion for Israel to think that it can annihilate Hamas. Even if it did, it would be replaced by another similar movement with a different name.

--
Edit,

You/we don't even have to spend much time discussing the illegality of the Israeli occupation - just listen to Ben Gurion.

“The Arab in Palestine has the right to self-determination. This right is not limited and cannot be qualified by our own interests…. It is possible that the realization of the aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs will create serious difficulties for us, but this is not a reason to deny their rights”
David Ben-Gurion, 1931.
Palestinians have a right to self-determination- and the right to resist.

Legality of the Israeli Occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Including East Jerusalem.

View original UN

…. Whether the occupation is illegal ab initio or becomes illegal, the consequences should be the immediate, unconditional and total withdrawal of Israel’s military forces; the withdrawal of colonial settlers; and the dismantling of the military administrative regime, with clear instructions that withdrawal for breach of an internationally wrongful act is not subject to negotiation. Full and commensurate reparations should be accorded to the affected Palestinian individuals, corporations and entities for the generational harm caused by Israel’s land and property appropriations, house demolitions, pillage of natural resources, denial of return, and other war crimes and crimes against humanity orchestrated for the colonialist, annexationist aims of an illegal occupant.

[Infidel144]

JERUSALEM, Nov 30 (Reuters) - Two Hamas gunmen killed three people at a Jerusalem bus stop during morning rush hour on Thursday, and Israel reiterated its commitment to wiping out the Palestinian Islamist faction, whose Oct. 7 killing spree triggered the Gaza war.


The attackers, Palestinians from East Jerusalem, were shot dead by off-duty soldiers and an armed civilian, police said. At least eight people were also wounded in the shooting.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle...ce-2023-11-30/

UNRWA Teacher Held Israeli Hostage in Attic for Almost 50 Days: Report
A teacher with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) reportedly held an Israeli hostage taken captive by Hamas on Oct. 7 in an attic.
The teacher, a father of 10 children, kept the hostage for almost 50 days, barely provided food, and neglected the hostage's medical needs, Israeli Channel 13's Almog Boker reported Wednesday. A Gazan doctor also held another hostage, according to Boker.


A spokeswoman for the UNRWA acknowledged the allegations but declined to comment.
https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/u...0-days-report/