Gaza is a trap. That is just one reason Israeli Prime Minister “Bibi” Netanyahu has not made the difficult decision to launch a ground invasion. I don’t know this for a fact, but I would place a good size bet that the Israel Defense Forces already have an estimate of the casualties they would suffer on the day they invade Gaza, and for every day thereafter. Hundreds might be killed within hours. It’s not out of the question that Israel’s military could suffer thousands killed and wounded.
I agree. It’s a trap. What Israel should do, in my opinion is instead of invading just provide humanitarian help to everyone in Gaza. But what do I know?
Which is what we should have done in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan as well! Instead we throw money and violence and treasure and we lose anyway...what a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan exists today.
Other questions I would like addressed is why have we given a country that is smaller than Rhode Island $91 Billion, yes, Billion since 1999?
Why does Biden think Israel needs more?
Could we give Israel way less and give some of those billions to our states so our bridges wouldn’t be falling down, our school and hospitals would have the best, up-to-date equipment, so rural communities could have well-stocked clinics instead of having to drive hours for health care? Imagine what our states could do for mental health care with a billion or two of our tax dollars coming back to meet our needs?
Last, really hot button question. Would we be having these problems if Israel had not taken land from the Palestinians?
Could their encroachment into other peoples’ lands be the same as the US settlers taking over the lands of the indigenous people who fought back?
To reduce the 1948 establishment of Israel to Israelis having "taken land from the Palestinians" is at the least inaccurate, and incomplete, and definitely suggests you read more of that history. There are no saints in this story.
Israeli genetic population (semitic people) inhabited the land prior to the Palestinians and were driven out during Roman times. The Jews are the Indians here. A cool history of all this is James Michener "The Source"
You forget the balance and the history here. The moment Israel was established in 1948, it was attacked on all sides, yet somehow managed to survive. Jordan was to be the Palestinian "state," but the Palestinians were forced out by other groups, and those within the boundaries of the new Israeli state were exhorted by the rulers of all the Arab states to flee, even though they did not want them coming to their respective countries. They could have stayed and lived in peace with the new Israeli state, but no - that wasn't what the rulers of Arab countries wanted.
Israel then had to fight three more wars and several internal intifadas against far more numerous odds, but it still survived. The land it seized after it was attacked in 1967 became the territories occupied today. and remember that several years ago Israel returned Gaza to the Palestinians, forcing their own settlers to leave the homes they had made there.
Israel is still the only democracy in the Middle East, and as the huge demonstrations against Netanyahu over the past months have shown, its citizens want to keep their democracy - and that includes the Israeli Arabs, Druze and Bedouins who are also citizens of the State of Israel. I only wish the same proportion of citizens of the US had the same passion for democracy here that the Israelis have shown in their country.
Israel has earned the right to support from other democracies, including the US, in the face of existential threats like Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. It is good foreign policy for the US to continue that support, while pushing for a two-state solution that will give the Palestinians self-determination and their own state, free from the vicious grip of Hamas and other terrorist groups.
Agreed - it's history, duh, but it's the history of Israel, and now that the initial shock of the slaughtered babies is off TV screens, the blame game is settling in. With some outstanding exceptions. Here is one I came across on FB:
Amazing speech in House of Lords
I am going to report only one. It was delivered by Guglielmo Verdirame, who’s a KC at Twenty Essex Chambers specialising in public international law, a professor of international law at the King’s College London department of war studies and a non-affiliated member of the House of Lords.
This is what he said, exactly as reported in Hansard:
There has been a lot of talk about proportionality in the law on self-defence. I refer to the words that the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, used a few days ago on the test of proportionality. It does not mean that the defensive force has to be equal to the force used in the armed attack. Proportionality means that you can use force that is proportionate to the defensive objective, which is to stop, to repel and to prevent further attacks.
Israel has described its war aims as the destruction of Hamas’s capability. From a legal perspective, these war aims are consistent with proportionality in the law of self-defence, given what Hamas says and does and what Hamas has done and continues to do.
Asking a state that is acting in self-defence to agree to a ceasefire before its lawful defensive objectives have been met is, in effect, asking that state to stop defending itself. For such calls to be reasonable and credible, they must be accompanied by a concrete proposal setting out how Israel’s legitimate defensive goals against Hamas will be met through other means. It is not an answer to say that Israel has to conclude a peace treaty, because Hamas is not interested in a peace treaty.
Proportionality also applies in the law that governs the conduct of hostilities, not only in self-defence. The law of armed conflict requires that in every attack posing a risk to civilian life, that risk must not be excessive in relation to the military advantage that is anticipated. That rule does not mean, even when scrupulously observed, that civilians will not tragically lose their lives in an armed conflict. The law of armed conflict, at its best, can mitigate the horrors of war but it cannot eliminate them. The great challenge in this conflict is that Hamas is the kind of belligerent that cynically exploits these rules by putting civilians under its control at risk and even using them to seek immunity for its military operations, military equipment and military personnel. An analysis of the application of the rules on proportionality in targeting in this conflict must always begin with this fact.
There has also been some discussion about siege warfare. The UK manual of the law of armed conflict, reflecting the Government’s official legal position—it is a Ministry of Defence document—says:
“Siege is a legitimate method of warfare … It would be unlawful to besiege an undefended town since it could be occupied without resistance”.
Gaza is not an undefended town. It is true that obligations apply to the besieging forces when civilians are caught within the area that is being encircled, and those obligations include agreeing to the passage of humanitarian relief by third parties. But it is not correct to say that encircling an area with civilians in it is not permitted by the laws of war.
A further point that concerns the laws of war is also of particular relevance to the British Government’s practice. It has already been mentioned that the Government have taken the view that Gaza remains under Israeli occupation, even though Israel pulled out in 2005. The traditional view until 2005 was that occupation required physical presence in the territory. That view is consistent with Article 42 of the Hague regulations of 1907, which states that a territory is occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the occupying power. Again, it is also the view taken by the UK manual of the law of armed conflict, which reflects the UK’s official legal position and states that occupation ceases as soon as the occupying power evacuates the area. The European Court of Human Rights, in its jurisprudence, has also adopted a similar approach to occupation. So I have always been rather baffled by the British Government’s position on this issue, which, as far as I know, has not changed. Yes, it is true that Israel has exercised significant control over the airspace and in the maritime areas, but even as a matter of plain geography it takes two—Israel and Egypt—to control the land access points to Gaza.
More fundamentally, it is Hamas that has been responsible for the government and administration of Gaza. I appreciate that this is a legal matter on which the Minister may not want to respond immediately but it is an important one, because the legal fiction that Israel was still the occupying power under the laws of armed conflict has been relentlessly exploited by Hamas to blame Israel for everything, while using the effective control that it has over the territory, the people and the resources to wage war.
On a final note, I would like to say something briefly on the way in which the war is being reported. When a serious allegation is made, particularly one that could constitute a war crime, the immediate response of the law-abiding belligerent will be to say, “We are investigating”. The non-law-abiding belligerent, by contrast, will forthwith blame the other side and even provide surprisingly precise casualty figures. The duty to investigate is one of the most important ones in armed conflict. What happened in the way in which the strike on the hospital was reported is that the side that professes no interest whatever in complying with the laws of armed conflict was rewarded with the headlines that it was seeking.
Thank you for your coverage of this situation that has no easy solution. I agree that it’s a trap where many will lose their lives. Until the Palestinian people are treated like the humans they are Israel will never know peace. Netanyahu must go. Why did it take so long for help to arrive after the attack began? All people must put aside their religious differences treat each other with love and kindness. Innocent humans are always the ones who suffer most when their leaders want power.
While Hamas is pure evil, Guterres is exactly right about Israel’s conduct. The situation is basically beyond resolution.
Interesting how Hamas, Hezbollah, et al, are from some of the poorest areas in the world, and yet they manage to buy some pretty trick infantry fighting tools… the same can be said of Israel. Maybe both sides could pony up and help the average Palestinian, Gazan, who just wants enough to eat for their families.
I was opposed to a ground incursion the last time you asked and happily so are you Lucian. Yes it is a trap and Netanyahu knows it but may not accept it. It's a tragedy any way you look at it.
Instead of bombs we should be dropping Levis and Ford Mustangs and HBO and Disney movies and flat screen smart tvs and McDonalds and Taylor Swift concerts and RHONY and all the other stuff that makes US far and away the culture the rest of the world wants, whether you like it or not you know it's true. Do that for 2-3 years instead of spending a trillion dollars a year on a military that given twenty friggin years could not defeat a few thousand bearded troglodytes armed with Toyotas and peashooters.
Israel had blockaded Gaza by air, land, and sea since 2007, which has had devastating effects on the Palestinian civilians. Is there any wonder why they hate Israel?
The UN and human rights groups have pleaded with Israel to cease, and they consider this blockade to the same as a military occupation.
The International Red Cross claims this stranglehold on Gaza is in violation of the Geneva Convention.
The international red cross has refused to work in Israel for 70 years. Hence Israel has its own equivalent of the red cross: Morgan David. I would suggest the International red cross is biased
I have an in-law who is Jewish. Years ago she visited relatives who lived in Israel on a ridge overlooking Gaza. For entertainment they would bring folding chairs, wine and snacks out to a place where they had a good view of the bombings, and cheer. If you lived your entire life watching the homes of your friends and families being destroyed as a recreation attraction I think it is entirely possible you'd grow up to be a violent person.
You continue to post statements without citations, and with an apparent lack of knowledge of the history of the Mid East and its problems. And you do not respond to any counterpoints made to your posts. That makes it easier to hold an opinion, perhaps, but does not advance the conversation.
The blockade has been since Hamas – whose charter explicitly calls for the eradication of the State of Israel – took complete control of Gaza in 2007 when "Hamas fighters took control of the Gaza Strip, while Fatah officials were either taken as prisoners, executed, or expelled." Further, the blockade is not by Israel alone, but also by Egypt while others in the international community instituted sanctions: "On 29 March 2006, Hamas established the First Haniyeh Government...snip...The international community responded by imposing economic sanctions against the PNA, and Egypt and Israel largely closed their border crossings with Gaza, instituting a blockade of the Gaza Strip." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)
Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but with such a lack of facts behind your posts no one is going to find such an opinion informative, or correct as to your claims.
Of course it’s a trap. Hamas knew that going in. Netanyahu was slow to figure it out. Hamas has no conscience while Israel suffers with the Knowledge of the Tree of Good and Evil. There are no easy solutions. My prayer and hope is that Israel chooses well; that Russia does not want active US military involvement; that Iran decides to slow the “humanitarian” aid. The most tragic outcome to date has been the exposure of rampant anti-Semitism 78 years after the end of The Shoah.
Netanyahu deserves his share of the blame for this, but none of these surrounding Arab countries has done very much to take in refugees from Gaza. When they rattle sabers at the idea of a ground incursion by Israel it sounds like they have an agenda that doesn't involve the well-being of Palestinians.
It’s complicated, Hamas is related to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian government hates them, most of them that they didn’t kill are in prison, they don’t want to import some more of them from Gaza.
Thank you for that explanation. I guess everyone has to hate someone. I think our hate and man's inhumanity to man continues. Maybe we all just kill each other until there's no one left on planet Earth....so very sad and so very senseless.
Well I think 2 comments pointed out that Egypt is worried about Hamas terrorists entering their country and others in general just don't have the capability.
However, it is also possible that the crisis in Gaza provides an excuse for various factions to conduct terrorist activity against Israel and to swing public opinion against them internationally.
Even before the current situation, why haven’t other Arab countries helped the Palestinians? They could have helped economically in many ways. Education, healthcare, housing. If they cared about them, they would have helped them.
Have you taken a close look at the "surrounding Arab countries" lately? Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq are in more or less shambles. Jordan has been in a delicate position pretty much since it was established. On the other side of Sinai, Egypt is relatively stable, but able to absorb that many refugees? I doubt it.
Not clear what you're saying here. Easier for a country like Iran to *what*? I'm guessing it's something along the lines of "back proxies in the region," and if so -- well, Iran is just doing what other countries, including the U.S., have been doing for decades. The Cold War casts a very long shadow. The USSR was backing anti-colonial movements in Africa and Asia while the U.S. generally followed the example of the European colonial powers -- while prioritizing market access for U.S. corporations. It's often said that the peak of U.S. credibility in the Middle East was when the U.S. opposed the Israeli-British-French invasion of Egypt in 1956. It's hard to imagine what the Middle East, especially the Levant, might look like today if the Western and Eastern powers hadn't been continuously stirring the pot.
Easier to take in refugees. That's what we were discussing. I think if you asked the average Palestinian living in Gaza you would find he or she is furious at the lack of support Middle East countries have given them in that regard.
I suppose we could go back to the Canaanites to muddy the waters but I thought the discussion was about what is going on today.
It does intrigue me that so many supporters of Israel want to go back to the Canaanites et al. but don't want to talk about the 20th century. As the philosopher Santayana so famously wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." That has been playing out in the Middle East for at least a century.
Come to think of it, "remembering" events of many centuries ago seems to be easier for many people than considering more recent events that fed directly into the current situation, whatever that situation is. Thinking about the Serbs and the Battle of Kosovo, or Sunni and Shi'a, or the Christians who blame Jews for the death of Jesus -- and, more recently, the white USians who can't accept that their side lost the Civil War (militarily at least -- the jury's still out on the politics).
B. You were the one who went back on a journey through time. Then you wanted to go back to the present and you immediately went right back to the past and other non sequiturs. My belief is that these Arab countries are more interested in destroying Israel than helping the Palestinians. Israel and BiBi in particular are not off the hook as I have said many times. Half the population of Gaza has known nothing but Israel bombing their homes. It's a bit absurd to expect them to grow up to be law-abiding citizens.
Wow. Well, you called bullshit on that story about Israel bombing the hospital before anybody I know of did. It’s looking very grim for any kind of reasonable outcome for anyone involved.
CORRECTION: Bibi is Prime Minister of Israel, not President. I knew it and screwed up.
I agree. It’s a trap. What Israel should do, in my opinion is instead of invading just provide humanitarian help to everyone in Gaza. But what do I know?
Which is what we should have done in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan as well! Instead we throw money and violence and treasure and we lose anyway...what a mess in Iraq and Afghanistan exists today.
Other questions I would like addressed is why have we given a country that is smaller than Rhode Island $91 Billion, yes, Billion since 1999?
Why does Biden think Israel needs more?
Could we give Israel way less and give some of those billions to our states so our bridges wouldn’t be falling down, our school and hospitals would have the best, up-to-date equipment, so rural communities could have well-stocked clinics instead of having to drive hours for health care? Imagine what our states could do for mental health care with a billion or two of our tax dollars coming back to meet our needs?
Last, really hot button question. Would we be having these problems if Israel had not taken land from the Palestinians?
Could their encroachment into other peoples’ lands be the same as the US settlers taking over the lands of the indigenous people who fought back?
To reduce the 1948 establishment of Israel to Israelis having "taken land from the Palestinians" is at the least inaccurate, and incomplete, and definitely suggests you read more of that history. There are no saints in this story.
Israeli genetic population (semitic people) inhabited the land prior to the Palestinians and were driven out during Roman times. The Jews are the Indians here. A cool history of all this is James Michener "The Source"
You forget the balance and the history here. The moment Israel was established in 1948, it was attacked on all sides, yet somehow managed to survive. Jordan was to be the Palestinian "state," but the Palestinians were forced out by other groups, and those within the boundaries of the new Israeli state were exhorted by the rulers of all the Arab states to flee, even though they did not want them coming to their respective countries. They could have stayed and lived in peace with the new Israeli state, but no - that wasn't what the rulers of Arab countries wanted.
Israel then had to fight three more wars and several internal intifadas against far more numerous odds, but it still survived. The land it seized after it was attacked in 1967 became the territories occupied today. and remember that several years ago Israel returned Gaza to the Palestinians, forcing their own settlers to leave the homes they had made there.
Israel is still the only democracy in the Middle East, and as the huge demonstrations against Netanyahu over the past months have shown, its citizens want to keep their democracy - and that includes the Israeli Arabs, Druze and Bedouins who are also citizens of the State of Israel. I only wish the same proportion of citizens of the US had the same passion for democracy here that the Israelis have shown in their country.
Israel has earned the right to support from other democracies, including the US, in the face of existential threats like Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. It is good foreign policy for the US to continue that support, while pushing for a two-state solution that will give the Palestinians self-determination and their own state, free from the vicious grip of Hamas and other terrorist groups.
Agreed - it's history, duh, but it's the history of Israel, and now that the initial shock of the slaughtered babies is off TV screens, the blame game is settling in. With some outstanding exceptions. Here is one I came across on FB:
Amazing speech in House of Lords
I am going to report only one. It was delivered by Guglielmo Verdirame, who’s a KC at Twenty Essex Chambers specialising in public international law, a professor of international law at the King’s College London department of war studies and a non-affiliated member of the House of Lords.
This is what he said, exactly as reported in Hansard:
There has been a lot of talk about proportionality in the law on self-defence. I refer to the words that the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, used a few days ago on the test of proportionality. It does not mean that the defensive force has to be equal to the force used in the armed attack. Proportionality means that you can use force that is proportionate to the defensive objective, which is to stop, to repel and to prevent further attacks.
Israel has described its war aims as the destruction of Hamas’s capability. From a legal perspective, these war aims are consistent with proportionality in the law of self-defence, given what Hamas says and does and what Hamas has done and continues to do.
Asking a state that is acting in self-defence to agree to a ceasefire before its lawful defensive objectives have been met is, in effect, asking that state to stop defending itself. For such calls to be reasonable and credible, they must be accompanied by a concrete proposal setting out how Israel’s legitimate defensive goals against Hamas will be met through other means. It is not an answer to say that Israel has to conclude a peace treaty, because Hamas is not interested in a peace treaty.
Proportionality also applies in the law that governs the conduct of hostilities, not only in self-defence. The law of armed conflict requires that in every attack posing a risk to civilian life, that risk must not be excessive in relation to the military advantage that is anticipated. That rule does not mean, even when scrupulously observed, that civilians will not tragically lose their lives in an armed conflict. The law of armed conflict, at its best, can mitigate the horrors of war but it cannot eliminate them. The great challenge in this conflict is that Hamas is the kind of belligerent that cynically exploits these rules by putting civilians under its control at risk and even using them to seek immunity for its military operations, military equipment and military personnel. An analysis of the application of the rules on proportionality in targeting in this conflict must always begin with this fact.
There has also been some discussion about siege warfare. The UK manual of the law of armed conflict, reflecting the Government’s official legal position—it is a Ministry of Defence document—says:
“Siege is a legitimate method of warfare … It would be unlawful to besiege an undefended town since it could be occupied without resistance”.
Gaza is not an undefended town. It is true that obligations apply to the besieging forces when civilians are caught within the area that is being encircled, and those obligations include agreeing to the passage of humanitarian relief by third parties. But it is not correct to say that encircling an area with civilians in it is not permitted by the laws of war.
A further point that concerns the laws of war is also of particular relevance to the British Government’s practice. It has already been mentioned that the Government have taken the view that Gaza remains under Israeli occupation, even though Israel pulled out in 2005. The traditional view until 2005 was that occupation required physical presence in the territory. That view is consistent with Article 42 of the Hague regulations of 1907, which states that a territory is occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the occupying power. Again, it is also the view taken by the UK manual of the law of armed conflict, which reflects the UK’s official legal position and states that occupation ceases as soon as the occupying power evacuates the area. The European Court of Human Rights, in its jurisprudence, has also adopted a similar approach to occupation. So I have always been rather baffled by the British Government’s position on this issue, which, as far as I know, has not changed. Yes, it is true that Israel has exercised significant control over the airspace and in the maritime areas, but even as a matter of plain geography it takes two—Israel and Egypt—to control the land access points to Gaza.
More fundamentally, it is Hamas that has been responsible for the government and administration of Gaza. I appreciate that this is a legal matter on which the Minister may not want to respond immediately but it is an important one, because the legal fiction that Israel was still the occupying power under the laws of armed conflict has been relentlessly exploited by Hamas to blame Israel for everything, while using the effective control that it has over the territory, the people and the resources to wage war.
On a final note, I would like to say something briefly on the way in which the war is being reported. When a serious allegation is made, particularly one that could constitute a war crime, the immediate response of the law-abiding belligerent will be to say, “We are investigating”. The non-law-abiding belligerent, by contrast, will forthwith blame the other side and even provide surprisingly precise casualty figures. The duty to investigate is one of the most important ones in armed conflict. What happened in the way in which the strike on the hospital was reported is that the side that professes no interest whatever in complying with the laws of armed conflict was rewarded with the headlines that it was seeking.
You are correct - an amazing and logically correct speech. Sadly, most of the world will not hear it or, if they did, understand it.
Thanks very much for this. For any who want a citation, it can be found here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-10-24/debates/17465F6F-4705-40A0-9250-0939AA74444B/details#contribution-45932906-22B1-4B64-8F9F-BAB25CD08642
Thanks for the link. Very helpful!
quite a speech this was. I'm gonna copy it.
thanks so much.
I will add this X/twitter thread as regards rules of engagement, proportionality, etc: https://twitter.com/JayNDonde/status/1711792581821301249?s=20
Thank you. Finally a comment relating a more complete factual context of the situation.
I’m conflicted I admit.
Justice v. Compassion.
Above my pay grade.
Yes!
Thank you for your coverage of this situation that has no easy solution. I agree that it’s a trap where many will lose their lives. Until the Palestinian people are treated like the humans they are Israel will never know peace. Netanyahu must go. Why did it take so long for help to arrive after the attack began? All people must put aside their religious differences treat each other with love and kindness. Innocent humans are always the ones who suffer most when their leaders want power.
The chances of this ending well are about nil.
While Hamas is pure evil, Guterres is exactly right about Israel’s conduct. The situation is basically beyond resolution.
Interesting how Hamas, Hezbollah, et al, are from some of the poorest areas in the world, and yet they manage to buy some pretty trick infantry fighting tools… the same can be said of Israel. Maybe both sides could pony up and help the average Palestinian, Gazan, who just wants enough to eat for their families.
Methinks those impoverished countries are not buying weapons bigger fish are giving them the weapons.
Israel is hardly poor. She takes care if her people
But not the Palestinians
I was opposed to a ground incursion the last time you asked and happily so are you Lucian. Yes it is a trap and Netanyahu knows it but may not accept it. It's a tragedy any way you look at it.
Instead of bombs we should be dropping Levis and Ford Mustangs and HBO and Disney movies and flat screen smart tvs and McDonalds and Taylor Swift concerts and RHONY and all the other stuff that makes US far and away the culture the rest of the world wants, whether you like it or not you know it's true. Do that for 2-3 years instead of spending a trillion dollars a year on a military that given twenty friggin years could not defeat a few thousand bearded troglodytes armed with Toyotas and peashooters.
I have traveled to Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, and China. No one wanted to be American. The Middle Eastern countries especially did not.
co-signed
They don't want to be Americans but they want American culture.
No they do not. That is an American Exceptionalism Myth.
double co-signed (1 for each one)
I was with you until you started the name calling there at the end of your comment.
Why not try peace?
All we are saying...is Give Peace a Chance!
Too much hate
Israel had blockaded Gaza by air, land, and sea since 2007, which has had devastating effects on the Palestinian civilians. Is there any wonder why they hate Israel?
The UN and human rights groups have pleaded with Israel to cease, and they consider this blockade to the same as a military occupation.
The International Red Cross claims this stranglehold on Gaza is in violation of the Geneva Convention.
The international red cross has refused to work in Israel for 70 years. Hence Israel has its own equivalent of the red cross: Morgan David. I would suggest the International red cross is biased
I have an in-law who is Jewish. Years ago she visited relatives who lived in Israel on a ridge overlooking Gaza. For entertainment they would bring folding chairs, wine and snacks out to a place where they had a good view of the bombings, and cheer. If you lived your entire life watching the homes of your friends and families being destroyed as a recreation attraction I think it is entirely possible you'd grow up to be a violent person.
They would hate Israel anyway if you know your history
They supplied false documents to defeated Nazis fleeing Europe. They were part of the Vatican ratline.
You continue to post statements without citations, and with an apparent lack of knowledge of the history of the Mid East and its problems. And you do not respond to any counterpoints made to your posts. That makes it easier to hold an opinion, perhaps, but does not advance the conversation.
The blockade has been since Hamas – whose charter explicitly calls for the eradication of the State of Israel – took complete control of Gaza in 2007 when "Hamas fighters took control of the Gaza Strip, while Fatah officials were either taken as prisoners, executed, or expelled." Further, the blockade is not by Israel alone, but also by Egypt while others in the international community instituted sanctions: "On 29 March 2006, Hamas established the First Haniyeh Government...snip...The international community responded by imposing economic sanctions against the PNA, and Egypt and Israel largely closed their border crossings with Gaza, instituting a blockade of the Gaza Strip." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)
Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but with such a lack of facts behind your posts no one is going to find such an opinion informative, or correct as to your claims.
Of course it’s a trap. Hamas knew that going in. Netanyahu was slow to figure it out. Hamas has no conscience while Israel suffers with the Knowledge of the Tree of Good and Evil. There are no easy solutions. My prayer and hope is that Israel chooses well; that Russia does not want active US military involvement; that Iran decides to slow the “humanitarian” aid. The most tragic outcome to date has been the exposure of rampant anti-Semitism 78 years after the end of The Shoah.
Netanyahu deserves his share of the blame for this, but none of these surrounding Arab countries has done very much to take in refugees from Gaza. When they rattle sabers at the idea of a ground incursion by Israel it sounds like they have an agenda that doesn't involve the well-being of Palestinians.
How many billions do we send in aid to Egypt and they won't accept refugees from Gaza??? Can't Biden put some pressure on them??
It’s complicated, Hamas is related to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian government hates them, most of them that they didn’t kill are in prison, they don’t want to import some more of them from Gaza.
Thank you for that explanation. I guess everyone has to hate someone. I think our hate and man's inhumanity to man continues. Maybe we all just kill each other until there's no one left on planet Earth....so very sad and so very senseless.
This begs the question of why the surrounding countries have not helped the Palestinians. They have obviously made a choice not to. Why?
Well I think 2 comments pointed out that Egypt is worried about Hamas terrorists entering their country and others in general just don't have the capability.
However, it is also possible that the crisis in Gaza provides an excuse for various factions to conduct terrorist activity against Israel and to swing public opinion against them internationally.
True. But what about the other Arab countries? Syria, for instance.
I don't know about Syria. I know that Jordan has taken in many refugees.
Even before the current situation, why haven’t other Arab countries helped the Palestinians? They could have helped economically in many ways. Education, healthcare, housing. If they cared about them, they would have helped them.
The only thing I can think of is maintaining the horrific status quo in Gaza gives them something for which they can blame Israel.
Have you taken a close look at the "surrounding Arab countries" lately? Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq are in more or less shambles. Jordan has been in a delicate position pretty much since it was established. On the other side of Sinai, Egypt is relatively stable, but able to absorb that many refugees? I doubt it.
That's a fair enough comment but it's still easier for a country like Iran, let's say, than to go to war.
Not clear what you're saying here. Easier for a country like Iran to *what*? I'm guessing it's something along the lines of "back proxies in the region," and if so -- well, Iran is just doing what other countries, including the U.S., have been doing for decades. The Cold War casts a very long shadow. The USSR was backing anti-colonial movements in Africa and Asia while the U.S. generally followed the example of the European colonial powers -- while prioritizing market access for U.S. corporations. It's often said that the peak of U.S. credibility in the Middle East was when the U.S. opposed the Israeli-British-French invasion of Egypt in 1956. It's hard to imagine what the Middle East, especially the Levant, might look like today if the Western and Eastern powers hadn't been continuously stirring the pot.
Easier to take in refugees. That's what we were discussing. I think if you asked the average Palestinian living in Gaza you would find he or she is furious at the lack of support Middle East countries have given them in that regard.
I suppose we could go back to the Canaanites to muddy the waters but I thought the discussion was about what is going on today.
It does intrigue me that so many supporters of Israel want to go back to the Canaanites et al. but don't want to talk about the 20th century. As the philosopher Santayana so famously wrote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." That has been playing out in the Middle East for at least a century.
Come to think of it, "remembering" events of many centuries ago seems to be easier for many people than considering more recent events that fed directly into the current situation, whatever that situation is. Thinking about the Serbs and the Battle of Kosovo, or Sunni and Shi'a, or the Christians who blame Jews for the death of Jesus -- and, more recently, the white USians who can't accept that their side lost the Civil War (militarily at least -- the jury's still out on the politics).
And not for nothing, your last "sentence" is not a sentence. Who is thinking, you or someone else?
A. I'm not a supporter of Israel.
B. You were the one who went back on a journey through time. Then you wanted to go back to the present and you immediately went right back to the past and other non sequiturs. My belief is that these Arab countries are more interested in destroying Israel than helping the Palestinians. Israel and BiBi in particular are not off the hook as I have said many times. Half the population of Gaza has known nothing but Israel bombing their homes. It's a bit absurd to expect them to grow up to be law-abiding citizens.
It seemed like the unusual brutality of the attack on October 7 was intended to provoke Israel in some way.
Exactly
And when Israel is attacked, they counter-attack tenfold.
Your summaries and assessments of this situation are blessedly concise and clear. Thank you so much.
Lucian I can’t imagine how you deal with this on a daily basis snd with such clear and precise detail and analysis but very thank you that you do
I so agree!!
Can I like this a thousand times?!
Wow. Well, you called bullshit on that story about Israel bombing the hospital before anybody I know of did. It’s looking very grim for any kind of reasonable outcome for anyone involved.
War and Reason, never the twain shall meet.