Middle East Defence & Security

[Big_Zucchini]

The ability to travel is a fundamental right not a luxury or to "make travel a bit more comfortable for "some people"'. Also how on earth does letting "some people" travel leads to the "sacrifice thousands of civilians on both sides"?

That depends on your idea of how to allow them to travel. If they could just exit Gaza without any documentation and going through border control, Hamas and the 90 other terrorist organizations would just drive out to carry out terror attacks across Israel. Or do you really expect them to just not murder Jews whenever they see them?
Unless you do propose they get processed at a border, in which case you're really just proposing the status quo because people CAN travel to and out of Gaza. Many Gazans do it on a daily basis.

What I did say is that it's a false and simplistic assumption to assume that the Houthis are the ever willing and obedient proxies/puppets of the Iranians. The Iranians were embarassed because certain Houthi attacks were carried out without Iranian knowledge and permission at a time when talks were being held. By the same token not every Shia group which is has benefited from Iranian largesse always listens to Iran.

Here's the excerpt from the source you gave:
military attacks are not the solution to the crisis in Yemen" and called for "a calm atmosphere and away from the continuation of tension and the cycle of violence and Establishing peace and stability in the region
Iran is not pro-calm, anti-tension or anti-violence, and certainly not pro-peace and stability. So this whole statement sounds a lot to me like denial of personal involvement in the attack, much like they denied any involvement in the bombing of ships in the gulf.
To take this one denial out of many in Iran's MO, and think it has a trust crisis with Houthis, is a huge leap, especially when we have more concrete data, like sensors, to tell us the drones in the attack on Aramco did not come from Yemen.

Exclusive: US probe of Saudi oil attack shows it came from north - report

The United States said new evidence and analysis of weapons debris recovered from an attack on Saudi oil facilities on Sept. 14 indicates the strike likely came from the north, reinforcing its earlier assessment that Iran was behind the offensive.

www.reuters.com

There is a time for military action and a time when military action is not required or conducive to other actions being carried out. Iran - like Israel - relies on both soft and hard power. You figure Iran would have lasted this long against such powerful enemies like the U.S. and Israel if it didn't know when and how to strike a fine balance with regards to it's actions?

It lasted this long because Israel and the US are not out to destroy Iran. They are out to contain the Iranian threat to the region and the world.

You make it sound as if I suggested that Israel should supply Arrow and David's Sling to Iran as a confidence building measure or rename a Kibbutz after a matyred Iranian figure. All I pointed out is that the Iranians didn't suddenly wake up the wrong side of bed one morning and decided to wage "terror", "terror" and more "terror" or to adopt the policy is has without good reason. I asked what change in Iran's threat calculus or actions on the part of others would see Iran having a lesser need for nukes or proxies. Valid question. Also valid to assume that Israel; which has long realised that military action has its limits; would like to understand what motivates or makes it's enemies tick. I'm assuming of course that Israel isn't in need of a perpetual threat.

Well then what DO you propose makes Iran target Israel, if you think you know better than the Israeli intelligence apparatus?
And what do you propose Israel do to avoid being targeted? And I mean anything other than bending over and be annihilated.

On the contrary there is but not necessarily Palestinian land per see. There is the Golan which is Syrian [and recognised as such by the international community] and which Israel continues to occupy in violation of UN Resolution 242 and there are strips of Lebanese territory

Maybe, but none in their right mind would actually support such a move in 2022.

With regards to Pakestinian land there is the West Bank which shrinks year by year due to the illegal construction of sentiments; sprouting like mushrooms. You'll no doubt claim this isn't an issue because settlements can always be vacated; as some have been in the past but then the question arises as to why even bother constructing them in the first place if Israel is willing to vacate them at some distant point in the future.

Because Israel is not a communist state. It doesn't dictate with an iron fist what happens exactly, and people are not living in fear of a secret police. People build, and it's up to the state to tear down if it's done without a permit, or outside permitted areas.
Israel does not build settlements. People do, and whenever they do, it's subject to scrutiny by the government.

Anyone who wishes to put an end to this construction has to tackle not the legal issue, but the practical one - why are people building there, and why should they stop?
Why people are building there is simple - untapped lands that can be settled in a time of housing crisis, and for only a fraction of the price of housing in central Israel.
But then, how do you convince them to stop? Do you tell them their houses might be vacated and demolished to pave way for a Palestinian state? They'll scoff and tell you there will never be one.

The best motivator for a solution is lighting a fire under one's feet. Don't tell them - show them the situation is urgent. Build more and show them if they won't accept peace and prosperity now, the offer will shrink and they'll get less later. Less and less until they break and accept.
Or maybe bring another US president that's willing to make the solution comprehensive, and seek land for them elsewhere, like the flat northern Sinai that's suitable for their economical model.

 

[STURM]

Or do you really expect them to just not murder Jews whenever they see them?

Two things [1] Is this a Jewish issue now? [2] Are you suggesting that allowing Gazans to travel [not necessarily into Israel ] would lead to them murdering "Jews whenever they see them"'. You demonising Pakstinians? No, I'm not putting words in your mouth as you claimed previously, merely asking a question.

CAN travel to and out of Gaza. Many Gazans do it on a daily basis.

If course they "CAN"; just not easily and subject to Israeli approval. Just like how any NGO is free to deliver humanitarian supplies in.

So this whole statement sounds a lot to me like denial of personal involvement in the attack, much like they denied any involvement in the bombing of ships in the gulf.

That was not the issue. You disagreed when I pointed out that Iran does not always have full control over its proxies; I pointed out that this is incorrect.

It lasted this long because Israel and the US are not out to destroy Iran.

It's lasted this long because the Iranians; far from being the fevered minded automatons you make them out to be [only interested in "terror", "terror" and more "terror"]; know how to play the game well; they know how how far they can push and they understand their enemies.

Also, pray tell but even if they wanted to; short of nukes [which of course Israel doesn't have]; how would both countries "destroy" Iran?

They are out to contain the Iranian threat to the region and the world.

They're "out there" to safeguard their own interests and their own interests isn't necessarily good for "the region and the world"...

Well then what DO you propose makes Iran target Israel, if you think you know better than the Israeli intelligence apparatus?

[1] I didn't say "I know better than the Israeli intelligence apparatus"' [2] The "Israeli intelligence apparatus"isn't infallible. I'd be happy to provide examples from a great book written by an Israeli author. [3] One of Iran's grievances with Israel is the longstanding Palestnian; I question if Israel really has a sincere desire to resolve this issue. As I pointed out; highly ironic but it's Israeli policies which feed the Hamas narrative.

And what do you propose Israel do to avoid being targeted? And I mean anything other than bending over and be annihilated.

If the concept of trying to understand what makes your enemy tick is such a novelty to you; I'll leave it at that.

Anyone who wishes to put an end to this construction has to tackle not the legal issue, but the practical one - why are people building there, and why should they stop?

Right, so various Israeli governments have no say in the issue; they never supported or encouraged the building of sentiments on land occupied?

Why people are building there is simple

What's simple is that settlements are growing like mushrooms on land Israel doesn't own and illegally occupies in violation of UN Resolution 242; land supposedly allocated for a future Palestinian state.


.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Two things [1] Is this a Jewish issue now? [2] Are you suggesting that allowing Gazans to travel [not necessarily into Israel ] would lead to them murdering "Jews whenever they see them"'. You demonising Pakstinians? No, I'm not putting words in your mouth as you claimed previously, merely asking a question.

Yes it is a Jewish issue. They are taught at schools to murder Jews. The Arab Israelis are seen as traitors, but I'm not familiar with the policies toward them. In one of the recent military operations, Hamas rockets had killed only a Palestinian worker in Israel, so there's that.

If they are traveling but not passing through Israel to do that, then there's no threat. But they cannot travel anywhere without entering Israel, and if they don't go through security checks then it's not just workers that will pass through but also terrorists, of which there is no shortage.

If course they "CAN"; just not easily and subject to Israeli approval. Just like how any NGO is free to deliver humanitarian supplies in.

Are you familiar with any country that allows traveling into its territory without approval?
So where's the issue exactly?

You're also not answering the question. Under what format are you suggesting they travel? Because if you suggest they become exempt of security checks, then that's nothing short of incitement.

That was not the issue. You disagreed when I pointed out that Iran does not always have full control over its proxies; I pointed out that this is incorrect.

So you agree that Iran attacks the same countries with whom it negotiates as leverage?
If not, I can give more examples, like the recent nuclear talks during which Iran attacked American bases nonstop.

Also, pray tell but even if they wanted to; short of nukes [which of course Israel doesn't have]; how would both countries "destroy" Iran?

Kill the ayatollahs, target every government institute while it's still populated, cut IRGC infrastructure, and provide arms to the people who will likely seize the opportunity to exact revenge on the government. Then promise full sanctions relief to the rising government if it aligns with the west, or at least ends the regional terror activities.

They're "out there" to safeguard their own interests and their own interests isn't necessarily good for "the region and the world"...

Well then they just coincidentally happen to be.

If the concept of trying to understand what makes your enemy tick is such a novelty to you; I'll leave it at that

Seems you cannot understand the point of criticism. If you criticize, you have to provide an alternative, some proposition.
You said Israel shares the blame for the conflict with Iran but blatantly refused to elaborate further.

Right, so various Israeli governments have no say in the issue; they never supported or encouraged the building of sentiments on land occupied?

It's ultimately not up to them.

What's simple is that settlements are growing like mushrooms on land Israel doesn't own and illegally occupies in violation of UN Resolution 242; land supposedly allocated for a future Palestinian state.

Okay and?

 

[STURM]

Edit.

 

[STURM]

Yes it is a Jewish issue.

It is a land issue overall and with regards to Gazans it has something to do [don't have to be an expert to see this] with the predicament they're in. Naturally in your world view it's all the fault of the Palestnians.

They are taught at schools to murder Jews.

All schools in Israeli blockaded Gaza and Israeli occupied areas?You really sure about that?

The Arab Israelis are seen as traitors

Correction. Palestinians who collaborate [either out of volition or because they were turned] are seen as traitors which they are by the very definition of the word. Just like how Israelis who condemn government actions/policies and who display solidarity for the Palestinians are seen as "traitors" by some..

But they cannot travel anywhere without entering Israel, and if they don't go through security checks then it's not just workers that will pass through but also terrorists, of which there is no shortage.

So you say but not convincingly. You suggesting that Gazans can leave freely without Israeli agreement from their coast? If some philanthropist from say Oman decided to place helicopters in Gaza to transport Gazans in need of medical emergency: Israel won't object? If Egypt decided to open its border crossing: Israel would not scream murder?

Let's see what the UN has to say. I didn't include links you'd claim are nefarious, anti Israeli, have an agenda and are economical with the truth; such as Oxfam, Al Jazeera or Amnesty International.

https://www.un.org/unispal/humanitarian-situation-in-the-gaza-strip-fast-facts-ocha-factsheet/

"The Gaza blockade (through the land, air and sea) is a denial of basic human rights in contravention of international law and amounts to collective punishment. It severely restricts imports and exports, as well as the movement of people in and out of Gaza, and access to agricultural land and fishing waters. Gazans are unable to provide for their families and the quality of infrastructure and vital services has deteriorated"

"Only a minority of the projects aimed at improving housing and vital services in Gaza, submitted for approval by the international community, have been approved by the Israeli authorities. Implementation of approved projects is impeded by funding shortages affecting the operating agencies, as well as by the limited capacity at the single crossing for goods. The internal Palestinian divide is an additional factor undermining the quality of vital services"

much like they denied any involvement in the bombing of ships in the gulf

Yes. Like the Israelis who often deny the murder of Palestinian: some of whom in the past;for some inexplicable reason; were not active militants/terrorists/resistance members but intellectuals and others who were not Fatah friendly and advocated accommodation with Israel.

also terrorists, of which there is no shortage

Naturally: they're all "terrorists"; nothing but "terrorists"; devoid of any humanity and Israeli policy has absolutely nothing to do with this. That's the impression you give ...

Are you familiar with any country that allows traveling into its territory without approval?So where's the issue exactly?

The "issue" is that Israel has a blockade on Gaza as a form of collective punishment [which the Brits did with the demolishing and burning of houses in Palestine] and that the blockade has adverse consequences for Gazans and feeds into the Hamas narrative. That's "the issue" chum.

Under what format are you suggesting they travel?

Since Israel is the one enforcing a blockade its Israel's responsibility to conduct the checks for every into Israel [similarly to what Israel does with Palestinians who enter Israel from other areas].

you agree that Iran attacks the same countries with whom it negotiates as leverage?

Yes, various countries do certain things for leverage whilst negotiating. Israel in the past negotiated but at the same time continued with the frenzied building of settlements. A cynic would say that Israel wasn't really interested in peace. Back to Iran, if you recall the issue was its proxies and your denial or ignorance that Iran didn't have full control of its proxies.

Then promise full sanctions relief to the rising government if it aligns with the west, or at least ends the regional terror activities.

Why on earth should it "align with the West"? Sounds an arrogant thing to say. You can say they should adopt Western values of democracy, human right, etc but not "alignment". As for "terror" activities the Iranians see them as actions which are in line with their interests. One could also point out that Israeli actions which leads to immense suffering including the deaths of children [of course you propagate the fantasy such deaths are solely caused by malfunctioning rockets or Hamas use of human shields; never Israel's fault of course] and the shooting of unarmed people [no doubt those doing the shooting only saw "terrorists"] as ''terrorists'.

Well then they just coincidentally happen to be.

If you say so. Ultimately what the U.S. and Israel are doing is for their selfish interests; not for the betterment of the region or the world as you would claim.

Seems you cannot understand the point of criticism.

"Seems" you're going enable to "understand" various things too; seen from your lens.

You said Israel shares the blame for the conflict with Iran but blatantly refused to elaborate further.

Ah but I did. It just didn't fit in your narrative in that it wasn't what you wanted to hear. I said clearly that the Palestinian issue is a source of major grievance. Just like how I said Israel's actions feed the Hamas narrative. Resolving the Palestinian issue does away with a major source of grievance.

Okay and?

"And" the situation is not as simple or innocent as you claimed. Nor is the Israeli government as incapable as you portray with regards to the frenzied building of sentiments on Palestinian land; if it wanted to halt them; which it doesn't of course.

Do you tell them their houses might be vacated and demolished to pave way for a Palestinian state? They'll scoff and tell you there will never be one.

Israel is supposed to be a democratic state where the rule of law counts for something. If Israeli settlers are free to illegally construct settlements on land belonging to others [not to mention their often aggressive behaviour] and the government is unwilling or unable to stop them: something is fundamentally wrong.

The best motivator for a solution is lighting a fire under one's feet?

The best motivater for lessening or worrying support for Hamas is to treat Palestinians with humanity and give them what's been denied them; rather than seeing them as mostly "terrorists"; grabbing their land: making all kinds of excuses why they shouldn't have their state; laying all the blame on them; blockading them and occupying them. To offer them something better.

The Palestnian issue is one Israel is still faced with; one it had tried to make go away; it"s still there. Maybe some in the political elite for nefarious reasons want the problem to stay and will continue making excuse after excuse as to why a permanent solution isn't possible. Decades after its creation; after winning various wars with the unconditional backing of a superpower [after 1967] Israel still has major security problems with the Palestinians and by extension with the Arab world world at large [not withstanding the Arabs Accords which is mostly cosmetic].

Anyhow, not my country or region. If you have no issues reading about a new type of rocket fired from the Gaza in 2035 or IDF ops in the West Bank in 2045 then it's fine. As a human being I have issues with civilians getting killed; whether an Israeli by stabbing or a Palestinian by missile. I have issues when I see injustice, hypocrisy and suffering.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

British PM tells Lapid she is reviewing relocation of UK embassy to Jerusalem.
Although late, this is the right move. Embassies should be physically close to government institutes, especially for such close friends.

British PM tells Lapid she is reviewing relocation of UK embassy to Jerusalem

In meeting at UN, Liz Truss says she's weighing 'current location of the British Embassy in Israel'; had already vowed to consider move while serving as foreign secretary

www.timesofisrael.com

It is a land issue overall and with regards to Gazans it has something to do [don't have to be an expert to see this] with the predicament they're in. Naturally in your world view it's all the fault of the Palestnians.

So once they get land, they'll still escalate further because of their self-inflicted woes? How is that going to convince anyone to give them land?

Correction. Palestinians who collaborate [either out of volition or because they were turned] are seen as traitors which they are by the very definition of the word. Just like how Israelis who condemn government actions/policies and who display solidarity for the Palestinians are seen as "traitors" by some..

So Israeli Arabs should be hostile to Israel, and be anti-democratic and regressive?

So you say but not convincingly. You suggesting that Gazans can leave freely without Israeli agreement from their coast?

Jesus christ. Ever heard of border control? I ask how you propose they travel and you keep deflecting.

If some philanthropist from say Oman decided to place helicopters in Gaza to transport Gazans in need of medical emergency: Israel won't object?

If done in coordination with Israel, it won't object. Gazans already receive foreign medical care.

If Egypt decided to open its border crossing: Israel would not scream murder

Judging by the fact that Egypt has occassionally opened and closed the Rafah closing without any incident, I'd guess not.

Let's see what the UN has to say. I didn't include links you'd claim are nefarious, anti Israeli, have an agenda and are economical with the truth; such as Oxfam, Al Jazeera or Amnesty International.

So AJ, Amnesty, RT, and the Pyongyang Times are not credible/honest, which is true, but then you quote the UN? The UN is even worse than them, especially when it comes to defunct organs like UNHRC.

Naturally: they're all "terrorists"; nothing but "terrorists"; devoid of any humanity and Israeli policy has absolutely nothing to do with this. That's the impression you give ...

No, that's the impression those who only know absolutes would choose to get.

The "issue" is that Israel has a blockade on Gaza as a form of collective punishment [which the Brits did with the demolishing and burning of houses in Palestine] and that the blockade has adverse consequences for Gazans and feeds into the Hamas narrative. That's "the issue" chum

Then if Hamas cares so much about the Palestinians, they should just lift the blockade.
You paint it as if it's Israel's choice, but it's not.

When a policeman pins down an assailant, does he do that as a form of collective punishment? Or does he do that because he has no choice, and doing otherwise would put others in harm's way?

Since Israel is the one enforcing a blockade its Israel's responsibility to conduct the checks for every into Israel [similarly to what Israel does with Palestinians who enter Israel from other areas].

That's called "status quo".

Yes, various countries do certain things for leverage whilst negotiating.

Then you might recall saying Iran definitely was negotiating with the Arabs in a peaceful manner, definitely not through extortion. Now you agree that Iran was forcing the Arabs into "negotiations" where it wishes to cement its dominance over them.

If you say so. Ultimately what the U.S. and Israel are doing is for their selfish interests; not for the betterment of the region or the world as you would claim.

Heard of selfish altruism? If a society is structured correctly, selfish acts can be leveraged to benefit all.
Is the US being selfish when it invests in space exploration? Yes, but it benefits humanity as a whole.
Is Israel being selfish when it invests in water and agriculture tech to cope with hostile geography? Yes, but it too benefits humanity as a whole.
Iran has only negatives to contribute to the world despite the massive potential it has, so any action done against the Iranian regime and its terror campaign, is a selfish act that works for the betterment of this world.

Ah but I did. It just didn't fit in your narrative in that it wasn't what you wanted to hear. I said clearly that the Palestinian issue is a source of major grievance. Just like how I said Israel's actions feed the Hamas narrative. Resolving the Palestinian issue does away with a major source of grievance.

Wait you said that unironically? Jesus... that's quite the disconnect.
If Palestinians are all the Ayatollahs are thinking about, why didn't Iran do anything when Assad and the PFLP massacred the Palestinians? Why didn't Iran do anything to elevate the Palestinians' status to citizenship in Lebanon? It didn't even utter a word, unless some event had relation to Israel.

And" the situation is not as simple or innocent as you claimed. Nor is the Israeli government as incapable as you portray with regards to the frenzied building of sentiments on Palestinian land; if it wanted to halt them; which it doesn't of course.

You said Israel was violating some UN resolution, and I asked why should it abide by it. Well then? Why should it?

Israel is supposed to be a democratic state where the rule of law counts for something

Let me correct you on that one. Israel IS a democratic state.
And perhaps you don't understand the term "rule of law" if you prefer it means "police state".
Let's say John here applies for a permit for a house in J&S area C. The government approves/rejects the permit, ultimately. So in this case it rejects. John didn't receive a formal answer so he challenges the decision in court. Court says gov't needs to provide answer or approve the permit.
What would the government say?

Your whole approach here is that Israel, a liberal democracy, needs to be punished for a false Palestinian narrative, while the nation with biggest concentration of terrorist organizations needs to be rewarded? This is an anti-humanist approach, which obviously as a westerner I would oppose.

If Israeli settlers are free to illegally construct settlements on land belonging to others [not to mention their often aggressive behaviour] and the government is unwilling or unable to stop them: something is fundamentally wrong.

Oslo Accords, specifically references to area C, would prove these settlements are not illegal.

The best motivater for lessening or worrying support for Hamas is to treat Palestinians with humanity and give them what's been denied them

Propose 1 action. But... one that hasn't been tried yet.

rather than seeing them as mostly "terrorists"; grabbing their land: making all kinds of excuses why they shouldn't have their state; laying all the blame on them; blockading them and occupying them. To offer them something better.

You say I dehumanize them, but I think it is you who dehumanizes them very often. It is undeniable that terrorism rules in all Palestinian territories, whether Gaza or J&S, or in other countries. It is also undeniable that whenever terrorism pops up in some place in the world, it's because the ideology was cultivated by the people, and is seen as legitimate. Hamas, PIJ, PFLP, etc etc, are overwhelmingly legitimized and endorsed by the Palestinian people. Anyone who would oppose them, is at a significant minority.
You are excusing them of any responsibility, and lay blame on Israel for fighting terrorism.
Just yesterday a Palestinian man traveling in Israel with a work search permit, murdered an elderly woman in Holon, a city where I currently study, before hanging himself nearby. He is now idolized as a national hero.
In Israel, failure to announce a national mourning day complete with thousands of denounciations, will spark a media uproar if an Israeli were to murder a Palestinian.
Israeli Prime Ministers have labeled certain Israeli Jews as terrorists in the past, following heinous murders. Were they also dehumanized?

The Palestnian issue is one Israel is still faced with; one it had tried to make go away; it"s still there. Maybe some in the political elite for nefarious reasons want the problem to stay and will continue making excuse after excuse as to why a permanent solution isn't possible

Ahh yes, the deep state is now in Israel. The only elite in Israel are artists and CEOs of supermarket chains.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Decades after its creation; after winning various wars with the unconditional backing of a superpower [after 1967] Israel still has major security problems with the Palestinians and by extension with the Arab world world at large [not withstanding the Arabs Accords which is mostly cosmetic].

If the region was still into big moves like the wars of the 40's to 70's, the Palestinians might have been relocated to somewhere else where they wouldn't harm Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. But the region calmed, Israel emerged as a vibrant liberal democracy, and is expected to make decisions based not only on cold calculations but also on a moral compass.
Well the reason why there isn't a massive exodus of Palestinians today is because of humanity. Unlike Syria and Jordan, Israel won't slaughter Palestinians. Unlike the Lebanese, Israel won't horde them into camps. Israel is trying to solve this the humane way, and what you're doing right now is criticizing it for being humane. At least be consistent with it.

Anyhow, not my country or region. If you have no issues reading about a new type of rocket fired from the Gaza in 2035 or IDF ops in the West Bank in 2045 then it's fine.

I do have a problem with that. But my solution would not involve letting loose countless serial killers on the streets to wreak havoc in Israeli cities.
I asked for your solution, but it seems to only demand more bloodshed. And you call that "humanity".


Undated footage of Saudi F-15 downing a Houthi drone with an AMRAAM.
It is not immediately clear why:
1. The F-15 would get so close, even dangerously close, to the drone.
2. An AMRAAM was used at such range instead of an AIM-9 or cannons.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1572669283771224064

 

[STURM]

So once they get land, they'll still escalate further because of their self-inflicted woes? How is that going to convince anyone to give them land?

That's right; more excuses not to give them their land. Just say that your opinion is that they should never have their state or if they do it has to be with Israel dictating things and agreeing what they should have.

So Israeli Arabs should be hostile to Israel, and be anti-democratic and regressive?

If you care to read what I wrote again; my comments were on Israeli Arabs and in relation to how they are viewed by non Israeli Palestinian Arab and your claim that Israeli Arabs are seen as ''traitors''. There was no mention at all about Israeli Arabs being ''hostile to Israel, and be anti-democratic and regressive''... I suggest you at least stick on the same page rather than go of tangent.

Gazans already receive foreign medical care.

What I oppose is your false narrative that everything's normal and fine with Gaza; that the Israeli blockade does not have a detrimental impact on its inhabitants and that any issues are solely the fault of Hamas.

The UN is even worse than them, especially when it comes to defunct organs like UNHRC.

Naturally; anything and anyone who has the slightest criticism of Israel is biased and dishonest - Israel is beyond reproach and criticism. All the data provided on Gaza which puts Israel in a bad light is false and Gazans are actually quite well off and content in Gaza. If you could you'd even vacation there I'm sure.

You paint it as if it's Israel's choice, but it's not.

You ''paint it'' like Israel has absolutely no fault; it's all the fault of everyone else. Israel has a choice because a lot of what we see is a result of Israel's actions; thus contrary to your - false - claims it has choice. To you naturally a two state solution would not solve any problems and would only result in Jews being killed my ''terrorists''. The notion that peace would benefit Israel is alien to you as is the notion that there are root causes which if addressed could in the long term gradually improve relations between the Palestinians and the Arab world [something with more substance compared to the cosmetic Abraham Accords]. No, in your world view this is not possible; not because of Israel which is perpetually blameless of course but because of ''terrorists'' [they're even under people's beds and in cupboards] and freedom hating Palestinians.

When a policeman pins down an assailant, does he do that as a form of collective punishment? Or does he do that because he has no choice, and doing otherwise would put others in harm's way?

Choice a better analogy. Israel has choices; not that it doesn't.

Then you might recall saying Iran definitely was negotiating with the Arabs in a peaceful manner, definitely not through extortion. Now you agree that Iran was forcing the Arabs into "negotiations" where it wishes to cement its dominance over them.

No. That's not what I said at all and you know it. What I said was written in simple English which gives no room for obfuscation.

Heard of selfish altruism? If a society is structured correctly, selfish acts can be leveraged to benefit all. Is the US being selfish when it invests in space exploration? Yes, but it benefits humanity as a whole.Is Israel being selfish when it invests in water and agriculture tech to cope with hostile geography?

You're shooting the wrong calibre and giving examples to bolster your narrative. You know exactly what I mean when I said that Israel's actions towards Iran are guided by its self interests rather than intending to benefit the ''world and the region'' as you dramatically claim. I wasn't referring to non security/military actions/policies and you know it. If you're suggesting that Israel and the U.S. [or anyone else for that matter act solely based on selfish altruism; you must must as well tell me you believe in Sleeping Beauty and Snow White.

Iran has only negatives to contribute to the world despite the massive potential it has, so any action done against the Iranian regime and its terror campaign, is a selfish act that works for the betterment of this world.

Let's make this clear; I'm not a fan of Iran and neither am I one of Israel but I don't believe in false and simplistic narratives. As far as I'm concerned three is no regional power who doesn't have blood on its hands; which hasn't indulged in a bit of war crimes and lies; as well as hypocrisy.

The statement that ''Iran has only negatives to contribute to the world'' is typical of your world view as seen from your narrow lense.

If Palestinians are all the Ayatollahs are thinking about, why didn't Iran do anything when Assad and the PFLP massacred the Palestinians? Why didn't Iran do anything to elevate the Palestinians' status to citizenship in Lebanon? It didn't even utter a word, unless some event had relation to Israel.

In the 1980's Iran was focused on other issues; it was only after the end of the war with Iran that it began taking an interest in the Palestinian issue - something you'll be aware of. You'll also be aware that Assad was Iran's only ally and even a 5 year old would realise why Iran would want to stay in his good books.

Also nobody said ''Palestinians are all the Ayatollahs are thinking about'' [read carefully before hitting the keyboard/keypad] only that the unresolved Palestinian issue is a major source of grievance as far a Iran goes and BTW for many others a well.

You said Israel was violating some UN resolution, and I asked why should it abide by it. Well then? Why should it?

Of course it shouldn't; there's one law for everyone else and one for Israel. Only 3rd world Arab and former Yugoslavia dictatorships are expected to follow UN Resolutions and if they don't they're punished. Similarly Israel is allowed to have nukes [not anyone else] and it's non kosher or verboten to even discuss the issue.

Let me correct you on that one. Israel IS a democratic state.

Did I say otherwise? A democratic state in which citizens are allowed to do various things without inference from the government; in this case building illegal settlements on land belonging to others; land in which the Israeli government had agreed to allocate for a future Palestinian state. All this whilst propagating the lie that it wants peace and that it has no partner to talk to [a tune Israel has been singing for decades].

Your whole approach here is that Israel, a liberal democracy, needs to be punished for a false Palestinian narrative

Incorrect; that's not my approach. I have made it very clear what my stance is and it's certainly not about punishing Israel.

You say I dehumanize them, but I think it is you who dehumanizes them very often. It is undeniable that terrorism rules in all Palestinian territories, whether Gaza or J&S, or in other countries.

Of course. They're all ''terrorists'' and nothing but ''terrorists''. They don't value life; hate democracy and all those other fine Western values and only have one purpose in life : to kill Jews. They fact that they're still living/breathing air is only due to Israel's restraint and humanity. Thank heaven's that they're Israel's neighbours!

asked for your solution, but it seems to only demand more bloodshed. And you call that "humanity".

Your solution is no solution; to maintain the status quo; to maintain the lie or illusion that all the region's problems are the fault of others but never Israel's. That a benevolent and peaceful Israel wants peace and is altruistic unlike the incompetent nefarious Arabs and of course the ''terrorist'' Palestinians who have this inherent nature to kill Jews and thus should be denied their state. Poppycock.

If the region was still into big moves like the wars of the 40's to 70's, the Palestinians might have been relocated to somewhere else where they wouldn't harm Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria.

You actually believe this nonsensical statement? They could never have been relocated anywhere because they have a land they're originally from and even though Israel would have liked it very much [remember Golda Meir's statement on the Palestinians not existing]
not all Palestinians wanted to relocate.

 

[STURM]

Just yesterday a Palestinian man traveling in Israel with a work search permit, murdered an elderly woman in Holon, a city where I currently study, before hanging himself nearby. He is now idolized as a national hero.

Really? Just like your claim that Palestinians at schools are taught at schools to murder Jews? A 'national hero' you say? In actual fact or are you embellishing things? They also erecting statues of this Palestinian man and writing poems about him?

I don't condone murder whether by a Palestinian suicide bomber or an IDF conscript shooting at unarmed Palestinians [whom for him are ''terrorists''] but it would be interesting to know the back story this man. Has he or his family suffered any form of tragedy or is murdering people to be expected as it's inherent in Palestinians?

A few weeks ago a Palestinian; whilst on his land was stabbed by settlers. He died and apparently this was witnessed by some Israeli army people.
The settler was brought to court but the court ruled it as self defence. Naturally being a democratic state it's inconceivable that an Israeli court would have any biases in a case involving an Israeli settler and a some Palestinian.

Unlike the Lebanese, Israel won't horde them into camps.

No; only in open air prisons under a blockade and when they resist they are labelled ''terrorists''. When children are killed people like you claim it's solely because of rockets which malfunctioned and because Hamas used children as human shields; the Israelis of course are always selective and precise in their targeting. If anyone says otherwise it's obvious they misinformed, have an anti-Israeli agenda and are supporters of ''terrorists''.
As for the Lebanese it was not as if they were in a position to construct multi storied apartments blocks for the Palestinians given the limited financials constraints they faced.

Israel is trying to solve this the humane way, and what you're doing right now is criticizing it for being humane. At least be consistent with it.

I'm very ''consistent''. Unless you're intentionally peddling half truths Israel is not ''trying to solve this the humane way'' though I do appreciate the humour. What it's trying to do is solve it its way and its way to just continue with what it's doing and to establish relations with various Arab countries in the hope that over time the Arabs will be less vocal about the Palestinian issue.

The problem for Israel is that the problem will not go away irrespective of how long it drags things. You can obfuscate all you like and continue propagating a false narrative but it doesn't change anything. BTW look at the statements made by various Arab leaders a the UNGA yesterday; no doubt you'll say the criticism is untrue and that its not a Palestinian/Israeli problem but a Palestinian/Arab problem.

Your reaction is telling; speaks for itself. I mentioned some ways in which lasting peace could be achieved [Israel off course also benefits] but you turn it around by claiming I want to punish Israel and reward ''terrorists''. You also go on with your self serving monologue of how Israel has absolutely no blame and all the blame is squarely on the Palestinians. Like I said previously; one would think judging from your reaction that I suggested that as part of a confidence building measure and to placate or appease the Iranians; Israel should give them Arrow and David's Sling or to rename a kibbutz after a martyred hero of the 1979 Revolution. Or I suggested that Israel should agree to the Palestinian 'right of return' and to construct [from Israel's coffers or cash diverted from U.S. aid] a home for every Palestinian family.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

That's right; more excuses not to give them their land. Just say that your opinion is that they should never have their state or if they do it has to be with Israel dictating things and agreeing what they should have.

If you want my opinion on this, it's that they should have some permanent status that separates them from Israel in a way that ensures prospects for conflict are minimal and hostilities are automatically reciprocal. If their territory is the J&S and Gaza and the Israeli defense establishment deems it feasible, then I trust them and would welcome their solution. If they don't deem it feasible, and propose a mass transfer that would include building large modern cities that can easily house the millions of Palestinians, plus manage to set up a compensation fund for the relocated people, then I would support that as well. As for why J&S populated by Palestinians is a dangerous idea is because this territory allows them to easily target the entire Israel with rockets, due to both proximity and an altitude advantage.
That's my opinion, and anything else would be putting words in my mouth.

What I oppose is your false narrative that everything's normal and fine with Gaza; that the Israeli blockade does not have a detrimental impact on its inhabitants and that any issues are solely the fault of Hamas.

It has a detrimental impact, but it is what's called the "lesser evil". None can propose a better, more humane solution, so that's what we have. Lifting the blockade would prompt a war with countless casualties on both sides, and anything in between lifting and maintaining a chokehold has been tried and tested at some point.
Easing restrictions e.g. expanding fishing zones, allowing more types of goods inside, increasing number of work permits, etc etc, has always had a very short term effect that could not prevent the next round of confrontations. I remember back in 2018 during the massive riots, the Gazans even torched the crossing from which goods came in (only one, albeit large, terminal exists), including damaging the pipelines that provided them with cooking gas, diesel, and other essential chemicals, which has only been to their own detriment. With that attitude, charity is a method that although comes from good intentions, is in itself naive and cannot be a standalone solution.

Naturally; anything and anyone who has the slightest criticism of Israel is biased and dishonest - Israel is beyond reproach and criticism. All the data provided on Gaza which puts Israel in a bad light is false and Gazans are actually quite well off and content in Gaza. If you could you'd even vacation there I'm sure.

Yeah I'd vacation in a place in which I'm gonna be beheaded as soon as I'm discovered.
Israel is not "beyond criticism". I just reject your specific criticism because it entirely coincidentally matches ancient propaganda created by the Arab states and the communist bloc over the years, and which is falsely repeated to this day under the "a lie told enough times becomes the truth" principle, and people are actually falling for it.
In the Arab world, and particularly in Palestine, it's a common belief that the holocaust either didn't happen, or was greatly exaggerated. Raisi, in his speech at the UNGA yesterday, reiterated his belief that there may be signs of the holocaust and that it needed studying, right in front of other attendees with relatives who died in the holocaust.
So for many in Iran, the Arab states, Palestine, and beyond, holocaust denial is the norm. Am I supposed to just take it as the truth? No. So why should I just accept this worn-out propaganda that Jews Israelis are murderers, thieves, and control the governments?

The notion that peace would benefit Israel is alien to you as is the notion that there are root causes which if addressed could in the long term gradually improve relations between the Palestinians and the Arab world [something with more substance compared to the cosmetic Abraham Accords]. No, in your world view this is not possible; not because of Israel which is perpetually blameless of course but because of ''terrorists'' [they're even under people's beds and in cupboards] and freedom hating Palestinians.

And the notion that caving in to demands of hostile entities would bring peace, or any positive results for that matter, is also alien to you.
I can't help but see it as hypocrisy that you demand Israel give Palestine even more land, but you don't demand of Ukraine to accept Russia's terms like demilitarization and claims of vast lands. You also don't think Taiwan should give half its territory to China. I wonder why that is. I wonder what might make Israel unique among these nations that it, and only it, is expected to make concessions to appease aggressors.

As for having substance, I strongly disagree. The Arab countries can take things from Israel, like agriculture, energy, and water tech, advanced medicine and draw from all fields of STEM, and can give to Israel raw resources, trade routes, and improved security, as well as work together on climate and environment.
The Palestinians can give Israel precisely nothing. They produce no goods, no tradable value that Israel can draw from. Right now, they are only useful in the cheap labor markets like construction, but even without them Israel has enough to draw from. So peace will only yield one less security nuisance. They will be neighbors, but nothing beyond that.
Even peace with Lebanon or Syria would yield much more benefit to Israel.

You're shooting the wrong calibre and giving examples to bolster your narrative. You know exactly what I mean when I said that Israel's actions towards Iran are guided by its self interests rather than intending to benefit the ''world and the region'' as you dramatically claim. I wasn't referring to non security/military actions/policies and you know it. If you're suggesting that Israel and the U.S. [or anyone else for that matter act solely based on selfish altruism; you must must as well tell me you believe in Sleeping Beauty and Snow White.

Then feel free to name 1 single Israeli security policy that antagonizes Iran and that is not in itself in reaction to an Iranian aggression.

Let's make this clear; I'm not a fan of Iran and neither am I one of Israel but I don't believe in false and simplistic narratives. As far as I'm concerned three is no regional power who doesn't have blood on its hands; which hasn't indulged in a bit of war crimes and lies; as well as hypocrisy.

The statement that ''Iran has only negatives to contribute to the world'' is typical of your world view as seen from your narrow lense.

The whole "everyone is equally to blame" thing is old, annoying, and honestly it does absolutely nothing to fix things. If we morally equate everyone, we will never have priorities. At least not the right ones.
If I see a person attacking other people on the street, and I see a policeman trying to calm/subdue him, I'd do my part to help the policeman. And if I'd start drawing moral equivalence and say the cop is at least as much to blame, then what good am I as a common citizen? That would even make me an accomplice (at least in some countries it does).
So saying Ukraine has blood on its hands may or may not be true, but it serves no purpose, and Ukraine's people need our support. Same goes for Taiwan - an enormous amount of blood on its hands. But I'll still support it if China attacks it. I will similarly support South Korea if North Korea attacks it, and the list goes on. None is clean, but very clearly there are those who by a sheer amount have a moral high ground, and need our support.
I'm anti-conscription in Israel, and strongly believe in either professional service or at least higher pay for conscripts. But I did not frown when I was drafted, and I did my part just like everyone else with high motivation because I knew it helped other people.

And if you think Iran contributes something positive to this world, other than dissidents that happily use their talents elsewhere, where they're appreciated, then please name it, and I'll gladly change my mind on it.

You'll also be aware that Assad was Iran's only ally and even a 5 year old would realise why Iran would want to stay in his good books.

So you're saying Iran supports Palestinians to stay on good terms with the man known as "The Butcher" and is responsible for the brutal murder of thousands, if not tens of thousands of Palestinians, and displacement of hundreds of thousands?

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Also nobody said ''Palestinians are all the Ayatollahs are thinking about'' [read carefully before hitting the keyboard/keypad] only that the unresolved Palestinian issue is a major source of grievance as far a Iran goes and BTW for many others a well.

Name 1 thing Iran did to contribute to the Palestinians. And no, weapons to murder Palestinians and Israelis with isn't one.

Of course it shouldn't; there's one law for everyone else and one for Israel. Only 3rd world Arab and former Yugoslavia dictatorships are expected to follow UN Resolutions and if they don't they're punished. Similarly Israel is allowed to have nukes [not anyone else] and it's non kosher or verboten to even discuss the issue.

I wasn't being sarcastic. I really asked why you think Israel should abide by this resolution. And since you clearly don't have an answer for that, I'll just assume you understand my point.
Also, here's one more lesson on law - there is no law, anywhere by any body or in any treaty, that says Israel cannot have nukes, or that it must disclose information about nukes.

Did I say otherwise? A democratic state in which citizens are allowed to do various things without inference from the government; in this case building illegal settlements on land belonging to others; land in which the Israeli government had agreed to allocate for a future Palestinian state. All this whilst propagating the lie that it wants peace and that it has no partner to talk to [a tune Israel has been singing for decades].

You did not answer the question, again. You say you want Israel to have a strong rule of law, and then propose something that would nullify that concept.
Israel - the government, cannot reject building permits on the basis of future land transfers, because the Oslo Accords clearly say area C is Israeli territory. The only option Israel has it to entirely close these entire areas and declare them as closed military areas, but it's not something it can do arbitarily, especially for such large areas with existing infrastructure.
You also couldn't name a reason why Israel should try to demolish settlements, and of course you conveniently chose to neglect the fact that Israel does in fact routinely demolish settlements that are built illegally.

Your solution is no solution; to maintain the status quo; to maintain the lie or illusion that all the region's problems are the fault of others but never Israel's. That a benevolent and peaceful Israel wants peace and is altruistic unlike the incompetent nefarious Arabs and of course the ''terrorist'' Palestinians who have this inherent nature to kill Jews and thus should be denied their state. Poppycock.

Like you said, not your region, so it's understandable why you seem to lack understanding of the region's dynamics and its people.
AOC is so vocal in its anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric. But when asked to elaborate on her statement on the subject, she could only find one thing to say "I don't actually understand this subject".

You actually believe this nonsensical statement? They could never have been relocated anywhere because they have a land they're originally from and even though Israel would have liked it very much [remember Golda Meir's statement on the Palestinians not existing]
not all Palestinians wanted to relocate.

Ahh yes the good old Golda Meir quote that was actually debunked but none cares that it's fake as long as it sounds evil.
Golda Meir said the Palestinian nationality is a made-up one, because it only came into existence when she said "that", but people will naturally claim she said the Palestinians don't physically exist.
And yes I do believe this nonsense. Remember the time about 1 million (1,000,000) Jews were violently expelled from the Arab and Muslim countries? I remember Syria had 100,000, and today it has 4 Jews. Where are Syria's Jews, STURM? Where are they?
Yeah, mass expulsions can happen, and they did happen. Some even claim Israel participated in one (a controversial claim but still). But today it would be unfathomable, as Israel acts out of humane principles.

No; only in open air prisons under a blockade and when they resist they are labelled ''terrorists''. When children are killed people like you claim it's solely because of rockets which malfunctioned and because Hamas used children as human shields; the Israelis of course are always selective and precise in their targeting.

Yes, Israel is precise in its targeting. What do YOU think is the reason children in Gaza die during conflicts? And just to get this started, I'm not asking for specifics.

Israel is not ''trying to solve this the humane way'' though I do like the odd comedy. What it's trying to do is solve it its way and its way to just continue with what it's doing and to establish relations with various Arab countries in the hope that over time the Arabs will be less vocal about the Palestinian issue.

Those evil Israelis! The AUDACITY to establish relations and have PEACE with Arab nations!!
Seriously, this whole "Israelis are not human" thing is getting old.

The problem for Israel is that the problem will not go away irrespective of how long it drags things. You can obfuscate all you like and continue propagating a false narrative but it doesn't change anything.

Here's a thought exercise.
Israel lets the problem drag on and so it persists - bad idea. So that means Israel must act, right?
But if Israel acts, it can happen 2 ways:
1. Israel acts unilaterally and is branded as evil because it would be "bad" for the Palestinians.
2. Israel acts bilaterally, and people start thinking Jews are wizards and thus need to be burned at the stake because they managed to pull the impossible trick - getting Palestinians to cooperate on a positive thing.
Either way - Israel bad.

Your reaction is telling; speaks for itself. I mentioned some ways in which lasting peace could be achieved [Israel off course also benefits] but you turn it around by claiming I want to punish Israel and reward ''terrorists''. You also go on with your self serving and inaccurate monologue of how Israel has absolutely no blame and all the blame is squarely on the Palestinians. Like I said previously; one would think judging from your reaction that I suggested that as part of a confidence building measure and to placate or appease the Iranians; Israel should give them Arrow and David's Sling or to rename a kibbutz after a martyred hero of the 1979 Revolution. Or as if I suggested that Israel should agree to the Palestinian 'right of return' and to construct [from Israel's coffers or cash diverted from U.S. aid] a home for every Palestinian family.

You didn't suggest a thing except tiny parts of an extremely bloody solution. Lifting the blockade on Gaza would not contribute to solving the conflict any more than a Ukrainian unilateral withdrawal of all forces to west of Kyiv would contribute to solving their conflict with Russia.
Good of you to think giving them even more land would solve the conflict, but you're conveniently forgetting that the 'right of return' is central to their demands.

Going around telling people to start loving each other is nice and all, but if you don't really solve their disputes, you're not doing anything.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

The recent clashes between PA and local terrorist groups have ended with an agreement that the PA would only arrest persons wanted by Israel if they have also committed crimes in Palestinian territories. This comes after the PA and Hamas have engaged in firefights following an arrest of a known Hamas figure. Some feared a mini civil war, but such fears are often raised and dissipate just as quickly - Israel has a silent agreement with the PA to shield it from Hamas and other terrorist groups who wish to overthrow it, in exchange for non-hostilities.

Palestinian Authority, terror groups agree to end clashes sparked by Nablus arrests

Under deal, PA security forces will only arrest suspects wanted by Israel if they broke Palestinian law, will release those arrested Tuesday unless they damaged property or looted

www.timesofisrael.com

First casualties in Iran's massive protests are reported, and the internet is now being cut off to block not only reports to the outside world, but also to fight against coordination of further protests. Iran has an effective mechanism to deal with dissidents, so none really expects a 2nd revolution.

9 dead as Iranian authorities attempt to stymie growing protests over women’s death

Internet access blocked following warnings from officials that connectivity may be halted for 'security' reasons; sources say 'near total collapse' of mobile connectivity

www.timesofisrael.com

Israel will grant 1500 more work permits to Gazans amid due to current calm, bringing total to 17000. Israel maintains a policy of rewarding calm with easing restrictions and providing economical opportunities.

Israel okays 1,500 more entry permits for Gaza workers, bringing total to 17,000

But military liaison to Palestinians stresses that expansion of quota -- to an eventual 20,000 -- is contingent on ‘security stability’

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[STURM]

As for why J&S populated by Palestinians is a dangerous idea is because this territory allows them to easily target the entire Israel with rockets, due to both proximity and an altitude advantage. That's my opinion, and anything else would be putting words in my mouth.

Right. By ''J/S'' you mean the occupied 'West Bank'' correct?

It has a detrimental impact, but it is what's called the "lesser evil". None can propose a better, more humane solution, so that's what we have. .

Easy to claim it's a ''lesser evil'' when you're looking at things from the extremely narrow, self serving and biased view of the party enforcing the blockade.

on both sides, and anything in between lifting and maintaining a chokehold has been tried and tested at some point.

[1] Unless you have an Oracle you can consult or perhaps a soothsayer at your disposal; it's not holy writ or written in stone that ''lifting the blockade would prompt a war with countless casualties on both sides'' [2]It wouldn't be ''countless casualties on both sides'' because they ever restrained, thoughtful and precise IDF which is ever concerned about civilian casualties would go out its way to avoid civilian deaths and that based on your skewered narrative the only Palestinian civilian deaths would be solely because of malfunctioned rockets and because of the use of human shields.

Easing restrictions e.g. expanding fishing zones, allowing more types of goods inside, increasing number of work permits, etc etc, has always had a very short term effect that could not prevent the next round of confrontations.

More excuses on why a blockade is needed and should be maintained. Missing from the narrative is how this longstanding problem can be resolved permanently to the satisfaction and benefit of all parties. You spoke of short term effects yes but it's Israel which apparently isn't looking at longer term effects; its merely doing what it has long been doing. Then again in your view the onus is entirely up to others isn't it?

 

[STURM]

I wasn't being sarcastic. I really asked why you think Israel should abide by this resolution. And since you clearly don't have an answer for that, I'll just assume you understand my point.

No I don't ''understand'' or even agree with you - don't flatter yourself. Israel as a democratic ''Western'' state [as you keep reminding us] and should; like most other law abiding countries; heed UN Resolutions because there's no point in having a UN if countries like Israel are free to do what they want and only has time for the UN when there are benefits. Ultimately solving the Palestinian would also have long term benefitsfor Israel but then you're apparently incapable of understanding this critical but simple fact.

Also, here's one more lesson on law - there is no law, anywhere by any body or in any treaty, that says Israel cannot have nukes, or that it must disclose information about nukes.

Whooo.. Thanks for the lesson; you have anymore? Reminder; who said that Israel should not have nukes [it doesn't of course] or that it should talk about it? What I did say-in simple terms - is that Israel does not want to lose its nuke monopoly and that if I was an Iranian planner and looked at a map of the region and took into account Israel's nukes I would want to have the ability to rapidly assemble a nuke device.

Note that this is completely different to what you said,

you did not answer the question, again. You say you want Israel to have a strong rule of law, and then propose something that would nullify that concept.

You also couldn't name a reason why Israel should try to demolish settlements, and of course you conveniently chose to neglect the fact that Israel does in fact routinely demolish settlements that are built illegally.

It's always me not doing something isn't it; especially when its not what you want to hear or contrary to your narrative. If I told you what you wanted to hear then no doubt I'll have answered your questions.

Like you said, not your region, so it's understandable why you seem to lack understanding of the region's dynamics and its people.

Sorry perhaps I need another ''lesson'' from you. By virtue of being an inhabitant of the region; you have a thorough ''understanding of the region's dynamics and its people''? It is a big region and it doesn't revolve around Israel.

You understand the dynamics between Iran and Iraq; the attitudes of the Druze in Lebanon or the different Shia sects in how there are major differences with sects in Bahrain and those in Iran?

I live in the Asia Pacific; does that mean I have an ''understanding of the region's dynamics and its people'' - attitudes of millennials in Japan towards South Korea over unresolved overlapping claims; of how West Papua fits in the TNI's strategic calculus or say about the dynamics at play with Thailand and Myanmar?

Ahh yes the good old Golda Meir quote that was actually debunked but none cares that it's fake as long as it sounds evil.

It doesn't ''sound evil'' what it is is a prime example of Israeli hubris and arrogance at a period when it had the strategic advantage [having won several wars] and adopted the position that the Palestinian issue was a minor irritating one that would eventually go away. Also what is there to be ''debunked''; she did say it and she never denied it; later she clarified what she claimed to have meant.

Yes, Israel is precise in its targeting. What do YOU think is the reason children in Gaza die during conflicts? And just to get this started, I'm not asking for specifics..

Not asking for specifics? You claimed in the past it was only due to rockets which malfunctioned and the use of human shields by Hamas. As for the IDF always being ''precise'' a lot of locals in various places would beg to differ but then their opinions don't count because to you it's all lies and ''terrorist'' propaganda. Naturally you'd say that the only reason children [mostly non Israeli of course] die is because of the ''terrorist'' adults who have absolutely no reason to have any grievances with Israel; who from the day they were born hate Jews and only live for the day when the Palestinian flag can fly from Ramat David air base - I do appreciate fiction and the occasional humour but there are times for it.

Those evil Israelis! The AUDACITY to establish relations and have PEACE with Arab nations!!
Seriously, this whole "Israelis are not human" thing is getting old.

Please continue. The message was too concise and somewhat fuzzy...

I know what your default mode is but don't make it into an Israel versus the rest of the world thing [rest of the world in this case being people who don't buy into your narrative]. BTW in case it hasn't occurred to you critiscism of Israel doesn't equate with being so called anti-Israeli or pro 'terrorist' - if you're able to make the distinction that is.

 

[STURM]

Yeah I'd vacation in a place in which I'm gonna be beheaded as soon as I'm discovered.

Wait a minute weren't you the one giving the impression [false one at that] that the blockade wasn't as bad as it sounds; that Gazans aren't suffering due to any Israeli action [naturally any suffering is due to ''terrorists'', ''terrorists'' and 'terrorists'' only whom Gazan worship because they don't value life and only live to kill Jews] and that any data/stats from any individual or organisation [the UN or anyone else can't be trusted right] which indicates otherwise is anti-Israeli; spreads untruth and has a neferious agenda....

Israel is not "beyond criticism".

Your monologues, denials, pro Israeli narrative and apparent inability to see anything which doesn't fit in your narrative contradicts your ''Israel is not "beyond criticism''

I just reject your specific criticism

''I just reject'' your narrative of propagating the extremely false impression that Israel bears no blame; has nothing but benevolent and altruistic intentions towards the Palestinians and that Israel wants peace but is unable to achieve it because of the Palestinians. Even my dog and my tortoise know better.

Ibecause it entirely coincidentally matches ancient propaganda created by the Arab states and the communist bloc over the years, and which is falsely repeated to this day under the "a lie told enough times becomes the truth" principle, and people are actually falling for it.

Right so anyone who is expresses any sympathy with the Palestinian cause; who calls for a genuine desire for peace with trade off/compromises to be made by both sides and who is critical and disgusted with Israeli policy has fallen for ''ancient propaganda created by the Arab states and the communist bloc '' - spare me this self serving arrogant tosh.

As for the 'a lie told enough times becomes the truth" principle'' you're extremely familiar with this principle it would seem.

So why should I just accept this worn-out propaganda that Jews Israelis are murderers, thieves, and control the governments?

Clarification needed; where and who in this thread said ''Jews Israelis are murderers, thieves, and control the governments?'' What I did say is that all players in the Middle East have blood on their hands; have indulged in war crimes/atrocities as well as lies and hypocrisy ... Don't make it sound like I've embarked on an anti Israeli rant.

IAnd the notion that caving in to demands of hostile entities would bring peace, or any positive results for that matter, is also alien to you.

The Zucchini pot shouldn't be calling the Sturm pot black and shouldn't be twisting and obfuscating things. Sturm never said that Israel should cave in too demands merely that Israel should do various other things which would bring it long term stability and peace [assuming Israel s really interested in that]. Sturm also never said that the Palestinians are blameless or that the Israelis should get some lubricant; open their pants and bend down to every single demand of the Palestinians..

II can't help but see it as hypocrisy that you demand Israel give Palestine even more land, but you don't demand of Ukraine to accept Russia's terms like demilitarization and claims of vast lands. You also don't think Taiwan should give half its territory to China. I wonder why that is. I wonder what might make Israel unique among these nations that it, and only it, is expected to make concessions to appease aggressors.

''I can't help but see it as'' as ludicrous and highly self serving that you would equate the Palestinian issue with Russia/Ukraine and Taiwan. Whilst your at it why not bring up Transylvania and how it impacted Romanian/Hungarian relations or the French/Indian wars....

Then feel free to name 1 single Israeli security policy that antagonizes Iran and that is not in itself in reaction to an Iranian aggression.

You want '1'; will gladly oblige. Israeli activities in Kurdistan are seen with great alarm by the Iranians. As you're aware Israel has long had involvement there [in his book Raful Eitan wrote of his experiences as an advisor in Iraqi Kurdistan] and still does. You wanted '1' example and you got it. There are others if you're interested.

IThe whole "everyone is equally to blame" thing is old, annoying, and honestly it does absolutely nothing to fix things. If we morally equate everyone, we will never have priorities.

Too bad chum; tough kitties. As for doing 'absolutely nothing to fix things'' you've just described Israeli policy towards the Palestinians; much appreciated. Ta.

Your claims BTW are also "old, annoying". The same tune for decades we've been hearing.

IIf I see a person attacking other people on the street, and I see a policeman trying to calm/subdue him, I'd do my part to help the policeman. And if I'd start drawing moral equivalence and say the cop is at least as much to blame, then what good am I as a common citizen? That would even make me an accomplice (at least in some countries it does).

I understand the need for analogies but if possible do try to give ones which are germane to the topic at hand.

So you're saying Iran supports Palestinians to stay on good terms with the man known as "The Butcher" and is responsible for the brutal murder of thousands, if not tens of thousands of Palestinians, and displacement of hundreds of thousands?

Nonsense and you know it. Like many things I've written and which you misread; it was written in simple precise English which leaves no room for doubt or obfuscation as to what I meant... BTW Israel as you very well know was ready to deal with the '' "The Butcher" if the price was right.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

By ''J/S'' you mean the occupied 'West Bank'' correct?

J&S means Judea and Samaria. Since it's easier to write than West Bank, and that's the name I use 99% of the time anyway, figured I might as well just switch to it when writing here.

Easy to claim it's a ''lesser evil'' when you're looking at things from the extremely narrow, self serving and biased view of the party enforcing the blockade.

Propose an alternative.

] Unless you have an Oracle you can consult or perhaps a soothsayer at your disposal; it's not holy writ or written in stone that ''lifting the blockade would prompt a war with countless casualties on both sides'' [2]It wouldn't be ''countless casualties on both sides'' because they ever restrained, thoughtful and precise IDF which is ever concerned about civilian casualties would go out its way to avoid civilian deaths and that based on your skewered narrative the only Palestinian civilian deaths would be solely because of malfunctioned rockets and because of the use of human shields.

Propose a way in which lifting the blockade would play out, preferably referring to the short term and long term separately.

More excuses on why a blockade is needed and should be maintained. Missing from the narrative is how this longstanding problem can be resolved permanently to the satisfaction and benefit of all parties.

Propose the solution.

No I don't ''understand'' or even agree with you - don't flatter yourself. Israel as a democratic ''Western'' state [as you keep reminding us] and should; like most other law abiding countries; heed UN Resolutions

UN resolutions are not law. They are merely the expression of sentiment on a subject. The UN is not a sovereign body above states. Each state is the supreme authority within its territory. The UNSC is the only one that may make somewhat binding resolutions, but only in very specific circumstances, which exclude Resolution 242 from being one. And even binding resolutions are only really binding to an extent. They can only truly be used on willing participants. If for example the UNSC votes for sanctions on Iran, there is no mechanism in place to force rogue states like Venezuela, China, or Russia, from maintaining trade with it.

The Resolution 242 is a multilateral one. It does not demand of Israel, or the Arab states, to make any unilateral actions. It merely demands previously warring parties to form peace. It calls upon the negotiating parties to establish said peace on the basis of return to certain past borders, but it does not absolutely mandate it. If Israel and Lebanon sign a peace treaty and decide on no land swaps, the resolution would still be fulfilled between Israel and Lebanon.

Israel extends an arm for peace. It has peace with Egypt and Jordan. It has peace with several others via the Abraham Accords. Lebanon is occupied by Hezbollah, but Israel still agreed to redraw its EEZ borders, giving Lebanon access to natural gas, which is a first step for peace in the post-Hezbollah era.
But it cannot have peace with those who do not want it, nor can it force peace upon others.
Therefore while the resolution is still not fulfilled, Israel remains committed to it.

Knowing that, the only possible way for me to interpret your assertion is that Israel should make a unilateral move, despite the abundance of evidence that it is most likely to backfire, and in itself presumes anyone can force peace upon others. If that is not your stance, I ask you to explain it.

What I did say-in simple terms - is that Israel does not want to lose its nuke monopoly and that if I was an Iranian planner and looked at a map of the region and took into account Israel's nukes I would want to have the ability to rapidly assemble a nuke device.

I remind you that this is what you said:
Similarly Israel is allowed to have nukes [not anyone else] and it's non kosher or verboten to even discuss the issue.
If you only meant that Israel prefers to remain the only nuclear armed state in the region, then you have a real problem expressing your thoughts. There is a clear hostile tone, and it certainly doesn't aid your argument that your statement there was made in a vacuum - i.e. not related to anything I said.
So, explain how the two align.

Sorry perhaps I need another ''lesson'' from you. By virtue of being an inhabitant of the region; you have a thorough ''understanding of the region's dynamics and its people''? It is a big region and it doesn't revolve around Israel.

Closeness contributes to familiarity. I know from first hand how the average Israeli thinks, how the average Arab thinks, and I have experienced first hand what others in the region think.
It also doesn't have to be personal experiences. Media exposure and political interests naturally revolve around one's region.

You understand the dynamics between Iran and Iraq; the attitudes of the Druze in Lebanon or the different Shia sects in how there are major differences with sects in Bahrain and those in Iran?

I do, and even if not perfectly, then certainly to a higher degree than the common outsider.

Not asking for specifics? You claimed in the past it was only due to rockets which malfunctioned and the use of human shields by Hamas.

As the primary reasons, yes. More specifically, Palestinian aggression. On the micro level there are more reasons and I expected you to understand that. Clearly not anymore.

As for the IDF always being ''precise'' a lot of locals in various places would beg to differ but then their opinions don't count because to you it's all lies and ''terrorist'' propaganda. Naturally you'd say that the only reason children [mostly non Israeli of course] die is because of the ''terrorist'' adults who have absolutely no reason to have any grievances with Israel; who from the day they were born hate Jews and only live for the day when the Palestinian flag can fly from Ramat David air base - I do appreciate fiction and the occasional humour but there are times for it.

You keep parroting these blatantly racist lines of "Israelis are murdering children and Palestinians can do no wrong", but it doesn't do anything beside invalidating your own points. Self criticism is important.
Yes, I think if Hamas and PIJ did not start wars, none would die. Yes, I think foreign media loves parroting the line of dead children without understanding simple rules of war, or facts. And yes, I think Israel is getting far too much hate for its massive investments in surgical operations that reduce casualties.
I get that your opinion is different, along the lines of "from the river to the sea...", but you never propose any alternative view.
You never tell what you think is the ultimate reason Palestinians die, and that in itself is quite telling of your true intentions.

Wait a minute weren't you the one giving the impression [false one at that] that the blockade wasn't as bad as it sounds; that Gazans aren't suffering due to any Israeli action [naturally any suffering is due to ''terrorists'', ''terrorists'' and 'terrorists'' only whom Gazan worship because they don't value life and only live to kill Jews] and that any data/stats from any individual or organisation which indicates otherwise is anti-Israeli; spreads untruth and has a neferious agenda

What are you on about? I just said that entering Gaza as an Israeli is a sure way to get killed. What's that to do with the blockade?

Your monologues, denials, pro Israeli narrative and apparent inability to see anything which doesn't fit in your narrative contradicts your ''Israel is not "beyond criticism''

Doesn't help if you're only peddling absolutes.

'I just reject'' your narrative of propagating the extremely false impression that Israel bears no blame; has nothing but benevolent and altruistic towards the Palestinians and that Israel wants peace but is unable to achieve it because of the Palestinians. Even my dog and my tortoise know better.

Again absolutes. Well then, if Israel doesn't want peace, what does it want?

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Right so anyone who is expresses any sympathy with the Palestinian cause; who calls for a genuine desire for peace with trade off/compromises to be made by both sides

Name 1 Palestinian figure that isn't overwhelmingly hated by the Palestinians, that promotes peace with Israel.

disgusted with Israeli policy

Name 1 disgusting policy.

What I did say is that all players in the Middle East have blood on their hands; have indulged in war crimes/atrocities as well as lies and hypocrisy ...

Name 1 instance of a war crime committed by Israel.
Name 1 instance of a lie on the national level.

The Zucchini pot shouldn't be calling the Sturm pot black and shouldn't be twisting and obfuscating things. Sturm never said that Israel should cave in too demands merely that Israel should do various other things which would bring it long term stability and peace [assuming Israel s really interested in that]. Sturm also never said that the Palestinians are blameless or that the Israelis should get some lubricant open their pants and bend down to every single demand of the Palestinians..

Another thing you keep repeating. You say Israel should make concessions, take actions, do whatever, but always refuse to name even a single one when asked to elaborate.

can't help but see it as'' as ludicrous and highly self serving that you would equate the Palestinian issue with Russia/Ukraine and Taiwan. Whilst your at it why not bring up Transylvania and hoe it impacted Romanian/Hungarian relations or the French/Indian wars...

This is deflection. If you think there is a core difference, do name it.

You want '1'; will gladly oblige. Israeli activities in Kurdistan are seen with great alarm by the Iranians. As you're aware Israel has long had involvement there [in his book Raful Eitan wrote of his experiences as an advisor in Iraqi Kurdistan] and still does. You wanted '1' you got it.

Took you several pages in this thread to get to it. Bravo.
Kurdistan is its own autonomous region and relations with it are irrelevant to Iran. Any offense Iran may take is due to its policy of interventionism.
Israel maintains good ties with Turkey AND with the Kurds. Israel is not warring with Russia despite it arming Assad and Hezbollah, and if certain events in the war in Ukraine hadn't happened, Israel and Russia would even have good-ish ties.
So, point taken, but I do not consider it of high enough value to be consequential in the Israeli-Iranian relations.

understand the need for analogies but if possible do try to give ones which are germane to the topic at hand.

Okay. A significant portion of the aid provided to Ukraine by European nations comes not from the selfish interest of weakening an old enemy, but from the moral view of Europeans, who see Ukraine as an aspiring democracy who wish to save it from a savage invader. This pressure forces politicians to increase aid. Good enough analogy for you?


One last note for you. Whenever I ask to provide an example, it's to form a debate around that. It's not a mechanism of denial. Your monologues on how Israelis are to blame and refusal to provide examples, is counterproductive.

 

[STURM]

Name 1 Palestinian figure that isn't overwhelmingly hated by the Palestinians, that promotes peace with Israel.

How is that germane to the discussion? Was the discussion on loveable Palestinian leaders?

Name 1 disgusting policy.

I have in several posts. Look it up. Admittedly ''disgusting was the wrong word; 'deplorable ' sums it up better but then I forgot Israel is always right, nobody suffers because of Israeli action; no non combatants get killed - what can we expect from a democratic ''Western' state? After we're not talking about ungrateful less enlightened Arab states here.

Name 1 instance of a war crime committed by Israel.
Name 1 instance of a lie on the national level.

Another thing you keep repeating. You say Israel should make concessions, take actions, do whatever, but always refuse to name even a single one when asked to elaborate.

Actually unless you're the same ''Zucchini'' I've been discussing this with and not an imposter; I have made numerous reference on mutually beneficial concessions Israel can make.

Took you several pages in this thread to get to it. Bravo.

How did it take ''several pages''? You asked me the question in a previous post and you got your answer? Trying to score brownie points and be petty?

Kurdistan is its own autonomous region and relations with it are irrelevant to Iran.

As someone who is so - apparently - knowledgeable with the region you're'' no doubt aware that there exists an entity called ''Iranian Kurdistan''. If I have to spell it out for you Iran is concerned with certain things taking place in ''Iranian Kurdistan''[sovereign Iranian territory] ; events involving certain third parties.

Good enough analogy for you?

Do you think it's ''good enough'' for you?

Whenever I ask to provide an example, it's to form a debate around that. It's not a mechanism of denial. Your monologues on how Israelis are to blame and refusal to provide examples, is counterproductive.

You're not ''debating''; you're obfuscating and repeating the same gagaland Alice In Wonderland fiction over and over again; giving the false impression that Israel bears fault at all; that it's completely on the Palestinians if they want peace; that anything or anyone who has the slightest criticism of Israel has a nefarious agenda, is peddling falsehoods and is anti-Israeli; that the Israeli government is innocent and completely powerless to stop the fevered construction of illegal settlements on land belonging to others in clear violation of international law [the words ''land grab'' and ''theft'' come to mind] and that Israel has nothing but peaceful, benevolent and altruistic intentions toward the ''terrorist'' loving Palestinians.

As for ''counterproductive'' you accurately described Israeli policy towards the Palestinians. ''Counterproductive'' to democratic Israel's own interests in the long run to not achieve permanent peace with the Palestinians [and by doing that improving relations with the Arab world and removing a major source of tensions with the evil expansionist Iranians]but of course this is an alien concept to you.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

How is that germane to the discussion? Was the discussion on loveable Palestinian leaders?

If a political figure is unpopular, it means its views are also unpopular. For it to become influential, he himself must be have popular opinions.
And without a popular leader promoting peace, a diplomatic solution to the conflict will not happen.

Actually unless you're the same ''Zucchini'' I've been discussing this with and not an imposter; I have made numerous reference on mutually beneficial concessions Israel can make.

Like what? Lifting the blockade on Gaza? That is not a realistic option, and when asked to elaborate on why you think it'd work, you refused.

As someone who is so - apparently - knowledgeable with the region you're'' not doubt aware that there exists an entity called ''Iranian Kurdistan''. If I have to spell it out for you Iran is concerned with certain things taking place in ''Iranian Kurdistan''[sovereign Iranian territory] ; events involving certain third parties.

I am not aware of any concrete Iranian Kurdish dealings with Israel. There has been speculation they see eye to eye, but nothing I could build any form of opinion about.
And the first instance of alleged Israeli-Kurdish(Iranian) concrete cooperation I can think of, is far more recent than the Iran-Israel conflict.
Do you have any concrete data on Israel-Kurdish cooperation specifically relating to Iranian Kurds, that predates Israeli-Iranian hostilities?

Do you think it's ''good enough'' for you?

I actually believe in what I say. So stop with the nonsense.



Israeli PM Lapid, who best matches my world view, gave a speech at the UNGA this week.
In it he expressed support for a 2 state solution.
It is widely assumed these comments were meant for the domestic audience, to be clear to voters on his stance.
The response at home as highlighted an ongoing issue - while none wishes to have a disastrous one state solution, and all prefer the two people living separately each in their own state, even the fringe politicians no longer believe the Palestinians will ever negotiate for peace. Hence, many now equate a 2 state solution to a desire to repeat the Gaza withdrawal. Due to this unfortunate association, I predict references to the 2 state solution will again fade for the forseeable future.

At UN, Lapid calls for two-state solution, says world choosing ‘easy option’ on Iran

Addressing General Assembly, prime minister says agreement with Palestinians the 'right thing' for Israel's security; blasts silence at world body when Israel is slandered

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[STURM]

And without a popular leader promoting peace, a diplomatic solution to the conflict will not happen

A popular leader who tries and fails to sell a deal based on what Israel is willing to agree to and what the U.S. [which always has Israel's interests first with regards peace with the Arabs] pressures him to agree to won't be popular for long.

Like what? Lifting the blockade on Gaza? That is not a realistic option, and when asked to elaborate on why you think it'd work, you refused.

In your mind no doubt I "refused" but if you'd care to actually look you'll know that I have addressed this before.

Again, since you missed it the first few times around I'll say it again as clearly as possible in order for it to be understood : a lifting of the blockade is not a one side fits all solution; it won't necessarily lead to evil "terrorists" killing Jews [to quote you] and it will be step in the right direction on the long road to a final resolution on this long standing issue. This of course is based on the premise that Israel actually has a genuine desire to resolve the issue.

Again, nobody said it would automatically lead to lasting peace but it would ease some pressure off the Gazans and eventually would weaken the Hamas narrative [Israel benefits

Do you have any concrete data on Israel-Kurdish cooperation specifically relating to Iranian Kurds, that predates Israeli-Iranian hostilities?

I do but not much. Israel first started its involvement in the area alongside the Shah: both wanted to keep the Iraqis busy. Given the wheeling and dealing; intrigue and various other things which have taken place in the region; as well as the tense relationship between Israel and Iran it's unsurprising and to be expected that Israel would have dealings with anti-Iranian Kurdish groups in Iranian Kurdistan [a source of Intel and it keeps the Iranians busy but whether it predates current Iranian/Israeli hostilities which largely started following the end of the Iran/Iraq war is unknown to me]; just like how it had dealings with anti-Iraqi Kurdish groups in the past. There are also non Kurdish anti-Iranian groups, including in Khuzestan, which receive outside assistance: whether from Israel or the Arabs I have no idea.

I actually believe in what I say. So stop with the nonsense.

I have absolutely no doubt at all that you actually believe some of the self serving inaccurate biased things you preach [if you want examples look at some of what you wri.

Israeli PM Lapid, who best matches my world view, gave a speech at the UNGA this week.

Well various Isreali leaders have spoke of peace deals before; some genuinely tried and some only to placate the Americans and others; as well as to gauge how far things could go. I have no idea what Lapid intended to achieve with his statement; probably intended for a domestic audiences as you said.

All I know is that a genuine lasting peace deal will require a lot of political will; a genuine desire; some level of trust between both sides; an impartial broker with the political stamina and the need for both sides to make compromises.

Amongst other things the Palestinians on their part have to do away with the Right Of Return; I won't talk again about compromises the Israelis have to make because you will huff and puff; as if I suggested that as part of reconciliation efforts a giant billboard of Arafat should be erected in Tel Aviv's Rabin Square