The Official Israel-Gaza Thread
Techniec
Drugs and Kalashnikovs
Because it was an open conflict, both sides maximalist
NZA
LOL
A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast
A widely cited missile video does not shed light on what happened, a Times analysis concludes.
times tries to post some facts about the hospital blast. none of the evidence in favor of HAMAS rocket is conclusive. hospital got warned to evacuate and was hit by israeli illumination rocket before. also could be stray iron dome munition.
Real tough guys. You need all this fire power for a group of terrorists in sandals driving Nissan pick up trucks.
Assuming that other people do disingenuous bullshyt just because you do is an interesting way to go through life.
I hadn't done anything like what you claimed in the comment you were responding to, or anywhere in this thread. So it was just a bullshyt ad hominem meant to deflect from the question I asked.
None of that related to the original question you asked about Jordan in the 1960s or whatever. You're just deflecting towards a different question.
And it's rewriting history to suggest that the Clinton Parameters were actually on the table and the Palestinians simply rejected them. BOTH sides said that the Clinton Parameters were not workable as written, and Palestine offered to keep negotiating from that starting point but they were taken off the table just a few days later.
Israel-Palestine: the real reason there’s still no peace
The long read: The possibility of a lasting deal seems as far away as ever – and the history of failed negotiations suggests it’s largely because Israel prefers the status quo
www.theguardian.com
In case you're interested in the actual sticking points:
1) Israeli Jews were being allowed to keep most of East Jerusalem as well as their illegal settlements in Palestine
2) The land being given to Israeli settlers in the West Bank would have meant Palestine was broken up into up to 5 different discontinguous territories (Gaza, an isolated island in East Jerusalem, and either 2 or 3 separated sections of the West Bank). This is an untenable manner to operate a country when your mortal enemy controls your own movement between each little separate part of your territory.
3) The lack of Right of Return as guarenteed in the Geneva Convention, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN General Assembly Resolution 194 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3236. The right of those people who were forcibly displaced from their land to return if they so choose. Israel rejected this on blatant demographic terms (the equivilent of admitting that genocide - the eliminating of a certain group of people from the land - had always been their aim).
4) Israel demanded that Palestine be demilitarized, that Israel would be allowed to have radar stations within the West Bank, that Israel could deploy soldiers on the West Bank/Jordan border, and that Israel retained the right to deploy troops into Palestine when it felt appropriate. This was a fairly large interferance with Palestinian soveignity, though from what I understand it was actually less of a sticking point than East Jerusalem, the carving out of the West Bank into different sections, and Right of Return.
5) Israel demanded that Palestine give up the right to negotiate any future demands, ever. So if they accepted the deal on Israel's terms, they could never negotiate for any greater control in East Jerusalem, any Right of Return for more families, any change to the status of Israeli military installations within their own borders, etc.
1) Israeli Jews were being allowed to keep most of East Jerusalem as well as their illegal settlements in Palestine
2) The land being given to Israeli settlers in the West Bank would have meant Palestine was broken up into up to 5 different discontinguous territories (Gaza, an isolated island in East Jerusalem, and either 2 or 3 separated sections of the West Bank). This is an untenable manner to operate a country when your mortal enemy controls your own movement between each little separate part of your territory.
3) The lack of Right of Return as guarenteed in the Geneva Convention, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN General Assembly Resolution 194 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3236. The right of those people who were forcibly displaced from their land to return if they so choose. Israel rejected this on blatant demographic terms (the equivilent of admitting that genocide - the eliminating of a certain group of people from the land - had always been their aim).
4) Israel demanded that Palestine be demilitarized, that Israel would be allowed to have radar stations within the West Bank, that Israel could deploy soldiers on the West Bank/Jordan border, and that Israel retained the right to deploy troops into Palestine when it felt appropriate. This was a fairly large interferance with Palestinian soveignity, though from what I understand it was actually less of a sticking point than East Jerusalem, the carving out of the West Bank into different sections, and Right of Return.
5) Israel demanded that Palestine give up the right to negotiate any future demands, ever. So if they accepted the deal on Israel's terms, they could never negotiate for any greater control in East Jerusalem, any Right of Return for more families, any change to the status of Israeli military installations within their own borders, etc.
Last edited:
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
What's the problem? Almost everyone believes both sides aren't being completely honest about death tolls.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
1) He said he doesn’t care the death tolls
of innocent Palestinians because “it’s war.”
2) why are you even debating death counts?
3) every news outlet, UN and even the US just this year uses the Gaza Health Ministry total
The only ones debating it are Israel and their right wing, callous and indifferent allies who lead the UK and US.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
They haven't historically differentiated between types of casualties -- civilians and combatants.
He was asked about the number of children.
Beyond that, I think he has some holdover skepticism from when he was VP and there were disputes over whether the people killed were combatants or civilians.
How Hamas Wields Gaza's Casualties as Propaganda
The terrorist group casts Israel’s military as indiscriminate and civilian deaths as disproportionate, but Hamas-affiliated fatality figures should be viewed with suspicion.
Last edited:
Did Biden question the numbers reported by Israel?
This was a response to a question by a reporter.
You're acting like Biden denied civilian and children casualties. He clearly did not and spoke out against it.
What's wrong with y'all?
This was a response to a question by a reporter.
You're acting like Biden denied civilian and children casualties. He clearly did not and spoke out against it.
What's wrong with y'all?
It’s not surprising, but it’s sad to see what you have devolved to... A black man carrying water for an apartheid state no different from 1980s South Africa. I can only hope one day you learn to think for yourself PressureGPT.
Israel is more diverse than Palestine.