Hamas Leader Killed

[ShahdagMountains]

You mean like dominos falling?

I have to catch up with Caroline. I watched some of it.

 

[Shusha]

You mean like dominos falling?

I have to catch up with Caroline. I watched some of it.

Yep, basically. Ripple effect as Iran's proxies are disrupted. Lebanon next. Then Jordan.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

Yep, basically. Ripple effect as Iran's proxies are disrupted. Lebanon next. Then Jordan.

But l am uneasy when there is a vacuum. Anything could happen. And l’ve never trusted the Turks. They’re unreliable.

I’m down in that region next week.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yep, basically. Ripple effect as Iran's proxies are disrupted. Lebanon next. Then Jordan.

Disrupt Iran.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

 

[Shusha]

Excellent! I was actually trying to think of things that have been obstacles in prior negotiations because they were “nonnegotiable” such as “right of return “.

I think one of the issues with conversation is the whole idea of "obstacles". It is one of the reasons why terminology like "occupation" should be set aside. "Occupation" presumes that there is an obstacle and that one side is responsible for that "obstacle" and is required to change before there can be forward movement.

Rather, let's consider a mutually beneficial end point and work backward from there. I think that, over the past roughly 90 years, this obstacle vs end point has shifted and this is preventing solutions.

No matter how you dissect it, or what narratives you tell, the territory of the Mandate for Palestine has never been legally divided into two separate states. The only way to divide a state into two separate states is by treaty agreement. This has never been done with the Mandate territory.

This is especially concerning for me today as I witnessed Francesca Albanese say before the UN Human Rights Council that there should be no negotiation between Israel and "Palestine".

Not that Francesca Albanese has a right to determine international law, but this represents a significant (can't be overstated!) destruction of existing international law and an undermining of state sovereignty. (Which would be an interesting discussion to have, but whoa, we can only talk so many subjects at once and you and I tend to spill over anyway). Think about it. If self-determination completely ignores state sovereignty (territorial integrity) without negotiation, nor expectation of treaty agreements or peace agreements, nor expectations of competent government, what becomes the basis of international co-operation and peace?

 

[Lisa558]

I think one of the issues with conversation is the whole idea of "obstacles". It is one of the reasons why terminology like "occupation" should be set aside. "Occupation" presumes that there is an obstacle and that one side is responsible for that "obstacle" and is required to change before there can be forward movement.

Rather, let's consider a mutually beneficial end point and work backward from there. I think that, over the past roughly 90 years, this obstacle vs end point has shifted and this is preventing solutions.

No matter how you dissect it, or what narratives you tell, the territory of the Mandate for Palestine has never been legally divided into two separate states. The only way to divide a state into two separate states is by treaty agreement. This has never been done with the Mandate territory.

This is especially concerning for me today as I witnessed Francesca Albanese say before the UN Human Rights Council that there should be no negotiation between Israel and "Palestine".

Not that Francesca Albanese has a right to determine international law, but this represents a significant (can't be overstated!) destruction of existing international law and an undermining of state sovereignty. (Which would be an interesting discussion to have, but whoa, we can only talk so many subjects at once and you and I tend to spill over anyway). Think about it. If self-determination completely ignores state sovereignty (territorial integrity) without negotiation, nor expectation of treaty agreements or peace agreements, nor expectations of competent government, what becomes the basis of international co-operation and peace?

I realize you and Coyote are in a discussion, but I’d like to interject here with a thought about obstacles:

Do what extent does the U.N. Itself create an obstacle? This is a decidedly anti-Israel, antisemitic body - and based on what Albanese said, is likely to block any advances to peace. Just look at her title: Special Rapportour on the Occupied Palestinian Territories!

Perhaps fodder for a different thread, but what does the U.S. gain by our participation - and money! - and hosting!! - of an antisemitic body that tries to delegitimize our #1 ally in the Middle East?

Perhaps a (back-burner) goal of Trump’s will be to discontinue our hosting of a major antisemitic organization in NYC.

 

[Shusha]

I realize you and Coyote are in a discussion, but I’d like to interject here with a thought about obstacles:

Do what extent does the U.N. Itself create an obstacle? This is a decidedly anti-Israel, antisemitic body - and based on what Albanese said, is likely to block any advances to peace. Just look at her title: Special Rapportour on the Occupied Palestinian Territories!

Perhaps fodder for a different thread, but what does the U.S. gain by our participation - and money! - and hosting!! - of an antisemitic body that tries to delegitimize our #1 ally in the Middle East?

Perhaps a (back-burner) goal of Trump’s will be to discontinue our hosting of a major antisemitic organization in NYC.

The UN is absolutely an obstacle. Not only because the UN is anti-Israel (and antisemitic), but because the UN has created falsehoods and written them into UN documentation, giving them the illusion of law, even though the UN does not create law. “Occupied Palestinian Territories, including East Jerusalem”, as example, has become the normalized terminology. There is no such thing and yet it has been accepted as fact. These “facts on the ground” have created far more of an obstacle to a negotiated peace and settlement of Palestinian self-determination than anything Israel has done.

 

[Pastelli]

Your responses are interesting.

You refer to the Palestinians or the neighboring Muslim majority states, as “the Muslim” this or that when it comes to aggression. Not Palestinians (or Egyptians, Lebanese, Jordanians). You reduce their identity (Palestinian) to a world religion only. Meanwhile you elevate the identity of Israeli Jews over non-Jewish Israeli citizens. You rarely to refer to “Israeli citizens” but only Jews.

This despite the fact that Israel’s demographics (excluding occupied territories) are:
73% Jewish
21% Arab (a category that includes citizens who ethnically identify as Arabs, Palestinians, Bedouin, Druze, Circassian, Armenian), mostly Muslim but also including Christians and other sects.
6% “other”

Over a quarter of Israel’s citizenry is not Jewish.

When Hamas murdered innocent civilians and took hostages, the dead and the hostages included non-Jews and foreign nationals. Hamas didn’t care who they took and who they killed on October 7 just like they don’t care that their rockets end up hitting Arab villages along the border. Many non-Jewish Israeli’s have also long suffered inequalities in terms of allocation of resources for security such as bomb shelters or Iron Dome, despite the fact that many of them live near the borders and have been frequent victims of Hamas and Hezbollah rocket fire.

So why do you act as if a quarter of Israel’s population doesn’t exist?

• Why do you separate Arabs from so called "palestinians," are you saying Israeli Arabs and "palestinian" Arabs are different ethnicities?
  
• The term "palestinians" referred to Jews too, before 1948. For its geography .
  Throughout the 1948 war and beyond it was always 'Arabs' till well into the 1950s. See newspaper archives. [ www.news.google.com/newspapers ]
  Term Arabs in or of "Palestine" - was the traditional 1920, before the 1960s.
  
  Arabs palestine - Google Search
  
  Whereas:
  Term "palestinians" is only recent:
  
  palestinians - Google Search
  
  
• Hamas treated differently Jews from non Jews.
  And you know that..
  
• The cruel captors bever referred to them as "Israelis," but as yahood.