Israel And The Palestinians: A Nightmare In Desperate Search Of A Solution

[PeterRS]

9 hours ago, vinapu said:

why you are so defensive ? Not liking America doesn't prevent you from liking Americans, the same with Russia/ Russians, Israel / Israelis, you name it.

I don't regard that statement as defensive! When one poster is repeatedly claimed to have one view that is inaccurate, it becomes incredibly boring. But it does not mean that the other poster has to sit back and accept the criticism. 

After all, were you dear @vinapu not suggesting the eye for an eye principle on an earlier post?

[vinapu]

7 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

 

After all, were you dear @vinapu not suggesting the eye for an eye principle on an earlier post?

I was not as already explained. What I said it that Israel has no other option than making sure to prevent  such disaster happening againn to them. This can be achieving by more peaceful means than levelling Gaza 

[reader]

The die is cast now and Israel has no realistic alternative to destroying Hamas which is dedicated to Israel’s eradication. If the UK or any other nation with the means to resist was threatened in similar manner, it would respond in kind. The matter is now one of how tactics will be employed.

[vinapu]

3 minutes ago, reader said:

The die is cast now and Israel has no realistic alternative to destroying Hamas which is dedicated to Israel’s eradication.

Tragedy of situation is  that while you are right about Israelis having  no option , chances of this happening by military means are between none and non-existent 

[reader]

Unfortunately, there is no peaceful means, either. 

Hamas doesn’t desire peace. It’s avowed reason for existence is to remove the Israeli state from the map by means of attacks like we witness a few weeks ago.

World leaders have, for decades, attempted to mediate a peace in the region without success. You can’t force peace on terrorists.
 

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterRS]

1 hour ago, vinapu said:

I was not as already explained. What I said it that Israel has no other option than making sure to prevent  such disaster happening againn to them. This can be achieving by more peaceful means than levelling Gaza 

WIth the greatest respect, what you wrote was "now reader is right, Israel got attacked and has every right to defend itself." And did you not write earlier in the thread "While other countries hit may decide not to retaliate and restrains themselves  for world's common good, Israel due to it's small size will have no option than to respond in kind"? Is Gaza not even smaller than Israel?

I fully agree that in other posts you have talked about resolution by peaceful means. I think every sane person agrees with that. The problem, as we all know, is that several countries have participated in attempted peace processes that have come to nothing. Both parties in the conflict are as guilty as the other for ensuring this. As this has been going on, Israel has continued a massive expansion of its settlements into what were Arab lands, rockets have continued to be showered down on Israel just as they have from israel to Gaza. 

In my view - and I know @reader will come back and criticise me for bringing Iran back into the matter(!) - Israel can possibly succeed in wiping out Hamas. That in the view of many will "avenge" the horrific attacks on its people. But we all know that Iran is the backer of Hamas, just as it is the backer of Hezbollah. With no Hamas, Iran will certainly find another proxy to achieve its ghastly ends against Israel.

The mullahs in Iran hate America. They have shown with their actions they are prepared to spread out over the Middle East to take on America and its allies. Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?

[reader]

Duplicate post (see below)

 

[reader]

17 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?

Your mistake is believing that it’s just a problem existing among Iran, US and Israel. Iran is a world-wide exporter of terrorism. It’s everybody’s problem.

[PeterRS]

57 minutes ago, reader said:

Your mistake is believing that it’s just a problem existing among Iran, US and Israel. Iran is a world-wide exporter of terrorism. It’s everybody’s problem.

 I made no such mistake! What i questioned was "Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?" I also clearly stated that Iran has "shown with their actions they are prepared to spread out over the Middle East to take on America and its allies." 

You put words into my post for at no time did I ever state - or have i ever stated - that a solution lies only in the hands of these three nations. Of course other nations have to be involved.

[reader]

This is a direct quote from you:

”Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?”

How in hell did I misrepresent what you said. You only mentioned three nations. I didn’t make that up, Peter. You can’t have it both ways.

I put no words in your mouth that you didn’t utter.

Maybe you were thinking something else but I can’t read your mind.

[PeterRS]

I notice that Israel is now releasing phone conversations purportedly illustrating the bloodthirstiness of the Palestinian terorists.

These may be true verbal captures, in which case they should be condemned in the strongest possible terms. But let's remember that nothing has yet been proved. Use of craftily manufactured "evidence" is regularly used in conflicts and war situations. Can we forget the heartbreaking 1990 appearance of Nayirah who appeared before a US Congressional Committee about the hideous crimes of the Iraqi forces which had invaded Kuwait?

The 15-year old refugee testified she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and the babies left to die. Her descriptions were backed up by the British-based Amnesty International and repeated frequently by US Senators and Congressmen. In a frenzy of PR activity, newspapers recounted tales of incubators being shipped off to Iraq. Variously 12 and up to 22 babies had been left to die on the floors. On September 30, US News & World Report reported that it had received secret US government cables based on eewitness accounts revealing "shocking acts of brutality by the Iraqs against innocent citizens at Kuwaiti hospitals." Kuwait denied access of journalists to the scenes of the deaths.

So big did the story become it was one of the platforms for Bush Snr's invasion.

Yet it was virtually all lies! On January 6, 1992, The New York Times revealed that the girl in question was not a refugee but the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the USA. Her testimony had been written for her by the Citizens for a Free Kuwait PR Campaign. This had been organised on a for-profit basis by the American PR company Hill & Knowlton on behalf of the Kuwaiti government. It had also both coached the girl's testimony in advance and then arranged for it to be filmed and the tape sent to 700 US news media organisations. The Times journalist John MacArthur also revealed that the incubator lies had skewed the American debate as to whether or not to suport military action.

Hill & Knowlton aserted it had no reason to doubt the veracity of the testimony, yet it had advised its client that the most effective tool in manipulating public opinion would be to emphasis atrocities. It is estimated to have received US$12 million for its work. Amnesty International later issued a retraction.

[PeterRS]

27 minutes ago, reader said:

This is a direct quote from you:

”Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?”

How in hell did I misrepresent what you said. You only mentioned three nations. I didn’t make that up, Peter. You can’t have it both ways

And you canot have it both ways either. Of course I referred merely to three nations involved in a conflict. I did not at any time state that a solution was only up to those three? Or did you have difficulty understanding that? Sorry @reader but the hell is you did!

[reader]

2 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

And you canot have it both ways either. Of course I referred merely to three nations involved in a conflict. I did not at any time state that a solution was only up to those three? Or did you have difficulty understanding that? Sorry @reader but the hell is you did!

No one can understand what you don’t say. 

[reader]

8 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

I notice that Israel is now releasing phone conversations purportedly illustrating the bloodthirstiness of the Palestinian terorists.

These may be true verbal captures, in which case they should be condemned in the strongest possible terms. But let's remember that nothing has yet been proved. Use of craftily manufactured "evidence" is regularly used in conflicts and war situations. Can we forget the heartbreaking 1990 appearance of Nayirah who appeared before a US Congressional Committee about the hideous crimes of the Iraqi forces which had invaded Kuwait?

The 15-year old refugee testified she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and the babies left to die. Her descriptions were backed up by the British-based Amnesty International and repeated frequently by US Senators and Congressmen. In a frenzy of PR activity, newspapers recounted tales of incubators being shipped off to Iraq. Variously 12 and up to 22 babies had been left to die on the floors. On September 30, US News & World Report reported that it had received secret US government cables based on eewitness accounts revealing "shocking acts of brutality by the Iraqs against innocent citizens at Kuwaiti hospitals." Kuwait denied access of journalists to the scenes of the deaths.

So big did the story become it was one of the platforms for Bush Snr's invasion.

Yet it was virtually all lies! On January 6, 1992, The New York Times revealed that the girl in question was not a refugee but the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the USA. Her testimony had been written for her by the Citizens for a Free Kuwait PR Campaign. This had been organised on a for-profit basis by the American PR company Hill & Knowlton on behalf of the Kuwaiti government. It had also both coached the girl's testimony in advance and then arranged for it to be filmed and the tape sent to 700 US news media organisations. The Times journalist John MacArthur also revealed that the incubator lies had skewed the American debate as to whether or not to suport military action.

Hill & Knowlton aserted it had no reason to doubt the veracity of the testimony, yet it had advised its client that the most effective tool in manipulating public opinion would be to emphasis atrocities. It is estimated to have received US%12 million for its work. Amnesty International later issued a retraction.

At least you’re not a conspiracy theorist. 😊

[PeterRS]

14 minutes ago, reader said:

No one can understand what you don’t say. 

Prefectly understood. But if you can show me where I specifically stated that only the USA/Israel and Iran should be involved in working out peace, then I will happily apologise. If you can not do that, perhaps you will have the decency to apologise.

[reader]

Right here. You cite three—and only three—parties involved in the conflict.

if there are other parties, why don’t you identify them.

”Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?”

You place the responsibility solely on those three.

[PeterRS]

39 minutes ago, reader said:

Right here. You cite three—and only three—parties involved in the conflict.

if there are other parties, why don’t you identify them.

”Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?”

You place the responsibility solely on those three.

That is absolute baloney!

[unicorn]

On 10/23/2023 at 11:46 PM, caeron said:

 

For those unlike Unicorn who are interested in alternatives to bombings, look at:

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/talking-with-insurgents-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/ 

...

I guess you thought I wouldn't click on the link and actually read the article. For the several people who "liked" your post, and therefore didn't bother to click on the link, I will tell them that that article has ZERO to do with the current situation, and in particular NOTHING to do with taking down the sites with which Hamas is using to volley missiles into Israeli civilian areas. All it does is suggest that negotiating with hostage-takers is a good idea. Nice try, but again devoid of integrity. 

Obviously, even if one were to buy into the idea that negotiating with hostage-takers is a good idea, that argument does nothing to address the immediate issue of stopping the Hamas missile launches. To address your aside, which has nothing to do with the situation we were supposed to be discussing, I personally think it's a bad idea to negotiate with hostage-takers, as this only encourages further hostage-taking. Nothing wrong with pretending to negotiate while planning a rescue mission, but I would oppose any concessions. Otherwise, one will end up in an endless cycle in which one gives up more and more as more and more hostages get taken. 

That being said, I strongly oppose Israel's recent policies vis-a-vis the Palestinians, especially the settlements in the West Bank, which are simply obvious provocations. One could also argue that placing a kibbutz, such as Nahal Oz, right on the border wall with Gaza, might also be construed as a provocation and/or asking for trouble--not that this would excuse slaughtering unarmed civilians or hostage-taking. I very much understand the Palestinians' frustrations, especially at the arrogant and offensive policies of Netenyahu. However, the insurgents would have had my sympathy had they limited to targeting IDF troops, and lost my sympathy by shooting and kidnapping women, children, and the elderly. 

 

[reader]

2 hours ago, PeterRS said:

That is absolute baloney!

In that case, treat yourself to a sandwich. 🙂

[vinapu]

12 hours ago, reader said:

Unfortunately, there is no peaceful means, either. 

World leaders have, for decades, attempted to mediate a peace in the region without success. You can’t force peace on terrorists.
 

correct on both accounts. 

You can physically eliminate terrorists by jailing or killing them but that only makes room for next batch or you can starve them support of local population but that  may be tall order if occupant or government is seen as even worse and/ or less effective.

throughout human history many terrorists  were later labelled freedom fighters and become prime ministers or presidents. And some of those , first lawfully elected or elevated by popular will tuned to terrorize their own population and neighbours.

[vinapu]

12 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Until something can be done about the US/srael/Iran conflict, is there even the remotest chance of peace?

yes, internal troubles in USA and Iran at the same time, forcing them to divert their  attention internally , then both sides can negotiate settlement knowing they can neither  count nor hope for interference of others.

 

[PeterRS]

On 10/24/2023 at 1:14 PM, reader said:

How can anyone forget when you keep repeating same garrulous meanderings?

You obviously do`

[PeterRS]

On 10/25/2023 at 1:39 PM, PeterRS said:

Prefectly understood. But if you can show me where I specifically stated that only the USA/Israel and Iran should be involved in working out peace, then I will happily apologise. If you can not do that, perhaps you will have the decency to apologise.

The fact is you cannot. You misread my post and assumed only the three warring parties would be involved in any peace settlement. Odd how you have forgotten all those countries which have been involved in peace processes in the past - Norway, the Madrid Conference, the Geneva conference, Egypt,Jordan and a host of others. If you seriously think that conflicts are only settled by the particpants, your knoweldge of recent history is remarkably slim. 

How about Northern ireland. Two bitter Anglo_irish foes brought together by the USA and peace resulted.

Emjoy the baloney!

[unicorn]

2 hours ago, PeterRS said:

...Emjoy the baloney!

[PeterRS]

And for those who believe the baloney, I failed to mention the efforts made by Quatar to find a peaceulf solution.

https://thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/28/10/2023/qatar-affirms-commitment-to-continuing-diplomatic-efforts-to-endbloodshed-of-palestinians