|
Post by Marshall on May 6, 2024 9:27:34 GMT -5
My 1440 Feed this morning had a article that said Hamas broke off discussions and left Egypt. Then they fired rockets at one of the crossings from Israel into Gaza.
From my takeaway from a quicky reading is that Hamas has no intention of ending this conflict. Nor does it give a shit about the immediate suffering of their own people.
|
|
|
protests
May 6, 2024 17:38:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by millring on May 6, 2024 17:38:26 GMT -5
Their own people are overwhelmingly on board with them.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on May 6, 2024 17:52:27 GMT -5
My 1440 Feed this morning had a article that said Hamas broke off discussions and left Egypt. Then they fired rockets at one of the crossings from Israel into Gaza. From my takeaway from a quicky reading is that Hamas has no intention of ending this conflict. Nor does it give a shit about the immediate suffering of their own people. Again, this is why you fight a war to win it and annihilate an enemy like Hamas. Even if civilians get in the way. Otherwise they'll be doing this next year, and the year after, and the next decade......
|
|
|
protests
May 6, 2024 21:39:35 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by coachdoc on May 6, 2024 21:39:35 GMT -5
Well, I’m not optimistic about it ending any time soon having read about it in the Bible. Hamas has just intensified it and given it a new name.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on May 8, 2024 9:10:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by howard lee on May 8, 2024 9:25:05 GMT -5
Exactly.
Thanks for the link, Don.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on May 8, 2024 10:06:14 GMT -5
It was interesting that his vision of a two-state solution pictured the Palestinian state as being a demilitarized state. Would Israel, the other part of his envisioned two-state solution, also then become demilitarized? Or would just one state of this two-state solution he supports be allowed the right to having an army, weapons, and a means of defense?
If the latter, that doesn't sound like a two-state solution. It sounds like something that would be part of a 'one and a half' state solution, a deal created by Israeli interests that from inception favors Israel's interests. Does such an arrangement fly? If so, how long?
Is the "demilitarized" part just sugarcoating to sell the deal? A coating that would dissolve once swallowed?
|
|
|
Post by howard lee on May 8, 2024 10:09:13 GMT -5
It was interesting that that his vision of a two-state solution pictured the Palestinian state as being a demilitarized state. Would Israel, the other part of his envisioned two-state solution, also then become demilitarized? Or would just one state of this two-state solution he supports be allowed the right to having an army, weapons, and a means of defense? If the latter, that doesn't sound like a two-state solution. It sounds like something that would be part of a 'one and a half' state solution, a deal created by Israeli interests that from inception favors Israel's interests. Does such an arrangement fly? If so, how long? Is the "demilitarized" part just sugarcoating to sell the deal? A coating that would dissolve once swallowed?
Friedman has some good ideas, but I do not have faith in the idea that either side here would ever de-militarize. The scenario seems not unlike the Cold War during the Soviet era. This is largely due to the fact that we are still cavemen, but with computers. And weapons of mass destruction.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on May 8, 2024 10:15:12 GMT -5
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Two armed states, with strong incentives to minimize violence, would be better than what we have now. And I think that aiming for a perfectly "fair" solution would likely mean no solution. Life isn't fair.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on May 8, 2024 13:23:15 GMT -5
When you fight a war to win then you have to occupy the country you defeated. Imagine if a group of Germans or Japanese continued to fight a hit and run gorilla conflict aided by a segment of the civilian population after the surrender. Would have been messy.
Not sure if Israel has a long term occupation or Marshall Plan in mind but they should.
|
|
|
Post by billhammond on May 8, 2024 14:39:19 GMT -5
Imagine if a group of Germans or Japanese continued to fight a hit and run gorilla conflict aided by a segment of the civilian population after the surrender. Would have been messy. You mean like in "2001: A Space Odyssey"?
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 8, 2024 15:00:05 GMT -5
"It's important that we understand that nobody is really at fault here.". - Marie Barone
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on May 8, 2024 19:32:41 GMT -5
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Two armed states, with strong incentives to minimize violence, would be better than what we have now. And I think that aiming for a perfectly "fair" solution would likely mean no solution. Life isn't fair. What exactly would be Hamas' strong incentive?
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 9, 2024 10:56:47 GMT -5
Being compassionate does not preclude which side of this divide one is standing on. I know that's how most people feel (most people, because most people assign compassion to the American left, and heartless calculation to the American right). In part I think that's also because we judge ourselves and our friends by our intentions and our foes by results -- oftentimes not even actual results, rather, projected results on actions never taken (because our mischaracterization of them in public debate works, and our foe's idea(s) never come(s) to fruition).
Love is way more complicated than picking a side and giving it what it wants.
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 9, 2024 13:46:34 GMT -5
|
|