placnx

On 12/4/2023 at 3:56 PM, Morch said:

 

What two-state solution? What parties are currently willing and able to negotiate and act on this?

US on behalf of Israel, for a starter.

On 12/4/2023 at 4:34 PM, Hawaiian said:

If the mullahs were overthrown there is a good possibility of democratic reforms coming back, maybe not overnight like you say, but quicker than many think possible.  Iran has a sizable population of well educated people that are not religious fanatics, especially the younger generation.

Lately there have been frequent  anti-government demonstrations demanding reforms and women's rights.  The pro-government demonstrations you see are government sponsored and instigated.

If really fair and free elections were held tomorrow, a pro-democracy government would most likely be voted in.

 

 

Looking back to the Shah's reign, middle class people were not happy with SAVAK, the secret police, and many thought that Ayatollah Khomeini would be better. Iran had a parliament for a long time, but now the ultimate power resides with the religious elite. I agree that the country can culturally support a democracy, but imposition by external force is problematic. There too much chance for opportunists to come in on the back of occupation.

On 12/4/2023 at 3:17 PM, Jingthing said:

Sometimes war is necessary.

Right now, both Ukraine and Israel are fighting existential wars.

Concerning IZ, it's existential in a paranoid mind.

On 12/4/2023 at 3:09 PM, PingRoundTheWorld said:

Complete nonsense. While the US shouldn't provoke a war with Iran, it's actually Iran that's been testing the waters with more provocations from Iran-backed militias, exactly because Iran fears an all-out war with the US. I don't think the US should directly attack Iran at this point, but more actions need to be taken against those militia and the Houthis in particular need to go. Either way comparing US military might to Iran's is ridiculous because they are orders of magnitude apart.  It's kind of like comparing Hamas and their RPGs and inaccurate rockets to Israel's coordinated land, air, and sea forces - it's not a question of if they lose, it's just a question of how long it takes.

 

Hopefully it won't come to that (a war with Iran), but if it does the US needs to promptly and decidely crush the Islamists and install a new government. The will of the people is already there - it's just a matter of helping them make it happen.

You haven't been following Yemen. US is currently containing the situation by naval forces. There has been a war going on in Yemen for years, finally winding down. The US stopped supporting this war several years ago.

Your idea of installing a govenment in Iran was already tried in Iraq.

On 12/4/2023 at 3:04 PM, Jingthing said:

Neither side wants a full war. Proxy actions are par for the course. Yes it could happen accidentally but so could anything. Perhaps the countries that most want a US - Iran war where Iran is crushed would be Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Not sure about Saudi Arabia. They have already seen the mess in Iraq.

On 12/4/2023 at 2:45 PM, ezzra said:

Not all wars fulfil their purpose but if you look back, wars were fought through out history, some with good results, others not so much but in some situation wars are a must and the way to go...

Most wars in recent memory planted the seeds for the next war. This is certainly true in the Middle East.

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

His policies on israel/ Palestine are one of the reasons I didn't want Trump to win again. On his other policies; immigration, border protection, world peace and most importantly NOT STARTING ANY WARS, I support him.

You might say that Trump's Abraham Accords were a proximate factor behind the current war.

23 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The link you provided details pretty much the same procedures I mentioned.

 

As for a two-state solution, it would require at least two parties willing and able to negotiate and implement things. Do tell if you've seen any around.

 

Putin met with the Thai Prime Minister not too long ago, and was invited for a visit. I don't think they met it Moscow.

I was not talking about Thailand. It was about Putin avoiding a visit to South Africa, which is technically required to arrest hum.

The two sides are not consolidated yet, but US will be the core broker on Israel's side, and Arab League/OIC/BRICS, etc, etc will broker the Palestinian side. The old approach with US dominating didn't work and will never work.

On 12/4/2023 at 3:40 PM, Bkk Brian said:

That does not relate to the reality of the current conflict and and hostage release, which was my point and what my post was about if you didn't notice

 

Israeli prisoner release shines light on system of detaining Palestinians without charge

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-palestinian-hamas-prisoner-release-gaza-west-bank-rcna127353

This war is really on three fronts: Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank. If Israel ends up occupying Gaza, then administrative detention will happen there, too.

Thanks for the link. It gives real life accounts of the effect of administrative detention on Palestinians. My link was a technical explanation by B'Tselem, which I posted because others were giving a distorted impression on administrative detention.

10 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

in ww2 they actually were going to declare war on the us and its allies, but the diplomat did not deliver that declaration. as history goes it will always seem like thailand was neutral when in fact it wasn't. i have a feeling of deja vu here. honestly i don't think they are neutral. one more thing. they mention '2 superpowers'. i guess they don't consider russia as being powerful, but heck... are they ever catering to them. seems to me thailand is playing on 3 fronts. dont military strategists always say never manage 2 wars at the same time?

Thailand was occupied by Japan and occasionally was bombed. It was not an enthusiatic supporter of Japan.

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

And...?

The colonies (or in this case territories taken from the Ottomans) were in the Levant and ruled by France and Britain. It was not the "West", but these two members of the Security Council (SC). I was trying to give more background to the creation of the SC. Russia and China were nonchalantly given permanent member status in 1945 without thinking about how things might change in the future.

On 12/3/2023 at 4:09 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Obviously any further hostage release has ended. As heard on Al Jazeera. Hamas is not going to release even non israeli hostages, which it had offered to do, and the terms for further releases has been increased.

 

The israelis protesting for the release of their relatives are apparently outraged and increasing their demonstrations. Must be galling to have come so close to getting them back only to see that chance becoming even less likely.

The WSJ mentioned last Thursday some of the Hamas asks regarding hostage release. Their usual formula is all Palestinian prisoners in exchange for the captured IDF soldiers. However, the article said this: "Hamas told the negotiators it was ready to extend the truce by an additional four days, the officials said, and discuss the release of fighting-age men in exchange for senior Palestinians jailed in Israel." It's been clear for a long time that the exchange ratio for soldiers would be more akin to the Gilad Shalit case. Does "senior Palestinians" mean political prisoners such as Marwan Barghouti?

On 12/2/2023 at 5:37 PM, Morch said:

 

The IDF did not plan to drop 'bunker busters' on any hospital. If that was the case the long standoff which allowed Hamas to clear off would not have happened. I'm aware you have issues with Israel, but try and keep things real, please. What 'international observers' would these be? Did the Hamas ever allow such to tour around? You want to deny the existence of tunnels, or any other thing Hamas does - go right ahead. You really don't have to make up excuses, you don't believe it, and that's it.

Where did I deny the existence of tunnels? However, disproportionate killing is undeniable. Instead of bunker busters, IDF should use their technology to enter the tunnels instead of destroying them. Maybe they can find traces of hostage presence in the process. Bunker busters might kill hostages instead of Hamas people.

As for whether they finish al-Shifa off with bombs remains to be seen. So far they are doing a good job of making hospitals unable to function.

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

I can back my reality up with a credible link, can you with yours?

If you had looked at the post above, this link was there: https://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention

7 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Is that an actual thing or is it something that you made up 

Well, the settlers and Ben Gvir are working on it.

10 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I covered administrative detention as it is in reality, not your version. 

Your alternative reality?

On 12/2/2023 at 10:07 PM, placeholder said:

 

Well, my opinion is one that's shared by some very knowledgeable people. As they have pointed out, Biden has kind of backed himself into a corner with his over-the-top embrace of the Israeli response. After investing all this political capital in support of Israel, is it politically palatable for Biden to break with Netanyahu? 

White House pressed Israel during bombing pause to change its strategy

As fighting starts up again, it is unclear whether White House actions made a difference

Despite this notable change in message and tone, outside advisers and Middle East experts said it remains unclear whether Biden would be willing to distance himself or break with Israel if it does not heed the American exhortations and undertakes another broadly devastating aerial campaign.

“There’s a rhetorical change in how they’re talking about it, but it doesn’t seem substantive,” said Steven Cook, senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. “If Israel pursues its military operations in a similar fashion, then you know the administration really hasn’t had an effect.”

https://archive.ph/FqD0S

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/02/white-house-pressed-israel-strategy-gaza/

 

As the article goes on to note, experts say they see no indication that Israel has changed its tactics in its prosecution of the war. An Israeli spokesperson quoted in the article says Israel sees no need to change its approach to the war. (Although, I suppose we would expect him to say that even if Israel had changed its tactics.)

 

The quoted comments of Bruce Riedel, a very savvy scholar of US policy in the Mideast, about the paralyzing predicament Biden finds himself in, are also telling.

 

As long as Biden doesn't explicitly draw a specific red line, why should Israel care what the rest of the world thinks? Essentially, as far as Israel's foreign concerns goes, it's down to a constituency of one person.

 

As for the Israeli government's domestic support, is there any politically influential concern among Jewish Israelis, who constitute roughly 80% of the population, about the fate of the Palestinian civilians in Gaza? Apart maybe from those voiced by a few leftists?  I think the order of the day for Jewish Israelis is vengeance and return of the hostages. Palestinian welfare doesn't figure in the political calculus.

 

 

Maybe Netanyahu is quite content to see Biden twist in the wind in the expectation that young US voters will abandon Biden in 2024 and Trump will win, so that the Greater Israel project can forge ahead full speed.

On 12/2/2023 at 5:53 PM, Bkk Brian said:

That's not quite how it is though. There are around 1,300 Palestinians held via administrative detention but only 23 of those are children/minors (19 or under). The current prisoner releases have been mainly children so its doubtful many of them would have been on that form of detention although many could well have been released having already been charged of offenses but not yet attended court. Of course then some had been convicted including for attempted murder. Most however were detained for offenses such as supporting terrorism, trespassing, belonging to an illegal organization, throwing incendiary devices and stones and carrying, possessing and manufacturing weapons, among others.

 

The ICC prosecutor Karim Khan visited Israel a couple of days ago actually, at the request of the families of those Israeli victims of the 7th Oct. After his visit to Israel he then travelled to the West Bank to meet senior Palestinian officials.

Didn't he also go to the Sinai side of the Rafah crossing?

I have covered administrative detention in a response to Morch above.

On 12/2/2023 at 5:49 PM, Morch said:

 

As far as I'm aware, administrative detentions do need to be approved by a judge (plus re-approved periodically), and there is a possibility to appeal to the Supreme Court. What you refer to, I  think, is the initial process and detention. IMO the issue is with the practice itself, rather than how it's implemented.

 

With regard to the ICC you can cite whatever you like - I don't see Putin avoiding international travel, or ICC squads trying to bring him to justice. As for you predictions - again, sounds like wishful thinking rather than something based on reality. The bit about the Palestinian State especially gives a distinct sense that you are not very informed on things Palestinian - but again, engage in wishful thinking.

Apparently the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem does not agree with you: https://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention

A two-state solution for now is the only way to stop this cycle of violence. Maybe in the future, Israel will deal with the apartheid within its borders. Then a one-state solution would be feasible if people wanted that. I believe that Putin did not go to South Africa and sent Lavrov instead.

On 12/3/2023 at 10:01 AM, Morch said:

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

When people mention 'colonial' that's often a way of saying 'the West'. Far as I recall, China and Russia are on the UNSC as well, and doubt they're into relinquishing their status as well.

 

I'm not sure what you consider 'proven'. Were things better, globally when there were no UN, UNSC, and permanent members' veto right? I'm not so sure about that, maybe you can demonstrate it. Same goes for abolishing these - how would things work? How would this effect global relations? Wars around the globe? Chances for WWIII? You do not offer any answers. Not even a hit at what would resemble a 'better way'.

Somewhere back in this topic I suggested a veto override mechanism.

UN Charter followed the WW I outmoded concept of victors dictating to the world, so the "powers" were the countries given veto power in the SC. Two of these were European colonial powers at the time - Britain and France, while the US was supposedly advocating abolition of colonies. In spite of its veto power, USSR was not able to block the UN authorized defense of South Korea, while China a/k/a Taiwan was irrelevant back then. Nowadays China & Russia seem to have imperial ambitions.

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

The general Palestinian population support Hamas owing to several reasons: if they say something against Hamas, they and their family will be shot no questions asked, the Palestinian see Hamas and their ilk as heroes and martyrs for the cause and their only way and salvation to eliminate the Jews and Israel and thus to go live in the so called imaginary land of 'Palestine' ( from the river to the sea)

but t that they will have to kill every Jew and Israeli and THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN...

This sounds really paranoid. Are getting worried that the two-state solution might actually happen?

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The OP here should have been labeled in the forum for what it is... an OPINION piece instead of a NEWS report. And one authored by a professor affiliated with the libertarian Cato Institute.

 

"Jordan Cohen is a policy analyst in Defense and Foreign Policy at the Cato Institute"

 

"Cato advocates for a limited governmental role in domestic and foreign affairs..."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

 

It seems odd that Cato Institute would favor another war, but supporters of the Israeli government's agenda on Iran want to get into any organization where they can have a platform to influence opinion of various elites.

On 12/3/2023 at 11:09 AM, Morch said:

 

Again, the only people insisting on using the Zionist moniker the way you do are leaders and official spokesmen of Hamas, other Palestinian terrorist organizations, Iran, Iran-backed-militias, and North Korea. You can try to spin it whichever way you like. The IDF is not a 'militant' group, but an army. Practically no one references it as you insist to do.

 

 

The IDF includes settler militants. That may explain why we can see settlers committing murder why IDF soldiers look on.

On 12/3/2023 at 10:32 AM, Morch said:

 

No, I couldn't - because unlike you I wouldn't exclusively refer to Israelis as 'Zionists'. That's something often seen from official representatives of Hamas, Iran, Iran-backed-militias, and North Korea. The underlying sentiment is objection to Israel's existence, and making a silly show of ignoring reality. It's a lame hater thing.

 

Also, next time that you whine about being labeled a Hamas supporter, Hamas apologist and so on - refer to your post and my reply.

First of all, are the Arab Israelis also Zionists? Maybe you will claim that the Druze are Zionists??? It's not fair to accuse all Israelis for this mass murder. There are a few Israelis who still believe in peace and justice for the Palestinians. The criminals like Netanyahu, Ben Gvir, and Smotrich are certainly Zionists. Zionism went criminal as far back as the 1930s.