Morch

I know that you chopped my post for no good reason. As for your comment - I am sure this won't happen overnight. But long term, without Hamas (or clone of) about? Yes. It won't make life in the Gaza a paradise, but much better than currently or since Hamas took over. There were talks about related measures for years. All which were discussed on similar topics (many with your participation). From Egypt's point of view as well, Hamas out of the picture would probably mean easing up of restrictions. No idea what you wanted with the convulsed bit about comparing the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

I suggest that you read the OP. It references such reservations. This is not even the first time these issues came up, or funding withheld. Also notice that I said 'may be more willing to donate' - as in possibly increase funding. Your second item is meaningless. The reality is that they weren't seriously pressured on this, and I think would be in the future. It also relates to the issues mentioned regarding Palestinian factions/politics. My comment about difficulty is on par with what was presented in the interview. As for the result being 'worth it' - I've no idea what's your actual point or complaint is. This was addressed in more detail on another post. I don't care much of what things you're reminded of. Deflecting much?

Dear me, what inhumanity. Binding prisoners, blindfolding them. The horror. Then, one recalls how the hostages taken by Hamas (and ordinary Gazans) were received upon arrival to Gaza, and goes pffft.

Gazans would not have to depend on UNRWA is Hamas was out of the picture. The whole economic situation in the Gaza Strip stems from Hamas's rule, and its agenda/actions. Gazans may hate Israel, with good reasons. Question is how many of them hate Hamas as well now, or afterwards, when things calm down some. As for your 'inevitable' assertion, go back to step one. If there's no Hamas to coalesce and organize such violence, it is of lesser concern, and can be addressed.

I find it interesting that in all this, there is little by way of pleas or pressure on Hamas to stop the war, care for the civilians under its rule, and so on. Not a whole lot of that from the international community, specifically from Arab countries. When it suits, Hamas is a 'terrorist organization' so no expectations, no accountability demanded. Other times, it's a legit representative of the people.

The link above is to the website's main page, the article can be found here: https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/us-proposals-to-fund-other-agencies-instead-of-unrwa-not-viable-senior-aid-official/ Other than this being another Mandy Rice-Davies act, one could point out to several issues with the points raised: - Some governments may be more willing to donate knowing Hamas and/or UNRWA are out of the picture. - Arab countries ought to be more involved in said funding - some of that is directly related to political issues vs. either Palestinian faction. - The argument that it's difficult is not a good enough answer, not if the end result is that you get a more streamlined, transparent, Hamas-free outfit. - As for salaries, maybe some of the involved high level officials (including the guy interviewed) could lead by example.

I have copy-pasted your own words, verbatim. You're 'recollection' has nothing to do with anything, I presented you with what you posted. Here it is again: You can 'believe' what you want, but facts are that this is what you posted. I did not twist your words or alter them. What you may have meant, what lame backtracking you offer, this is neither here nor there - what you actually posted is real, not an 'opinion'. Also - 70,000? Why not 7 million while at it? Maybe it's your 'opinion' again? Who knows. The actual figures are, of course, much lower, and they include Hamas men. There is no need to 'imply' what you say is not true - it's simply not true. As for your bogus second complaint regarding hostage exchange tactics - it was not claimed that Hamas was doing or considering to do so. That was part of the point - it was more to do with you going an extra mile, that extra step to where even Hamas did not dare tread. Either you completely failed to comprehend this (how?) or you're willfully deflecting with some nonsense 'objection' to something imaginary. Here are your words again: Go on and talk some more about lies....why don't you. Regarding your last bit: The Palestinians are not led by Hamas (nice Freudian slip there with Haman, echoing Netanyahu's Amalek reference). Palestinian politics have been dominated by schism between two main factions/parties for years now - Hamas and the PA/Fatah. Hamas does not lead all Palestinians, and arguably, not even all Gazans. In the same way, you misrepresent Israel's positions and political situation, again using your own home-made nonsense terminology which got no bearing in real life. You've been doing this from the start, and still at it - despite this being addressed numerous times. Zionists are not what you claim, there are moderate Zionists, pro-peace Zionists and so on. There is no 'bottom line' such as you claim.

Hamas already violated the terms of the previous hostage release agreement. A peacekeeping force could not 'intervene and force compliance' - that's not what they do, or what they are for. They are more like observers.

@Brickleberry Again, you do not know the details. You make up some. Then go on to treat them as facts. Rinse. Repeat. As for your last bit, how do you know that? Where you there? Did you build it?

@Brickleberry You do not know what is in the report. You claim you do. The news outlet you talk about did not see fit to release the actual document, make it public and so on. I don't see this being the main story on all Western media. I do not see relevant governments scrambling to defend their actions after the segment was aired. You treating things as gospel is not an indication of anything much. The current Israeli government is a coalition one. While it is right-wing, the far-right elements are not the majority in this coalition, and obviously they are no majority when it comes to Israel as a whole. They certainly punch above their weight, though - given Netanyahu's ongoing political weakness and legal issues. What you originally posted seemed to be a wider claim, referencing the entire country, all of its people. This is incorrect. Further, the current emergency coalition includes a centrist party usually on the opposition. In the war cabinet itself, where actual decisions are made regarding the war and IDF actions, there are no far-right representatives (much to their chagrin), but the new addition (that centrist party mentioned) does. As usual, you make big claims, without actually bothering with details. The same goes for the dubious legal angle you try to push. Other than in your posts, I do not see a whole lot of talk about it, at least not from solid sources. Again, relevant governments do not seem too worried about this. The commentary following this got nothing to do with the point you were trying to make. And still, avoiding it like the plague. You can rant all day, but bottom line you cannot address it, cannot explain it in any rational manner - your only answers are either solipsism, conspiracy theory stuff, or assuming you are more informed than the governments in question. All three verities are ridiculous in their own way.

@Brickleberry Of course you were.

@Brickleberry What is it with you wannabe 'pro-palestinian' posters and chopping posts? Why can't you just quote like normal posters? It's such a lame 'debate' tactic, pathetic. At times past this was not allowed, but with the new winds, maybe it's on. You have no idea what's on the report. You keep pretending that you do, but you do not. Give it a rest. All you've got to go on is a report - which did not actually release the information to the public. Unless you think that Israel sent them governments one typed page and 15 blank ones, you're just talking nonsense. You claim that the far right wing took over Israel. You do not bother to actually support, or demonstrate it with anything. You just state it as fact, and plunge on, expecting it would stick. Nations having differing historical narratives, especially with conflicts which are still going on, is quite normal. The Palestinian versions of history are a mirror image and aren't very accurate as well. You trying to paint things in a totally one-sided way is beyond ridiculous, especially concerning the subject matter of the topic - remember them Palestinian textbook used in UNRWA schools? Don't recall you whining about that). And, just in case you weren't aware, schools in Israel follow differing programs - there's no single unified one in each and every school). And indeed, you are no legal expert. You're a hyper-biased poster who often makes incorrect, over-the-top comments. Taking your 'opinion' as to legal matters is a choice. As said, them governments do not seem particularly concerned on that score. Your last comment is simply you failing to read my posts. I do not know, or pretend to know what was in the report Israel presented to the governments of donor countries. I do know that a bunch of them decided to act on it, and in a very decisive manner - which is unlike their past responses to past allegations. I do know that such decisions involve a whole lot of people within each and every government. So to assume they are all idiots, all clueless, or all somehow suddenly colluding with Israel or fulfilling its wishes on a whim - is not very reasonable, or likely. You avoid addressing this issue like the plague, bringing up every semi-relevant deflection.

I doubt you could support your theories about Netanyahu's intentions and wishes with anything much. Nah, you'd have little issues if Hamas was ever successful doing what they wish. Don't be coy.

@retarius Other than you seemingly ok with targeted murder of civilians, your nonsense post fails to account for them thousands of rockets Hamas launched at Israel. All of them unguided, indiscriminate. Each such instance, by the way, an actual war crime (if going by previous investigations etc.). A terrorist organization which specifically targets civilians is the good side? Someone lost his moral compass.

Here is what you actually posted up-topic: Renew implies this was going on before. Israel's borders do not include the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. This not happening, and it did not happen in the past. And, other than in your imagination, there is no unified Israeli view on most things - this one included. You'll find groups who are all for it, others who are anti-Zionists like yourself, and a whole lot of people and views in-between. Not having much knowledge regarding the things you post about is one thing, making bogus blanket statements is another. Most people could, through their life experience, appreciate that in any nation, any society, one will find a range of political views. Your 'toning back' is no better - it does not betray anything that's relevant to the current war, or indeed the the wider issues of a two-state solution, as both have to do with things outside Israel borders. Your nonsense comment, the way you framed it, refers the Arab citizens of Israel. And with regard to the hostages: Tell me more about 'I'm sure I never said or implied', or ' I never suggested'....You can't even follow you own posts? Can't be bothered to check what you posted? And there you go again - bringing up points, calling for responses and discussion, then declining to address comments made. You've done this more than once on these topics, it's getting old. You're either being dishonest, or you're being dishonest. No two ways about it. You have, again, failed to actually address the performance of UN peacekeeping forces, even as they involve current affairs. Simply parroting the same nonsense over and over again will not make your point become more valid. Peacekeeping troops do not 'enforce' anything. Get your facts straight. These aren't 'opinions'. And sure enough, you've dodges the issue regarding Israel quite possible not being able to renew it's offensive vs. Hamas - which was the reason for mentioning them 'pressures'. What you would support is of little significance or importance. It is at a disconnect with what's already a mostly agreed upon framework. You simply cannot bother reading up on things, so you go with your 'opinions', thereby posting out of touch commentary. No on seriously expects a return to the 1947 lines. It is neither feasible, not fair. It's just your 'opinion', and that's very little to go on. You routinely treat your 'opinions' as equal to facts, even when presented with evidence that you are wrong. What you trust or don't trust doesn't change that. Almost everything I commented on is either common knowledge or strongly backed by sources.

@billd766 More of a myth, than an accurate account. As with most historical examples, and references, a 'wee' bit more complex than that. One reason we're often asked not to go into them history lessons/debates. Given the general level of knowledge on this forum, it's a good thing.

Normal. As in no bombings. As in no more Gazan casualties. As in Aid pouring in to the Gaza Strip. If you think Gazans would refuse going back to how things were in 6/10, you're wrong.

How effective are/were UN 'Peacekeeping' forces in Syria, Lebanon? You are aware of things between Israel and Hezbollah, right? And you are, presumably, aware there's a UN peacekeeping force in place?

@retarius Does that mean you have a new issue lined up to blame Jews about?

You were most definitely deflecting, running away from addressing two 'points' you put up before that: - An allegation that implied Israel is killing all the Palestinian within it's state boundaries. - A suggestion that Hamas would hold on to the most vulnerable, the more innocent hostages - children, until the last minute. The first is a lie, the second is vile (even Hamas didn't go that far). You don't want to address them, fine - not expecting anything meaningful anyway. But do not claim that you're not deflecting, when you obviously are. The list you put up is not quite what's discussed on CNN, at least not in the manner and biased way you present things. Maybe that's how you 'grasp' what's being commented on, but it's not quite what you're on about. It is not true that both sides want the same thing. For starters, you can't even identify the sides, relying instead on some personal nonsense definition which do not conform to political reality. You are even wrong with regard to 'the faction in charge' on each side. These are basic facts. Not 'opinions', facts. You can assert or believe that there's an equivalency. That does not make it into an agreed upon position, or one generally accepted. So once more, either inaccurate, or dishonest. Pick one. As for Israel renewing operations after a ceasefire and hostage exchange, this may be so, but it is far from a fact or a done thing, as you make it to be. For starters, the Hamas is not unaware of this, and requires assurances regarding this. Constraints would be anything from the Hamas regrouping during the ceasefire, or breaking the agreement again and holding on to hostage after regrouping, or the cost and operational validity of withdrawing from the Gaza Strip and going back in again being too great, or the USA putting it's foot down, or whatever. If Israel was to sign an official agreement, or agree to unofficial arrangement (but, say, with USA as a side) I doubt it could walk out of it, or break it very easily. Noticeably you do not raise the possibility of Hamas renewing hostilities, or breaking the agreement - in your 'opinion' these are things Israel would do, but not Hamas. You've made your despicable view of Hamas's use of hostage taking and holding on to hostages clear. Even the Hamas didn't go there. You take the extra step. And expect to be taken seriously. Or your 'opinions treated as some 'balanced' view. Bizarre. Vile. Goes hand in hand with using propaganda memes and pushing Hamas talking points. You don't seem to know a whole lot about the content of past discussions regarding the two-state solution, or your wouldn't come up with such inane 'plans', as you did. Almost all of the talk regarding the two-state solution references these past discussions. Somehow, you feel that these could be ignored, and that the whole thing should be done from scratch, based on your uninformed 'opinions'. Nobody is seriously talking about a two-state solution materializing right now, or even right after the war. This will not happen. The talk is about how to renew the peace process, how to make it viable. There's virtually no serious view that advises sorting the two-state solution first, then deal with the Gaza situation - which is basically what you're on about. What this showcases, again, is your lack of interest in the people involved. You don't mind them suffering some more. In that too, not so different from Hamas leadership. You have just demonstrated, again, that you do not grasp details and facts involved. Also, if you follow your own posts and interactions, you do not actually manage to discuss much with anyone - most of your exchanges get stuck real quick in that quagmire of you insisting on your 'opinion' being equal to facts, and your made up definitions meaning something in reality.

Pretty messy garage, but nice car.

But liked by dictators, real and wannabes...

@billd766 You can obviously access Wikipedia. So it's not unreasonable to assume you can look up how Hamas leadership operates. It's not about a single guy. It's not 'who-runs-it-this-week'. A whole lot more to it. Hamas's conditions are a non-starter. And Israel's outright rejection was expected. These things follow certain forms. It's always like that. Nothing new or surprising about how this goes.

From the above: This should be interesting. Let's see what happens.

@Brickleberry Again. Channel 4 claimed it was the same report. The actual content of the report was not divulged by channel 4. The report was not made public, so all you got to go on is Channel 4's claim. I'd expect someone who pretends to be a legal expert to get this the first time. It's really not complicated. Channel 4 could publish the contents of the report, make the full document available to the public. Not aware that they did so. And no, not necessarily lying - it would not be the first time a news outlet published an incorrect story, or one relying on partial/misunderstood details and so on. Happened quite a few times with regard to this war alone. If you're having trouble with this, think back about previous times on these 'discussions' you had to backtrack, admit you were wrong and so on. So no, I'm not calling them 'liars', I'm saying it doesn't add up - and that at this stage it's not 'proof'. Again, I find it astonishing that you either don't get it or pretend not to. The Police, the NHS and so on are not international UN bodies, and their funding is through approved state budgets, not donations. It's only same same if one tries to lamely deflect. There is no obligation to donate, or to continue to do so. It's up to the governments of the donor countries. Funding of such things as a police and a national health service is mandated by law. Also, you've tried this nonsense before - maybe come up with some new stuff? According to me, you are not a legal expert. The governments of countries in question do not seem concerned about the 'legal' angle you raised. I guess that they get advice from actual legal experts. You saying it's an issue doesn't make it so, given your obvious bias and vehemence, you're bound to say pretty much anything that will 'support' your 'cause'. Your position regarding Israel, as expressed in a previous post (and others) was, basically, that them dastardly Zionists tricked Western Governments (may want to check who voted how...) into proclaiming it a state (never mind that the same included a Palestinian State), along with wild allegations about them 'supporting' the Nakba etc. So get a clue and make up your mind. And you go on with them blanket statements - 'the far right wing has completely taken over': Not true. - 'indoctrinated....blah blah blah': Not true. Israel is not a Pariah state, other than in your imagination and wishful thinking. It is not a controversial view, it's a nonsense, propaganda one. Did your government sever ties with Israel? Applied sanctions? Or does it support the findings of the UNRWA report? Maybe have economic and security ties with Israel? No? Or maybe you're gonna try some lame 'the government does not represent bit'? You've tried that too - but coming on the heels of your previous comment regarding Israel it would seem rather silly.... Any other deflections and nonsense on offer?