Morch

Amnesty needs to make such reports in order to justify its existence. Amnesty is populated by people who often share certain political leanings and views. Amnesty relies on local staff, volunteers, and testimonies to generate it's reports. This doesn't mean all of their reports are biased, flawed or incorrect. But it does mean that some context need to be applied. Same as every source.

That's unfortunate. Thought I was the one.

Is he a 'community insulter', though?

@Neeranam Don't tell me what I know. Calling things 'a massacre' is a choice. You make, I do not. Also, I do not 'have to' anything. Certainly not your meaningless comments about 'reasonable retaliation' or 'ethnic cleansing'. Nowhere in your posts is there a shred of suggestion as to what would be a 'proportionate' or 'reasonable' retaliation. As for 'integrity', doubt you have a clue. I get it that you lump in Hamas terrorists killed in order to inflate the total. Unsurprisingly, that's exactly what Hamas does.

@Neeranam Modern fighting in urban setting against insurgency/terrorists. That what it looks like. That you attribute other elements to this means less than nothing.

The Palestinians would not 'have to' anything. It would not be in Israel's interests to have it's citizens in the Palestinian State's territory. All the more chances for things going pear shaped.

@Neeranam Not quite proportionate in relations to what? As opposed to what?

@Neeranam I do not know that. I know that you claim so. You do not discuss what 'vested interest' is involved, even.

How does this 'standing up for humanity' fit with the Hamas attack on 7/10? Hamas actions since? Hamas knowingly and intentionally placing the people of Gaza in harm's way? Denying them shelter, even? Stealing supplies meant for civilians? Referring to them as 'necessary sacrifices'?

@Neeranam More of your constant nonsense. There was no such denial on my part. If anyone denies something it is you - whenever it comes to Hamas's responsibility and accountability for the attack. Unless you want to claim Hamas was justified in attacking Israelis the way it did....not sure what inane point you had in mind. The Gaza Strip is not completely destroyed. The people are not sent anywhere. And there is no 'annihilation of the Arabs' (whatever you thought that meant). These are stuff you invent in order to make a bogus question/argument.

Trolling? Memory issues? Who cares. Earlier on these topics, you made a claim regarding poll results etc. that you claimed to have seen on a tv report. When you finally bothered to post the link, which was about 25-30 minutes long, there was nothing like you claimed there. Further attempts by you to post other links in support resulted in the same. If you wish to deny that....go right ahead. What you claim to have seen is worthless. My comment was with regard to recent experience with how you post.

Spin it as much as you like, the blockade came about as a result of Hamas agenda and actions.

Hmmm....should he trust your advice?

Israel's problem is that ticking clock. From a military point of view, given enough time, ousting the Hamas, or making a way lesser threat is doable. But as assessments indicated, this could take much longer than either politicians convey in statements, or the USA willing to afford. Also, it depends on what falls under the 'defeat' label, can mean a whole lot of different things. There's a whole lot of talk about 'the day after', but that's usually done in the context of assuming Hamas is defeated, hostage situation resolved one way or another. But what if it doesn't come to that? What if Israel does not get a carte blanche? I'm not sure how such a situation will play out. Even if the USA withdraws support, it will hardly be in some hostile manner. How would the new situation be explained, publicly? How could it be sustained, from a military and political point of view? What of the hostages? There are no clear, or good answers on that. A whole lot of factors involved. Just food for thought now. IMO, under such circumstances, if the current Hamas leadership survives this (literally and politically), and/or even if Hamas maintains power in the Gaza Strip - it's just a question of time before things will flare up again. There will be no 'day after' peace negotiations. Not with the current Hamas leadership involved, at least (and given Hamas needs to be onboard, no serious headway expected anyway). There will be no 'day after' two-state solution, and the international pressure on Israel to go there would be brushed off on these grounds. Years back, last time Israel went into the Gaza Strip, I posted pretty much the same on the forum. Essentially, for things to have a chance of being resolved, it is better for the Palestinian cause that Hamas be defeated.

This is not about the Palestinians surrendering, but about Hamas leadership doing so. Also, it wasn't claimed that such a surrender would lead to a two-state solution or stop the illegal settlement effort. This is and was in the context of the current fighting in the Gaza Strip. Again, your questions make no sense.

Do yo have any clue as to the background, history, facts, politics of what's going on? Do you know any country/region where the people act like a hive mind?

@Neeranam He's the Jordanian Foreign Minister. Not known for soft words when it comes to Israel on a good day, so not surprising. Also, with most of Jordan's population being Palestinians, government and heads of state need to tread carefully. As an aside, while he's Druze, his surname indicates roots to Safed, an old town in northern Israel. Same place the PA's Abbas's family hailed from. Don't know if there's a similar history, but if so, it could certainly paint his views in a certain manner. Regardless, what he says is not true.

@thaibeachlovers Again, more like you fantasizing than bringing anything semi-factual to the discussion. Over the years, Erdogan shifted his positions (on Israel, and other ME countries) many times. In effect, measures such as you wish for were not actually taken, to the best of my recollection. Other than Turkey's own economic interests, countries simply do not usually do this stuff (disrupting maritime traffic, cutting energy supply routs) on a whim.

@thaibeachlovers Again, other than yourself going on about it, are there any claims that Israel and Saudi Arabia will cooperate on a military level as you imply vs. the Houthis?

@thaibeachlovers Other than yourself bringing this up, was there any mention of an invasion of Yemen by Israel? Or is it more a case of you dreaming something up and then treating it as a serious proposition? Having 'the best toys' is no guarantee for proficiency or success. It takes decades of practice, combat experience and a organization mentality to build a top of the line air force. That's why there aren't many of them. Saudi Arabia's is nowhere near the list. To make this clearer - you yourself could be supplied with the best machine out there, best accessories, and the fastest internet connection ever: and It would still have zero effect on the quality of your posts. As far as I understand there is no intention to do more than retaliate, if things come to that. Your fantasies are irrelevant. Was it suggested they will?

@thaibeachlovers Such things happen in wars. This was covered on Israeli media as well. Not that it should be condoned, but in reality, it's a nothing burger. A handy deflection.

@thaibeachlovers ICC proceedings are more likely to find Hamas actions as 'war crimes', and leaders responsible. Their actions are more clear cut when it comes to that, compared with Israel. Granted, if Hamas leaders were tried and sentenced in Israel, than there would be less chances of that happening. There would still be Hamas leadership in Qatar available, though.

Oh, didn't get the that from your original post. If things are this way, and you do not desperately love the lady, or seriously tied (house, no money etc.) then yeah - bail sounds good. Things often don't work out as planned, and if there's no desire or obligation to take on them head on, trying something else is reasonable.

Hamas could stop the fighting tomorrow. We already saw an example for that when hostages releases were on. Same thing. It could also surrender. As much as Hamas fans on here and elsewhere don't like it, it's an option. For some reason, you seem to think that Hamas keeping on the fight is ok (at the cost of civilian Palestinian lives), but not so as far as Israel goes. Not making a whole lot of sense. Moving to another country is another option. The PLO done this more than once (Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia, and now the West Bank). Not aware that Israel is about to establish settlements in the Gaza Strip, or that there were such since Israel's 2005 disengagement from Gaza. As far as I'm aware Israel still takes Hamas men captive when they surrender or apprehended. They aren't being mass executed or anything under such circumstances. As for your 'not asked' comment - Hamas could try taking the initiative on this, of course. And no, not exactly what the 'accused Hamas of saying' - Hamas actually got this in it's Charter. And Hamas doesn't even try to avoid civilian death (on the Israeli and Palestinian side).

Nothing much to do with your the post I commented on. Given the situation in Yemen, generalized comments about 'support' for the country are often unclear. I don't think the missiles launched at Israel were Russian made or supplied. And as said, if they get too much out of line, they'll be pounded. Hard.