Morch

Once again, a late arrival to the topic expects to be spoon fed.

You cannot even bring yourself to call Israelis Israelis, but insist on that nonsense 'Zionist' bit. That's something of a hallmark for haters. Also, you seem to reject the legitimacy of Israel's basic claims - and done so on many comments by now. Israel's claims are not 'based on their holy book' but on the UN resolution sorting this back in 1947. Palestinians have not lived in the area for 'thousands of years' - not in any meaningful way that's relevant to the present. You start off denying that you do not embrace the Palestinian narrative, then go on to reiterate some of its basic tenets.

You are wrong, again. Hamas support ratings were much lower prior to this. Was already discussed. The reason the new support figures make headlines is exactly because they are clear and high.

Bah...I was just reminding myself I need to get a move on booking a hotel room for later this month. Wonder what's the more secure option, as guess similar services aren't very different, and hotel websites, other than larger chains/brands probably not that secure anyway.

Reading compensation issues, I think. Try reading my post again, in context, and maybe go slower this time.

@thaibeachlovers Peace For Our Time, Says Poster.

@thaibeachlovers Let Russia Win, Says Anti-West Poster. As for 'western taxes'...seriously, were you actually taxed for this? Not in some roundabout global economy BS way - I mean directly taxed?

That's your assertion. It will be surely looked into, and I have little doubts that at least some instances of the Israeli attack would indeed be classed as 'war crimes'. Going by past instances, that's almost a given. That doesn't mean all of the Palestinian deaths and the accompanying destruction would be labeled 'war crimes' - my guess (again, based on past instances) is that they will not. Hamas actions are often much more clear cut in terms of such violations.

The previous period of fighting, in north Gaza saw an average casualty rate of X/day. That's with most of the population evacuating. I wonder how the current fighting compares. Considering the areas under attack host much more civilians (original populace + evacuees), casualty figures should be way higher compared to the previous fighting phase, if the Israeli offensive is carried out in exactly the same manner and intensity.

Considering that you, an outsider, cannot bring yourself to refer to Israelis as Israelis, but rely on claptrap 'Zionists', and at the same time denying Israel's rights/claims and so on - what does it imply for those directly involved in the conflict? Your positions on here aren't about compromise, nor are they about acceptance of the other side - they are a full embrace of one side's narrative.

And your messages are mostly biased nonsense, with little relevance to reality. Zionist does not necessarily imply what you claim. Most of Israel's Center-Left political parties are Zionist. None of them advocates what you claim.

Oh yeah....the wisdom of using such weapons on one's doorstep....maybe rethink that piece of strategic genius?

That is your opinion, not fact. That you embrace the Palestinian narrative doesn't make it true.

That makes your original comment incorrect, and your current one a deflection. But you already knew that....

I don't know - it's something you claim. Not something you provide proof for. By your 'reasoning' Hamas ranks should have been swelling by now, even prior to the current war. The effect you mention is either constant, as in so long as things go on there's a steady stream of volunteers to draw on, with occasional 'peaks' after such wars. It doesn't change the overall situation much. As for your garbage comment - the Fatah/PLO would be the obvious example. But then you don't seem to know much about things. Strong opinion, yeah - you do have those.

@thaibeachlovers At the same time, ongoing violent actions and a rejectionist stance by the Palestinians led to their predicament being what it is. The only times the Palestinians managed to (somewhat) better their situation is when they opted for non-violence, negotiations and dropping the rejectionist attitude. The same elements that you describe - fear of attack, endless brutalization of youth and so on, applies tenfold to the Palestinians. Somehow you do not seem too concerned about that. As for 'legal owners of the land' etc. - yeah, I think it's already agreed you issue is with Israel's very existence, thanks for making it clear again.

@thaibeachlovers What your 'historical' analysis misses are two things: (a) The elimination of a violent terrorist outfit carries immediate benefits with regard to short/medium-term security. (b) In the long run, resistance movements who survive such a fate tend to change their stance, opting for a more 'political' way.

It seems you're back with your careless usage of facts and applied misinformation. The casualty figures on offer by the Hamas controlled Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip do not differentiate between civilians and combatants. This lumping together fits well with Hamas agenda of inflating casualty reports for propaganda purposes. When the smoke clears they do admit to their own casualties (if claiming lower figures than Israel and the international community assess). It is not clear, for example, whether all them Hamas men killed in Israel following the 7/10 attack are included in the list. The short version - you are wrong.

Amusing. When it fits, you get 'outraged' over the UN statements being effectively meaningless, untimely and so on. When it's demonstrated this applies to the investigation as well, you choose to ignore it.

People act according to the notions of their own time. Similarly, notions used at present to build a 'new' UN would likely seem 'naive and anachronistic' in time. Other than your comment being meaningless, it also implies things which I doubt you could seriously support. Some could equally say that there was nothing 'naive' about the way the UN was structured. And so on and so forth....

How about you watch and see what happens, as apparently you didn't bother doing so the last month. Or you could wait with your pronouncements about what's to come and wait for them to materialize first.

How do you mean 'day-to-day'? The Israeli ground offensive in the Gaza Strip have been going on for weeks now. If you were not aware of this, it means that you have no clue, and no interest beyond airing old school anti-Israeli rhetoric. Considering you are unaware of basic facts, reality and so on - what you are 'sure' of is meaningless.

You can claim whatever out of context stuff you like - it would still be nonsense. The Palestinians (and their Arab sponsors) had quite a lot to do with the shaping of the Palestinian predicament.

And you just had to edit the post replied to, of course.... Anyway - I was not advocating Israel conquering and holding on to anything. You, on the other hand, are cheer-leading the opposite. That difference.

Of course not....he complains about 'the Zionists in Israel' (or other versions of the same nonsense).