Morch

Maybe educate yourself before jumping in.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neturei_Karta Charming people.

You did not. That you try and dictate what the argument is, thus dismissing them again is simply your brand of posting.

Evaporated? No idea what you're on about. I'm not always very impressed with your displays of faux indignation, or virtue signaling.

Virtue signaling is one way not to address points raised.

I will ask you again, why do you expect me to address your points and questions when you disregard mine?

Not that I haven't addressed this before, of course - but why do you expect your arguments and points to be addressed when you ignore mine?

Guess you didn't bother with the link because it would put things in a different light. Already mentioned here: https://aseannow.com/topic/1308598-israel-is-at-war/page/273/#comment-18477456 And here: https://aseannow.com/topic/1308598-israel-is-at-war/page/273/#comment-18477494

I'm not responsible for the many things you're not aware of.

All of them? Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by some. Others kicked their people out. Most Arab countries having diplomatic relations with Israel are obviously not into Hamas ideology. That still leave some potential backers, sure - but not all. No condemnation is not an endorsement. This is the ME, and there are different ways of doing things, different realities to contend with. Take Jordan, for example. With some 70% of the population being Palestinian, it's quite obvious that having an empowered Hamas would be dangerous for the regime's stability, on the other hand, so would a strong condemnation. A bit of tightrope act, there. Or take Egypt - no love for Muslim Brotherhood or offshoots (as in Hamas), but still need to contend with some public sentiment. Also relations with Hamas ensure Egypt continue to play a major role in regional politics as mediator. Lose that, and Egypt's relevance gets shot. Again, complicated. What Arab regimes do is play it safe - let the public vent against Israel, up to a point. Also serves to divert other criticism from regime itself as bonus. In effect, once things cool down, the situation returns to normal, more or less. Not all Arab media is pro-Hamas (notably Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE). Qatar's support of Hamas is mostly diplomatic, the financial side more nuanced than that (and with Israel's blessing). If it was up to most Arab rulers, Hamas would be gone tomorrow if there weren't any side effects or if they could be seen as not being complicit.

Iran is not an Arab country. But granted, they do support Hamas. Others?

I'm not the one routinely picking petty arguments with you - that's your thing. Whining about 'personal' is a tad disingenuous. Not allegations, just a good take on your posting style. Indeed, you can't say anything. Not beyond the narrow scope of something you Googled, or some notion that you inject to the discussion as fact. Not even when your arguments go against themselves as this one has. You have hardly addressed anything I've posted, but simply deflected until the only thing left was some bogus virtue signaling. You can go on with this free pass thing, and at the same time claim the Palestinians are all for peace. It still doesn't add up. It still doesn't address issues raised in previous posts. Same thing on almost each and every interaction. And not only with me.

What Arab countries do you see as supporting Hamas, and how?

I think you need some tissues or you'll make a mess.

Yeah, got pretty much wall-to-wall condemnation, but still with that stupid grin on his face. Man can't seem to go a couple of weeks without saying something outrageous. An extremist and a clown even by the current governments' low standards.

I'm not interested in your point scoring. I've made a post giving you some pointers as to why I'm not overly impressed by polls presented, and why I do not have blind faith in them the way you seem to. What you offer in response is more of the same, plus some dodging of issues and points raised. I've addressed the same 'questions' you put up now on recent previous comments. As usual, you insist on pretending things weren't already discussed. The Palestinians could have chosen many different ways, many different paths - what it comes down to is that both leadership and people assumed a rather passive stance. You want to claim they had no choice? There's no good reasoning for that unless one allows for things mentioned in my previous post. You're just doing the same old free pass thing. The only way which you could support your view is by allowing some dissonance between their supposed pro-peace stance, and a supposed sense that efforts would be futile. That would rob your argument of whatever little force it had, and ultimately go towards my original claim about not being ready and willing. As for your remarks on oppression - you've read a couple of articles and you think you 'grasp' things? Seriously? You've no idea. Considering you can't discuss anything related beyond what you can pull from polls or a quick Goggle search, I'm not very impressed.

Make up your mind as to what you're pushing and I'll address it. Earlier post you claimed Palestinians were for peace, now you seem to be claiming something more nuanced. In 2005 the Israeli Prime Minister was Sharon. I daresay he was a 'trifle' more reviled and hated by Palestinians, or at the very least as much as Netnayahu was later on. Dully noted you ignored most point raised, and instead went for the 'what if' - but only from Israel's side. No such 'what if' suggested with regard to the Palestinians. naturally. The usual free pass. You can cite as many polls as you like, they are meaningless if one does not consider or is unfamiliar with things beyond figures and tabs.

.....

First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.

Yes, I am. Mostly because I do not rely solely on polls to have an opinion. I'll give you a current example, to illustrate. Abbas, heading the PA, is often cited as the one Israel should be dealing with. Now, let's ignore he's not very popular, on his last legs, and indecisive. We can also disregard, for the purposes of making this point, his bouts of antisemitism. What is more or less a constant for some time now, is his pin lapel. Kinda popular with Palestinian higher up. It shows their flag, and an old key. The key represents the houses they left (or driven out of, whatever) in 1948. Seems like nothing much (and I'm sure you'll have a go at it), but it underscores a (in my experience) rather prevalent sentiment among Palestinians (even ones who didn't own any houses or weren't born yet) that the past is very much alive, and that old claims aren't going anywhere. I can go on, as i did in the proper topic related to this, about how Palestinian (well, Arab) politics, social structures and traditions play their part. But since your reactions to most things you can't pull of the net are dismissive, maybe not much point. My basic view on this is that there's this gap between poll results and how things are, or how people polled actually react to reality. Yet another example, perhaps - all this massive support for peace, and yet not much by way of public pressure on leadership to do anything, no mass protests supporting the actions needed to go ahead, or against forces opposed to peace. Same thing we're seeing in the Gaza Strip with regard to the Hamas. Like it or not, the culture, the traditions and history of the Palestinian people are not easily translated to Western concepts and ideas. There is no peace movement as such on the Palestinians side. And let's go even one more step further - these figures weren't secret, and I'm sure PA leadership had access to them, and proper analysis presented. All that, and they still did not make a decisive move, no breakthrough play, for peace. Maybe they had a different agenda, maybe they had a more in-depth understanding of the relevant political trends, maybe the made a mistake. I don't know for sure. But obviously, they weren't as confident of these figures the way you seem to be.

Thank you. Wasn't aware. A proof we could all learn and better ourselves reading this here topic.

Rev. Jesse Jackson approves.

To be fair, it's not like the Palestinians were ready and willing for a two-state solution, even if Netanyahu was into it.

Netanyhu said, and says, a whole lot of things. He's not really much of an ideologue. More invested in his own political survival. Think about a smarter version of Trump. There's a link in one of the posts above to his whole history of words on this specific point.

I doubt the Hamas is much invested in this, though. If you're looking for a grudge it may have something to do with Thais replacing Palestinians as foreign workers in Israel.

There are quite often comments like that, about how Israel (or the World, or the West, Or the USA, or Arab countries) should give, do, help and so on the Palestinians. There's relatively very little by way of expecting the Palestinians to do anything semi-constructive on their own. I agree Israel's policies (especially in the West Bank, though) aren't helpful, to put it very very mildly. But at the same time, there were other nations and people in history that managed to gain their independence, set up a state, and take charge of their destiny without it being handed on a platter. More on topic, there was a comment on this made on social media by one Jason Marriner, ex Chelsea headhunters, nowadays living in Thailand. Some sort of mangled call to arms. Guess it was more the enemy of my enemy is my friend thing.