Morch

The Hamas would have a better 'case' had they released the civilian hostages, and kept the IDF soldiers (maybe releasing the female soldiers as well). Same goes for the murders, rapes and all the rest. Had it just been a military style incursion, it would have worked out better for them.

Seriously doubt that man could do much if the lion decided to leap at something or someone. Would probably be towed along. Or break his arm. Some serious muscle on this animal, and it's not even an adult.

Come again? The tunnels just...appeared out of nowhere? They weren't built? How does this work, exactly?

It was discussed, linked and argued about at the time. Also during the preparations to the ICJ hearing. There's just so many times things need to be rehashed over and over again. Considering you're chose not to address my previous comment, regarding that false 'thousands of children and women' held, I don't feel like bothering. What's the point of presenting you with facts if you're going to ignore and twist them anyway?

The IDF condemned these instances, and several investigations were launched. In several cases, soldiers and commanders were disciplined, removed from position etc. Regardless, this does not go toward this being part of IDF training.

I have no described Palestinians as 'Arab citizens of Israel'. I said that I have engaged with both groups. I'm not getting into the issues the latter group got with how to label itself. I've differentiated between how I see Israel's actions in them areas (not specifically with regard to the current war, but generally). I do not think that I have said anything about 'tensions' either way - not sure what you're on about. Pre-war, Israelis were forbidden from entering the Gaza Strip, barring very specific cases and being permitted to do so. Entry of other nationalities into the Gaza Strip was restricted as well (on the Egyptian side too), but less so. The West Bank is different in that it is more accessible, less restrictions etc. There were also tens of thousands (more, counting the illegal ones) Palestinians working in Israel (from both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) - which implies more interaction opportunities. The situation in the West Bank is volatile, but as of now, still under control. Not in the PA's interest for another Intifada to break out either. As for you silly dig, IAF actually stands for Israeli Air Force.

Whether you authored it or not (you didn't), it's waffle. Doesn't go toward answering the question or explaining how things would be achieved. Sides are not even communicating directly and so on.

The IDF does not train recruits to hate the Palestinians. It is not an integral part of the training program. Granted, soldiers may either have been brought up that way, or pick it up during service (especially in the West Bank). But it's not a built in feature as is the case with Hamas. For one thing, the IDF is not focused solely on the Palestinians. It's not like they are the only adversary out there. Different for Hamas (unless one counts the domestic struggles with the PA).

I think there are enough issues with the Israeli-Palestinian situation, so that piling the South Africa example on top just muddies the waters. It's not even remotely same same, anyway. As for leadership - there's that. Posted often enough about ongoing leadership crisis on both sides. This is not, however, something which much can be done about. Can't force leaders from the outside, hard enough even to support them without getting the opposite effect. In theory, what you say is correct. In practice? Very little on offer regarding how it could be brought about, or even get on track.

It's basically 18. Some get permits for early recruitment, but it's not standard or widespread.

The 7/10 attack was carried out within Israel's borders. As for the rest of your waffle - no one expected Israel not to retaliate. Get a grip. Maybe you think they should have stopped and the border and say 'oh well', but that's just you.

@ozimoron That would be you using a very contrived historical narrative. The Palestinians (and/or their Arab sponsors) declined statehood and independence on 1947. For the next 20 years, Palestinians were alright being ruled by Jordan and Egypt. Following that, decades of rejectionism (the infamous 'three no's'), again denying the two-state thing. So when you say 'currently' - what do you mean, exactly? Also, I would venture that not all the Palestinians object to Israel's existence. Some do, some don't. You making blanket statements on their behalf is ridiculous, especially seeing how clueless you are regarding basic facts. I have no idea what 'Israel pulled the plug with the settlements' would even mean. The settlements started at a time when the Palestinians were still in the rejectionist phase. They were in place when the Oslo Accords were signed. So what exactly you meant by that? Also what does 'the borders they are left with' refer to? Basically, the two-state solution is about the 1967 lines, with corrections. You declaring that the Palestinians do not want that would be (a) going against some of the Palestinian views and, (b) meaningless without explaining what is the alternative. As usual, you do you - big statements, weak on facts and detail, a whole lot of misleading comments, and very little by way of reason. Coherence is simply not your thing.

Forum noise, like the OP, does sometimes.

What does it have to do with what I posted? Diplomacy will make the hatred go away? Do tell how.

How will a one-state solution solve things, given the existing levels of hatred? How will it even be possible to setup and maintain?

You ask for a whole lot of details, and given the interaction, no sure I feel comfortable, want to or have reason to accommodate you. Yes, I have engaged with Palestinians (and Arab citizens of Israel). Conversations often turn political, as they do down there. It's a reprieve when they do not, actually. I was more interested in extremists and nutters back when, much less so nowadays. So guess most of the people I retain contact with could be defined as middle of the road or pro-peace. That said, the context is not the American or European one - so apart from dreamers, most people seem to have a rather realistic, maybe pessimistic, take on things, regardless of what they actually support. It would be impossible to encapsulate all the views heard in a post. It also depends on when things were said, circumstances, and so on. Things change, views change. As for you being 'leery' - tell it to someone who cares. I've no idea what 'handlers' you're on about. You seem not to have a whole lot of clue how things are or what's going on. Do you think you get a 'handler' at the entrance to every Arab village in Israel? When you go to Nazareth? East Jerusalem? Too funny. Even in the West Bank it doesn't work this way. Gaza Strip is different - and indeed haven't been there for a long while, obviously - just talk or keep in touch with people online etc. (yeah, even during this war, when possible). My general view, as posted more than once on these topics is that what Israel does in the West Bank is mostly wrong, but not so when it comes to the Gaza Strip. Obviously, it would be in Israel's (and the Palestinians') best interest to reach some peace agreement, preferably based on a two-state solution. But that's neither here nor there, given reality, positions and political landscape on both sides. You express your opinions. That's clear enough. But your opinion on 'what the Palestinian perspective must be' ? That's nonsense. Same way you make assumptions about me, my views, my experience. It's meaningless without having an actual clue. It's not that far off from them youngsters shouting 'river-to-the-sea' without knowing what it's about. And no, you most obviously do not have a clear grasp of either sides' political, social and whatever facets. That is made very evident by your weirdo use of bogus terminology. Same goes for your grasp of political agendas and leaderships. Things are way more nuanced and complex than your rendering of it. I'll suggest you stop making silly suggestions. I occasionally watch CNN, but if that's your main/only source of reference, then it says something about the level of knowledge you bring to the discussion. As for CNN expressing similar 'opinions' to your own - I think that's more like la la land territory, on your part. And if there's one thing I'm sure of - is that you will NOT remember what I posted above, but misrepresent it. That's my past experience with you from previous topics.

UNRWA denied various allegations along these lines for years. Israel is not a UN body.

Yawn. Other than in fantasies, a one-state is a non-starter. Same goes for the 1948 lines. It's all very well to hold fringe positions, it's another matter to make them popular, reasonable or doable. I'm not really sure what point you were trying to make.

Yawn... And best regards to the Rabbit.

Opposite experience here. The larger branch upgraded itself, new stuff showing up more regularly, better choice of fruit, veg, alcohol. Staff better behaved as well. But the main difference is the smaller branch, which completely transformed from a useless no-point-to-stop-there place to a decent option in between major shopping trips. Same staff, but also noticeably better service. To be clear, neither is great. Just better than before. In comparison, the two Big C branches went downhill, we hardly ever go there anymore.

Amusing. You cite position he aired (and out of context) years ago - disregarding where he's at now, politically and ideologically. As for his 'apology' - it was not well received among the readership, especially as true to form he was quick to get back into bashing the left (that is, the left that ain't as extreme as himself), the center and pretty much anyone but Netanyahu. Again, idolizing people is dodgy. The man got a side job on the right-wing channel as a panel member, where his main function is being a useful idiot.

Levy, for years now, is not a supporter of the two-state solution. It would be well if people would bother knowing who their instant idols are, and what they are about.

How does Hamas feel about that?

They conducted the investigation and report after they couldn't dodge things anymore. For years they denied any knowledge of any such things, any involvement of personnel and so on.

You're assuming a whole lot. Guess that it's just a step away from it becoming your 'opinion', and then 'fact'. I have been to all three areas mentioned. I have command of both languages (getting rusty with years, sure). To follow your 'reasoning', anyone who has first hand experience with the regions is 'biased' and it would be much better to listen to the half-cooked 'opinions' of such as yourself, which are based on...reports from others who are in the region? Did you actually think this through? You do not present things from the perspective of the Palestinians. How could you? Do you know any? Do you even understand their various social, political divides and groupings? You can't even get their official political agendas straight.