32 minutes ago, bannork said:

 

 

Haunting pictures show parents running with kids as Israel launches Gaza assault

 

 

 

    Don't start wars .

Don't attack another Country and then complain when they fire back .

They wanted a war, they have got a war 

 

3 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

 

Talking of disgusting, here is ex-Reform MP (and hero to some on this forum who want him to become PM) Rupert Lowe.

What an absolute scum bag. His Twitter feed is just a long list of hate.

I am not British, and I don't know who he is  

7 minutes ago, ericthai said:

Did you forget that Palestine has a boarder with Egypt, so why only blame Israel for the lack of supplies entering Palestine?

 

 

Israel's military has taken control of the strategically important buffer zone along the Gaza-Egypt border known as the Philadelphi Corridor, meaning it now controls Gaza's entire land border.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1994g22ve9o

1 minute ago, still kicking said:

I am not British, and I don't know who he is  

Lucky you.

3 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Lucky you.

But most of my friends are British 

3 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

 

Talking of disgusting, here is ex-Reform MP (and hero to some on this forum who want him to become PM) Rupert Lowe.

What an absolute scum bag. His Twitter feed is just a long list of hate.

Look it up on x.com and, thankfully, the comments universally slate him - there is hope yet. I would love to post some of the comments but they would get me banned, worth seeking out though.
 

 

This is one of those 'situations' where any comment or opinion that is not 100% supportive no matter how no matter how commonsensical or realistic, is immediately drowned out by and kneecapped by emotion.

 

As abhorrent as his comments may seem - especially given they concern children in the midst of a highly emotive and deeply politicised conflict - I don’t think he is entirely wrong. Experts across the Middle East have long warned that such measures, without a firm framework, could easily become the “thin end of the wedge”...

 

If the UK were strategic, it could negotiate directly with Israel to provide urgent medical assistance for the 30–50 Gazan children in need, and then repatriate them safely back to Gaza. This approach would address immediate humanitarian concerns without creating long-term complications.

 

The reality is clear: the UK is unlikely to repatriate Palestinian children permanently to Gaza. If a pathway were opened here, we could quickly face a significant influx at a time when the country is already grappling with an immigration crisis.

 

Given this, I wonder why a solution along these lines - targeted, practical, and cooperative - has not been attempted as a first step. It seems both humane and strategically sound, yet it remains overlooked.

10 minutes ago, still kicking said:

But most of my friends are British 

Lucky you. 🙂

9 minutes ago, bannork said:

19 minutes ago, ericthai said:

Did you forget that Palestine has a boarder with Egypt, so why only blame Israel for the lack of supplies entering Palestine?

 

 

Israel's military has taken control of the strategically important buffer zone along the Gaza-Egypt border known as the Philadelphi Corridor, meaning it now controls Gaza's entire land border.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1994g22ve9o

 

The Philadelphi Corridor is a narrow strip of land along the Gaza–Egypt border, about 14 km long and 100–200 meters wide. It was set up under the 1979 Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty and later security arrangements. Its main purpose has always been to stop the smuggling of weapons and militants from Egypt into Gaza. Importantly, it has never been a border crossing for civilians.

Following Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza in 2005, the corridor's control was transferred to Egypt, with the Palestinian Authority overseeing the Rafah Border Crossing. However, after Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, the situation became more complex and despite efforts to curb smuggling, the corridor has remained a critical point of contention, with Israel reasserting control over parts of it, citing security concerns related to Hamas's access to arms.

 

Meanwhile, the Rafah Crossing is the only official route out of Gaza into Egypt. It’s controlled by Egypt, with Hamas oversight inside Gaza, not Israel. It’s used for people and some goods under very limited circumstances - medical emergencies, students, humanitarian cases. It remains the primary legal exit for Palestinians, but it’s far from open or unrestricted.

 

So, that begs the question: why aren’t more Palestinians allowed refugee status or long-term residence in Egypt?

 

The reasons are fairly clear: Egypt worries that Hamas or other militant groups could exploit permanent Palestinian settlement in Sinai.

 

 

 

 

In short, the Philadelphi Corridor is security, the Rafah Crossing is legal passage, and the reason Egypt doesn’t just take in more refugees is for its own security.

1 minute ago, josephbloggs said:

Lucky you. 🙂

I was born in Germany, but I never had a German friend; all my friends are from different countries, and I have been married to a Thai for over 20 years. I have been in OZ for about 40 years and a few years in LOS.

1 hour ago, Chris.C said:

Do you think they should have not resisted Occupation, total control of utilities, borders, airspace by Israel?

I don't think you understand how evil Israel have been in the last decades.

Are you supporting Netanyahu?

You must want a greater Israel with no Palestine state, or Palestinians if that's the case.

 

Occupation? Israel had no presence in Gaza after 2005 until Gaza attacked Israel in October 2023.

Israel never had control of Gaza utilities.It was Hamas managed. The power generation problems until 2023 were Has caused. In some cases because of disputes with Egypt and the Palestinian Authority. It was Hamas rockets that took down power lines from Israel.

The airspace is comntrolled for obvious reasons. Don't expect Israel to  enable hostile state have the capacity to launch aerial aattacks against israel, a country Hamas is sworn to destroy.

 

Is this the best  AI generated hate propaganda you can cut and paste?

 

9 hours ago, Mavideol said:

it appears you may not have any relatives and/or family members that were hurt by such actions (war crimes), maybe you should have had and quite sure your opinion would be a different one

My family lived under Japanese occupation.  They welcomed the limited allied bombings. They were fine with the blockade too because it impeded Japanese actions. 

11 hours ago, bannork said:

No one is defending Hamas. As you say they have no regard for their own people's lives. 

But that doesn't excuse Israel's carpet bombing or deliberate policy of starvation and withheld medical supplies.

 

who is carpet bombing? The only entity that launches multiple barrages have been Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran. Israel does not use the  rockets that are needed for a multiple rocket attack. The IAF does not have aircraft that can undertake  "carpet bombing".

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

Just in case you have forgotten this thread is titled ‘It doesn’t matter now if they are children’.

 

So yes, this thread IS about children, specifically about Palestinian children, no matter how you wish to twist, deny or change the subject of the thread.

No. It is an excuse to  post hateful  commentary about Israel.  Bannork is relying on a recording that is taken out of context, and edited to present his constant message of "Israel bad".  You have joined in because you won't miss out on an opportunity to criticize Israel. I do wish you would volunteer your time and money to go to Gaza or the PLA territories to care for these people you champion.

2 hours ago, bannork said:

Regarding your question, I would say proclaiming that God, whoever he is, gave them the land a long, long time ago.

And GOD didn't give the Palestinians any common sense. 

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

So, that begs the question: why aren’t more Palestinians allowed refugee status or long-term residence in Egypt?

Wherever they go, they bring strife to the local government. 

1 hour ago, bannork said:

Israel's military has taken control of the strategically important buffer zone along the Gaza-Egypt border known as the Philadelphi Corridor, meaning it now controls Gaza's entire land border.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1994g22ve9o

This happened on May 29, 2024.   What event caused this to happen?   Was it something to do with an attack on Israel? 

4 hours ago, Chris.C said:

Move them to the USA, it's the only country that supports their ethnic cleansing.

 

Please send them to live with you.  

1 minute ago, TedG said:

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

So, that begs the question: why aren’t more Palestinians allowed refugee status or long-term residence in Egypt?

Wherever they go, they bring strife to the local government. 

 

Yes... I simply 'nudged that door ajar'...  

 

Palestinians, who arrived in Lebanon in large numbers after 1948 and again in 1967, quickly established armed factions that became deeply enmeshed in Lebanese politics. Their presence exacerbated existing sectarian tensions and contributed significantly to the outbreak and prolongation of the Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990). While they were not the sole cause of the conflict, Palestinian militancy and the PLO’s semi-autonomous operations created profound instability, particularly in the south and in urban refugee camps, and challenged the authority of the Lebanese state.

 

A similar pattern occurred in Jordan, where the influx of Palestinian refugees after 1948 and 1967 eventually led to the Black September conflict of 1970–71. Armed Palestinian groups openly challenged King Hussein’s authority, prompting a brutal crackdown, the deaths of thousands, and the expulsion of many militants to Lebanon. Unlike in Lebanon, however, Jordan eventually integrated most Palestinians, granting citizenship and allowing them to participate in society, though only after forcefully reasserting state control over armed factions.

 

These examples underscore a recurring reality: in both Lebanon and Jordan, the presence of armed Palestinian factions has historically been a source of major political, social, and security crises for their host countries. While Palestinian refugees have often been victims themselves, their militancy and lack of integration have repeatedly destabilised the states in which they sought refuge.

 

 

I often wonder how many pro-Palestinian advocates are truly aware of this history.

 

If we argue that Palestinians are simply fighting for their “home” i.e. the "Free Palestine" movement... then what is the practical solution? Would they insist on a single state that effectively eradicates Israel, or would they accept a two-state solution? Many in the West seem naive if they believe Palestine can be “free” under any arrangement other than Israeli oversight with Hamas, and other militant groups, removed.

 

History demonstrates the risks of leaving armed factions unchecked: as Jordan showed during Black September, only decisive military action was able to neutralise the militants threatening both the state and ordinary Palestinians. It is precisely these armed groups that place innocent Palestinian civilians in such grave danger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The Philadelphi Corridor is a narrow strip of land along the Gaza–Egypt border, about 14 km long and 100–200 meters wide. It was set up under the 1979 Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty and later security arrangements. Its main purpose has always been to stop the smuggling of weapons and militants from Egypt into Gaza. Importantly, it has never been a border crossing for civilians.

Following Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza in 2005, the corridor's control was transferred to Egypt, with the Palestinian Authority overseeing the Rafah Border Crossing. However, after Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, the situation became more complex and despite efforts to curb smuggling, the corridor has remained a critical point of contention, with Israel reasserting control over parts of it, citing security concerns related to Hamas's access to arms.

 

Meanwhile, the Rafah Crossing is the only official route out of Gaza into Egypt. It’s controlled by Egypt, with Hamas oversight inside Gaza, not Israel. It’s used for people and some goods under very limited circumstances - medical emergencies, students, humanitarian cases. It remains the primary legal exit for Palestinians, but it’s far from open or unrestricted.

 

So, that begs the question: why aren’t more Palestinians allowed refugee status or long-term residence in Egypt?

 

The reasons are fairly clear: Egypt worries that Hamas or other militant groups could exploit permanent Palestinian settlement in Sinai.

 

 

 

 

In short, the Philadelphi Corridor is security, the Rafah Crossing is legal passage, and the reason Egypt doesn’t just take in more refugees is for its own security.

True, the Egyptian authorities fear if Hamas settles in Egypt they can use it as a base to attack Israel.

Another reason is if the Egyptians let the Gazan people in , then the Israelis certainly won't let them back into Gaza. 

The Egyptians would be complicit in the expulsion of the Palestinians from Gaza.

24 minutes ago, bannork said:

True, the Egyptian authorities fear if Hamas settles in Egypt they can use it as a base to attack Israel.

Another reason is if the Egyptians let the Gazan people in , then the Israelis certainly won't let them back into Gaza. 

The Egyptians would be complicit in the expulsion of the Palestinians from Gaza.

 

Israel has no control over the Rafah Crossing. The restrictions on Palestinians leaving or re-entering Gaza through that gateway are set by Egypt and, on the Gaza side, Hamas.

 

As you rightly point out: Egypt’s reluctance to open the crossing fully is not arbitrary. Cairo views Hamas as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a movement it has long considered a direct threat to its own regime.

 

Allowing large numbers of Gazans into Sinai risks importing Hamas fighters and networks, potentially turning Egyptian territory into a new staging ground for attacks on Israel or even destabilising Egypt itself, and we have seen what has occurred in both Lebanon and Jordan.

 

Additionally, the fear is not unfounded. The Sinai Peninsula has already been plagued by jihadist insurgencies, some with suspected links to Gaza smuggling tunnels. Egypt has spent years trying to stamp out militancy there, at great cost. Opening Rafah without restrictions would risk inflaming a volatile region on its own doorstep.

 

History also weighs heavily. Egypt fought four wars with Israel - in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973.... and the memory of the Six-Day War of 1967, when Israel decisively defeated Egypt (and its allies) in less than a week, still lingers.

 

Cairo has no appetite for being dragged into another conflict with Israel, directly or indirectly, especially on behalf of Hamas.

 

Its strategy since the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty has been clear: keep the peace, avoid entanglement, and secure its own borders first.

 

Thus...  while many in the West simplistically ask why Palestinians cannot just cross into Egypt, the reality is that Egypt has powerful strategic, security, and political reasons to keep Rafah tightly controlled. It does not want Gaza’s problems becoming Egypt’s problems - and certainly not at the cost of reigniting a war with Israel... This stance is held by all of 'Palestines' neighbours... 

 

So the question lingers: if Egypt does not want Gaza’s Palestinians, and Jordan, Lebanon, and other Arab states are equally reluctant, then who does? No Arab state is volunteering to absorb them permanently. Lebanon has kept Palestinians in refugee camps for decades without granting full rights. Jordan, though it absorbed many, violently crushed Palestinian militancy in Black September (1970–71). The reality is stark: no one else wants them.

 

 

That raises a difficult, even uncomfortable question: if their supposed “home” is so widely rejected by their neighbours, is it really their home at all?

 

The debate, of course, is highly emotive and steeped in history. Advocates speak of Palestine as an eternal homeland, yet it is worth noting that the word “Palestine” does not appear in the Qur’an. By contrast, The name "Israel" (إسرائيل) does appear repeatedly in the Qur’an - as the name of Prophet Jacob and his descendants, the Children of Israel.

The land of Israel - its people, its prophets, Jerusalem itself - is also referenced repeatedly in Jewish scripture and appears in the Bible as the land of the Israelites, long before the term “Palestine” was ever used.

 

Historically, the earliest mentions are of Israel, Judea, and the Jewish kingdoms, centuries before the Roman Empire renamed the region “Syria Palaestina” in the 2nd century AD, in an attempt to erase Jewish identity after the Bar Kokhba revolt.

 

To be clear, today’s conflict is not a straightforward religious war - it is primarily a turf war, one of land and sovereignty. Yet the historical record matters, because it underlines that both peoples have lived on this strip of land for millennia, but the Jewish connection is traceable far earlier in recorded history than the concept of “Palestine” itself.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

That raises a difficult, even uncomfortable question: if their supposed “home” is so widely rejected by their neighbours, is it really their home at all?

Which neighbours do not support a Palestinian state?

 

Anyway, a people’s home is not determined by whether neighboring states approve of it.

 

How many of Israel's neighbours reflect it as a state?

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Yes... I simply 'nudged that door ajar'...  

 

Palestinians, who arrived in Lebanon in large numbers after 1948 and again in 1967, quickly established armed factions that became deeply enmeshed in Lebanese politics. Their presence exacerbated existing sectarian tensions and contributed significantly to the outbreak and prolongation of the Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990). While they were not the sole cause of the conflict, Palestinian militancy and the PLO’s semi-autonomous operations created profound instability, particularly in the south and in urban refugee camps, and challenged the authority of the Lebanese state.

 

A similar pattern occurred in Jordan, where the influx of Palestinian refugees after 1948 and 1967 eventually led to the Black September conflict of 1970–71. Armed Palestinian groups openly challenged King Hussein’s authority, prompting a brutal crackdown, the deaths of thousands, and the expulsion of many militants to Lebanon. Unlike in Lebanon, however, Jordan eventually integrated most Palestinians, granting citizenship and allowing them to participate in society, though only after forcefully reasserting state control over armed factions.

 

These examples underscore a recurring reality: in both Lebanon and Jordan, the presence of armed Palestinian factions has historically been a source of major political, social, and security crises for their host countries. While Palestinian refugees have often been victims themselves, their militancy and lack of integration have repeatedly destabilised the states in which they sought refuge.

 

 

I often wonder how many pro-Palestinian advocates are truly aware of this history.

 

If we argue that Palestinians are simply fighting for their “home” i.e. the "Free Palestine" movement... then what is the practical solution? Would they insist on a single state that effectively eradicates Israel, or would they accept a two-state solution? Many in the West seem naive if they believe Palestine can be “free” under any arrangement other than Israeli oversight with Hamas, and other militant groups, removed.

 

History demonstrates the risks of leaving armed factions unchecked: as Jordan showed during Black September, only decisive military action was able to neutralise the militants threatening both the state and ordinary Palestinians. It is precisely these armed groups that place innocent Palestinian civilians in such grave danger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where are you getting this information?

 

In Lebanon, sectarian tensions and the fragile confessional system pre-dated the arrival of Palestinians. The Lebanese Civil War had multiple drivers: Maronite–Muslim divides, Cold War dynamics, Syrian intervention, and later Israeli invasion. To pin the war chiefly on Palestinians oversimplifies and distorts history.

 

In Jordan, the monarchy already faced internal opposition and identity struggles between East Bank Jordanians and the much larger Palestinian population. Black September was as much about King Hussein consolidating authority as it was about armed factions.

 

Palestinians in both Lebanon and Jordan were denied basic rights, often restricted from work, property ownership, or integration. In Lebanon especially, refugees were confined to camps under harsh conditions. It is unrealistic to expect a stateless, disenfranchised population to remain politically passive under those conditions – particularly while their homeland remained occupied.

 

Yes, armed factions created instability. But to present this as uniquely Palestinian ignores the fact that militancy has been a common response among oppressed peoples throughout history. Resistance movements in Ireland, Algeria, South Africa, and elsewhere were once branded as “destabilizing terrorists,” only later to be recognized as political actors. Singling out Palestinians as inherently destabilizing shifts blame away from the systemic denial of their rights.

 

Suggesting that Palestinians must either “eradicate Israel” or live under “Israeli oversight” is a false dichotomy. The international consensus for decades has been a two-state solution – Israel alongside a sovereign Palestine. Palestinians themselves have repeatedly accepted this framework (e.g., PLO recognition of Israel in 1993). It is Israeli settlement expansion and political obstruction that have eroded its viability, not simply Palestinian intransigence.

 

Highlighting Palestinian militancy without equal emphasis on Israeli invasions, massacres (Sabra and Shatila, 1982), and systematic denial of Palestinian self-determination creates a one-sided picture. It risks turning refugee survival strategies into proof of unworthiness, while ignoring the far greater asymmetry of power that forced them into exile in the first place.

 

Yes, Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan were involved in armed conflict. But that was a symptom, not the cause, of their dispossession and statelessness. To use this history as an argument against Palestinian nationhood is like blaming the refugee for the fire that drove them from their home, while ignoring the arsonist who lit it.

 

6 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

No. It is an excuse to  post hateful  commentary about Israel.  Bannork is relying on a recording that is taken out of context, and edited to present his constant message of "Israel bad".  You have joined in because you won't miss out on an opportunity to criticize Israel. I do wish you would volunteer your time and money to go to Gaza or the PLA territories to care for these people you champion.

Why are you so sensitive to people criticizing Israel?

 

Turn on the news, you'll see the entire world is,  obvious reasons.

 

 

6 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Occupation? Israel had no presence in Gaza after 2005 until Gaza attacked Israel in October 2023.

Israel never had control of Gaza utilities.It was Hamas managed. The power generation problems until 2023 were Has caused. In some cases because of disputes with Egypt and the Palestinian Authority. It was Hamas rockets that took down power lines from Israel.

The airspace is comntrolled for obvious reasons. Don't expect Israel to  enable hostile state have the capacity to launch aerial aattacks against israel, a country Hamas is sworn to destroy.

 

Is this the best  AI generated hate propaganda you can cut and paste?

 

That was not AI generated.

 

This is, 

1. Occupation is about control, not troop presence.
   Under international law, occupation does not require a permanent ground presence. What matters is effective control. Even after 2005, Israel has retained control over Gaza’s:

   • Borders (land, sea, and air)

   • Movement of goods and people

   • Population registry (who counts as a resident of Gaza)

   • Imports and exports, including fuel, building materials, and medical supplies

   Because of this, the UN, International Committee of the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International all recognize Gaza as still being under Israeli occupation.

2. Utilities and dependence.

   • Gaza’s electricity grid has always been tied to Israel. Roughly half of Gaza’s electricity has consistently come directly from Israel, with the rest from Gaza’s small power plant and limited Egyptian supply. Israel has repeatedly cut or restricted fuel and electricity as political pressure.

   • Israel also controls Gaza’s water supply through shared aquifers and pumping stations.

   • Hamas mismanagement has contributed to shortages, but the bigger issue is Israel’s blockade and restrictions on infrastructure repairs, spare parts, and fuel imports.

3. “Airspace control” isn’t neutral.
   Israel’s control of Gaza’s airspace and coastline is not simply defensive. It means Gazans cannot operate an airport, a seaport, or free fishing waters. This prevents normal economic activity, development, and independent governance. The result is systemic dependency — one of the key indicators of occupation.

4. The blockade itself.
   Since 2007, Israel (with Egyptian cooperation at Rafah) has imposed a blockade on Gaza. The UN has repeatedly called this “collective punishment,” which is illegal under international law. Blocking the free movement of civilians, goods, and humanitarian aid directly undermines claims that Gaza is “independent.”

5. October 2023 is not the starting point.
   The narrative that “Israel left Gaza, and Hamas attacked out of nowhere” ignores 16 years of blockade, periodic bombardments (2008–09, 2012, 2014, 2021), and humanitarian collapse. This context doesn’t justify atrocities against civilians — but it does explain why the international community still regards Gaza as occupied and why the claim of “Israel had no presence” is misleading.

---

Closing Line

Israel may not station troops permanently inside Gaza, but when one side controls the borders, airspace, imports, exports, electricity, water, fishing, and movement of people, that is not independence — it is occupation by another name.

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, ericthai said:

Did you forget that Palestine has a boarder with Egypt, so why only blame Israel for the lack of supplies entering Palestine?

 

 

Because the border with Egypt is locked on the Israeli side. There are hundreds and possibly thousands of trucks loaded with fuel, food, water and medicine unable to enter Gaza because the border gates are shut to them.

I can't find the link at the moment, but I am sure it was on the BBC world news in the last few days .

 

There are however many links on the internet for those people who care.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcm885V9mDE

 

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1036911577414454

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IVwoVSmWO8

 

https://www.tiktok.com/@cnn/video/7540600786699570487

 

Just some of the many links and videos available to view.

 

I ahve no doubt that there will be some posters denying them as fake news and claiming that they are all staged.

 

Rescuing hostages is not that difficult. All it takes is a specialized team flown in and some good intel.

9 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

 

Talking of disgusting, here is ex-Reform MP (and hero to some on this forum who want him to become PM) Rupert Lowe.

What an absolute scum bag. His Twitter feed is just a long list of hate.

Look it up on x.com and, thankfully, the comments universally slate him - there is hope yet. I would love to post some of the comments but they would get me banned, worth seeking out though.
 

 

   Why doesn't your Country take in the Palestinian children ?

Why isn't YOUR Country giving them asylum ?

 

3 minutes ago, Mark1969 said:

Rescuing hostages is not that difficult. All it takes is a specialized team flown in and some good intel.

 

   Hamas kill the hostages when there's a rescue attempt .

They cannot be rescued 

10 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Occupation? Israel had no presence in Gaza after 2005 until Gaza attacked Israel in October 2023.

Israel never had control of Gaza utilities.It was Hamas managed. The power generation problems until 2023 were Has caused. In some cases because of disputes with Egypt and the Palestinian Authority. It was Hamas rockets that took down power lines from Israel.

The airspace is comntrolled for obvious reasons. Don't expect Israel to  enable hostile state have the capacity to launch aerial aattacks against israel, a country Hamas is sworn to destroy.

 

Is this the best  AI generated hate propaganda you can cut and paste?

 

That Is why air corridors have been established world wide, and aircraft carry transpnoders to identify themselves, and also why the aircrew file a flight plan stating where they will be and when. The air, sea and land blockade of Gaza is totally illegal, but is also totally ignored by Israel and its partner in crime, the USA.

20 hours ago, bannork said:

I don't think Israel takes great care to target only Hamas strongholds. They've killed thousands of innocent civilians in their nearly 2 year war.

Still, if they do conduct a ground invasion as they announce, then it should be the end of Hamas in one way.

I expect some of their soldiers would prefer 'martyrdom' to being imprisoned by the Israelis, so they may prefer a shootout and death to surrender.

Other Hamas may try to hide among the civilian population.

And then you have the children and teenagers, growing up with a blazing hatred of Israel 

I don't think you understand what Hamas are really like. Yes many are growing up with a hatred of Israel but why would you think they wouldn't be? It isn't in Hamas's favour to say they started the killing and Israel just retaliated. If Israel stopped all retaliatory actions right now what do you think would happen? Hamas would kill every Jew. So with that in mind you expect that Israel is going to say we are putting down our weapons? Really?