At least 11 people were killed after Israeli strikes in Gaza, in violation of the U.S.-brokered cease-fire, the blockaded Palestinian enclave's civil defense said Wednesday.

 

https://www.dailysabah.com/world/mid-east/11-killed-after-israel-strikes-gaza-in-violation-of-cease-fi

re

4 minutes ago, JimCM said:

 

 

At least 11 people were killed after Israeli strikes in Gaza, in violation of the U.S.-brokered cease-fire, the blockaded Palestinian enclave's civil defense said Wednesday.

 

https://www.dailysabah.com/world/mid-east/11-killed-after-israel-strikes-gaza-in-violation-of-cease-fi

re

Be careful, there are a couple of Israeletis on here, they might get upset 

Interesting that a Pro-Paletistine / Anti-Israel Publication based in Turkey has not mentioned anything about Hamas shooting on Israeli troops which is reportedly (reuters) why Israel attacked.

 

 

 

Since the ceasefire came into effect on 10 October 2025, there are credible reports that Israel has violated it repeatedly - perhaps hundreds of times. According to the Gaza Government Media Office, Israeli forces carried out at least 282 distinct violations during the first month alone, including airstrikes, artillery fire, direct shootings, and raids. 

 

Some of those violations reportedly resulted in the deaths of more than 240 Palestinians and injuries to over 600. According to Gaza’s authorities, these breaches included 88 instances of direct gunfire against civilians, 124 bombing attacks, 52 demolitions of civilian buildings, and 12 incursions beyond a so-called “yellow line” — a boundary delineating the redeployment of Israeli forces.

 

On the other hand, Israel argues that many of its actions were responses to Hamas violations. For instance, Israeli officials cite claims that Hamas militants opened fire on their troops, including in areas where the truce was supposed to apply. In one particularly deadly flare-up at the end of October, Israel conducted a surge of airstrikes that, according to Gaza’s health ministry, killed 104 Palestinians - including 46 children.

 

The Israeli military said these strikes targeted “terror infrastructure” and command operatives allegedly linked to Hamas.

 

So, who’s right? The truth likely lies somewhere in between.

While Israel has clearly mounted repeated operations since the truce began, its actions aren’t random: many appear to be justified (from its perspective) on grounds of security, retaliation, or deterring further attacks.

 

 

 

There - without bias....

Welcome to Shuja'iyya, in the north of Gaza. Not so long ago, this was a bustling town of around 100,000 people, proud of a history dating back 850 years.

 

Now, it is a wasteland, a patchwork of dust and misery.

 

Israel does not allow news organisations to report independently from Gaza. Today, it took a group of journalists, including Sky News, into the area of the Strip occupied by Israeli forces.

 

The brief visit was highly controlled and offered no access to Palestinians, or other areas of Gaza. Military censorship laws in Israel mean that military personnel were shown all our material before publication.

 

On the ground in Gaza: A landscape of complete devastation

 

On the ground in Gaza: A landscape of complete devastation© Sky

 

 

'Patchwork of dust and misery': The Yellow Line dividing Gaza - where only skeletons of buildings remain© Sky

Off topic post removed

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Interesting that a Pro-Paletistine / Anti-Israel Publication based in Turkey has not mentioned anything about Hamas shooting on Israeli troops which is reportedly (reuters) why Israel attacked.

 

 

 

Since the ceasefire came into effect on 10 October 2025, there are credible reports that Israel has violated it repeatedly - perhaps hundreds of times. According to the Gaza Government Media Office, Israeli forces carried out at least 282 distinct violations during the first month alone, including airstrikes, artillery fire, direct shootings, and raids. 

 

Some of those violations reportedly resulted in the deaths of more than 240 Palestinians and injuries to over 600. According to Gaza’s authorities, these breaches included 88 instances of direct gunfire against civilians, 124 bombing attacks, 52 demolitions of civilian buildings, and 12 incursions beyond a so-called “yellow line” — a boundary delineating the redeployment of Israeli forces.

 

On the other hand, Israel argues that many of its actions were responses to Hamas violations. For instance, Israeli officials cite claims that Hamas militants opened fire on their troops, including in areas where the truce was supposed to apply. In one particularly deadly flare-up at the end of October, Israel conducted a surge of airstrikes that, according to Gaza’s health ministry, killed 104 Palestinians - including 46 children.

 

The Israeli military said these strikes targeted “terror infrastructure” and command operatives allegedly linked to Hamas.

 

So, who’s right? The truth likely lies somewhere in between.

While Israel has clearly mounted repeated operations since the truce began, its actions aren’t random: many appear to be justified (from its perspective) on grounds of security, retaliation, or deterring further attacks.

 

 

 

There - without bias....

 

As a matter of fact, those 280 Palestinians were killed in their "homeland" Gaza.

 

The question should be, how many Israelis were killed or injured since the ceasefire, that might justify such a death toll especially as once again children had to pay the price.

And if so where those Israelis killed in their own country or were they invaders in another man`s land.

 

If a few of those 20.000 children killed by Israel were not evil and insane terrorists, obviously so smart that they could turn baby formula into TNT, will Israel be held accountable?

 

When we look to the Westbank where Israel is stealing land on a daily base, do we also have to ask, who is right?

 

Counting the death on both sides may not answer the question who is right but it surely answers the question "who is acting more evil?"  Especially when looking at the children`s death toll.

 

30 Israeli children and 20.000 Palestinian children.

 

What was the rate since the cease fire?

 

If those are our allies, what does that say about us?

 

History will judge and I doubt we will be judged kindly.

8 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Interesting that a Pro-Paletistine / Anti-Israel Publication based in Turkey has not mentioned anything about Hamas shooting on Israeli troops which is reportedly (reuters) why Israel attacked.

 

 

   So, the thread headline is incorrect ?

It was the Palestinians who broke the ceasefire 

 

8 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

anything about Hamas shooting on Israeli troops which is reportedly (reuters) why Israel attacked.

They always say that now.

They used to throw around the old “human shields” excuse a lot also.

 

This was not ever a real peace deal. It was just a con to get the rest of the living hostages back and they were always going to continue the mass slaughter.

 

 

A post was removed. Discussion concerning the politics or actions of the State of Israel are allowed. Emotionally charged condemnation of all Israelis, or their society, or their religion contravenes Rule 15, and is rude and offensive to our esteemed Israeli membership, who are as welcome here as anyone else. Thank you. 

4 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

12 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Interesting that a Pro-Paletistine / Anti-Israel Publication based in Turkey has not mentioned anything about Hamas shooting on Israeli troops which is reportedly (reuters) why Israel attacked.

 

 

   So, the thread headline is incorrect ?

It was the Palestinians who broke the ceasefire 

 

 

Who knows ???  -  news from a war-zone is notoriously unreliable.

 

We have extremely 'loud' voices (on this forum) who are highly vocal from the extreme perspectives of this conflict... 

... Very much in the dichomtoisng manner of: 

> You are either with us [Pro-Palentine] or against us [Fully Supporting IDF Aggression].

> You are either with us [understanding of Israel's need to protect itself] or against us [supporting Hamas Terrorist].

 

There is LOT of middle ground nuance, a quieter more analytical voice, thats more moderate, has a greater and unemotional grip on the conflict - but that voice is lost in the louder more extreme soundbites, emotive vocalisation, the oversimplification and forced dichotomy in a situation thats fluid, highly complex and subject to the chaotic flux and actions of warfare - this 'noise' is filled propoganda, misinformation and media manipulation...

 

I don't believe for a second that Hamas did not attack Israeli IDF troops with small arms fire and even RPG attacks etc.

I and don't believe for a second that Israels response was swift and extreme.

 

The question always remains unanswered - IF this peace deal was truly wanted by Hamas - why did the not yet release all the hostages ?  we keep getting back to this point and its never been effectively answered by pro-Palestine supporters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Somjot said:

 

As a matter of fact, those 280 Palestinians were killed in their "homeland" Gaza.

 

The question should be, how many Israelis were killed or injured since the ceasefire, that might justify such a death toll especially as once again children had to pay the price.

And if so where those Israelis killed in their own country or were they invaders in another man`s land.

 

If a few of those 20.000 children killed by Israel were not evil and insane terrorists, obviously so smart that they could turn baby formula into TNT, will Israel be held accountable?

 

When we look to the Westbank where Israel is stealing land on a daily base, do we also have to ask, who is right?

 

Counting the death on both sides may not answer the question who is right but it surely answers the question "who is acting more evil?"  Especially when looking at the children`s death toll.

 

30 Israeli children and 20.000 Palestinian children.

 

What was the rate since the cease fire?

 

If those are our allies, what does that say about us?

 

History will judge and I doubt we will be judged kindly.

 

I'm not defending Israel - but you've asked the question without the balance of also presenting the cost to Israel - particularly the Oct 7th Massacre.

 

I don't see balance in these threads - Just see the extremes of each side and very little in the way of balance - it really is a situation whereby people are either with Palestine and totally against Israel, or with Israel and totally against Hamas - the pro-Palensitine lobby seen to gloss over the Hamas involvement.

 

The issue is incredibly nuanced - and is simplified down to 'good vs evil' in these threads - when really its one shocking and horrific necessity vs another shocking and horrific necessity...   

 

 

A link to a social networking was removed. Please only cite authoritative sources. Thank you. 

19 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I'm not defending Israel - but you've asked the question without the balance of also presenting the cost to Israel - particularly the Oct 7th Massacre.

 

I don't see balance in these threads - Just see the extremes of each side and very little in the way of balance - it really is a situation whereby people are either with Palestine and totally against Israel, or with Israel and totally against Hamas - the pro-Palensitine lobby seen to gloss over the Hamas involvement.

 

The issue is incredibly nuanced - and is simplified down to 'good vs evil' in these threads - when really its one shocking and horrific necessity vs another shocking and horrific necessity...   

 

 

I don't see balance in your posts. The pro Israel lobby seems to gloss over the Israeli atrocities.

On 11/20/2025 at 2:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

 

I'm not defending Israel -

 

But you clearly are, maybe unintentionally.

 

Just look how you described the two opposing sides

 

 

On 11/20/2025 at 2:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

people are either with Palestine and totally against Israel, or with Israel and totally against Hamas - the pro-Palensitine lobby seen to gloss over the Hamas involvement.

 

why not "with Israel and totally against Gaza"?

 

Where is the balance in: "with a country and totally against another country or with another country and totally against terrorists"? 

 

Where is the balance in adding "the pro-Palensitine lobby seen to gloss over the Hamas involvement." but not adding:  "the pro Israel lobby seen to gloss over the IDF involvement"

 

 

On 11/20/2025 at 2:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

 

but you've asked the question without the balance of also presenting the cost to Israel - particularly the Oct 7th Massacre.

 

But I did:

 

On 11/20/2025 at 5:30 AM, Somjot said:

Counting the death on both sides may not answer the question who is right but it surely answers the question "who is acting more evil?"  Especially when looking at the children`s death toll.

 

30 Israeli children and 20.000 Palestinian children.

 

That are the costs from October 7 compared to the costs Israel caused since then.

 

And they do not include the costs to Gaza in all the previous decades.

 

Maybe this creates a bit more clarity

 

 

 

 

On 11/20/2025 at 2:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

I don't see balance in these threads - Just see the extremes of each side and very little in the way of balance - it really is a situation whereby

 

Don`t you think the side you are supporting is the one side which should rather not complain about disbalance?

 

On 11/20/2025 at 2:18 PM, richard_smith237 said:

The issue is incredibly nuanced - and is simplified down to 'good vs evil' in these threads - when really its one shocking and horrific necessity vs another shocking and horrific necessity...   

 

 

what necessity?

 

Jews have almost always been welcome in that area.

 

The actual problems started when they thought they need a religious apartheid ethno state for self determination (for whatever that means) and started brutally displacing and killing Arabs and stealing their land.

 

So, yes, it is non-racist native land owners against racist colonialist land thieves, who present themselves as victims.

 

No nuances, very simple actually, if one is willing to see the truth unbiased.

 

But if one still believes in the good and righteous west and the evil and bloodthirsty (middle) east and ignores all the wars and death we have brought over them especially in the last decades, might see it differently.

5 hours ago, Somjot said:

 

But you clearly are, maybe unintentionally.

 

Just look how you described the two opposing sides

 

 

 

why not "with Israel and totally against Gaza"?

 

Where is the balance in: "with a country and totally against another country or with another country and totally against terrorists"? 

 

Where is the balance in adding "the pro-Palensitine lobby seen to gloss over the Hamas involvement." but not adding:  "the pro Israel lobby seen to gloss over the IDF involvement"

 

Theres a lot to unpack there... Maybe you are correct and I'm unable to see this without bias, for I see an Anti-Israel bias in your response.

 

I believe Israel / IDF are right to be able to protect themselves against Hamas - is that a necessary evil to protect the people of Israel ? 

Is Hamas a necessary evil to protect the people of Palestine against Israel / IDF ?

 

"IF Hamas removed all its weapons there maybe peace - If Israel removed all its weapons there would be no Israel ?" is this a valid statement ?

 

I also see the firm hand of IDF to be barbaric, over-reaching and often with the appearance of operating without control - the IDF seem almost lawless to an extent in the manner with which they over-react - but 'front line soldiers' do not have the luxury of 'hindsight optics'...  

 

Is the IDF a necessary evil to protect the Israeli people ?

Are the IDF protecting the Israel people from the Palestinians ? or from Hamas ?

 

Is HAMAS a necessary evil to protect the people of Palestine ?

Are HAMAS protecting the people of Palestine from the Israelis, or from IDF?

 

I would argue that if Hamas ceased to exist - Palestine would be existing in a state of wealth and may well have already 'merged with Israel' in a safe two state society - this has not been allowed to happen and I don't believe that stumbling block to be excessive Israeli defence but to be aggression sponsored by outside factors; namely Iran.

 

 

Simplifying it down (which is very difficult with this conflict) I do standby my comment that I don't think is bias...

 

Anyone supporting Israel will automatically fail to see anything else as against them as anything other than anti-Israel.

Anyone supporting Palestine will automatically fail to see anything else against them as anything other than anti-Palestine. 

 

There is a middle ground where the 'balanced' opinion exists but the voice is overshadowed by the extremes (I've tried to visualise that in a very simple graphic below).

 

 

5 hours ago, Somjot said:

But I did:

 

 

That are the costs from October 7 compared to the costs Israel caused since then.

 

And they do not include the costs to Gaza in all the previous decades.

 

Maybe this creates a bit more clarity

 

 

 

 

 

Don`t you think the side you are supporting is the one side which should rather not complain about disbalance?

 

I would question 'how' those 20,000 children died ? - were they killed by IDF ? or through lack of aid reaching them ?  Its tragic and horrible, but there has been plenty of news surrounding Israel / IDF delaying Aid - but also of Hamas also hindering aid attempts.

 

 

5 hours ago, Somjot said:

 

what necessity?

 

Jews have almost always been welcome in that area.

 

The actual problems started when they thought they need a religious apartheid ethno state for self determination (for whatever that means) and started brutally displacing and killing Arabs and stealing their land.

 

So, yes, it is non-racist native land owners against racist colonialist land thieves, who present themselves as victims.

 

No nuances, very simple actually, if one is willing to see the truth unbiased.

 

But if one still believes in the good and righteous west and the evil and bloodthirsty (middle) east and ignores all the wars and death we have brought over them especially in the last decades, might see it differently.

 

You are presenting bias in your comments in this past series of sentences.

"Land owners against racist colonialist land thieves"

 

I suspect the opinions on this horrific situation are swayed by the belief or understanding of who the original land owners were - was it the Israelites / Judaea - or is that history so aged, that more recent rights take precedence and a few hundred years ago - those lands were Arab controlled.

 

The behavior of either side has not existed in a vacuum - I certainly do not support the actions of the IDF, but I support the actions of Hamas even less - the amount of Aid that has been sent to the Gaza is astronomical - where has that money ended up ? the area should be a riviera with the money thats been sent there.

 

 

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Theres a lot to unpack there... Maybe you are correct and I'm unable to see this without bias, for I see an Anti-Israel bias in your response.

 

I believe Israel / IDF are right to be able to protect themselves against Hamas - is that a necessary evil to protect the people of Israel ? 

Is Hamas a necessary evil to protect the people of Palestine against Israel / IDF ?

 

"IF Hamas removed all its weapons there maybe peace - If Israel removed all its weapons there would be no Israel ?" is this a valid statement ?

 

I also see the firm hand of IDF to be barbaric, over-reaching and often with the appearance of operating without control - the IDF seem almost lawless to an extent in the manner with which they over-react - but 'front line soldiers' do not have the luxury of 'hindsight optics'...  

 

Is the IDF a necessary evil to protect the Israeli people ?

Are the IDF protecting the Israel people from the Palestinians ? or from Hamas ?

 

Is HAMAS a necessary evil to protect the people of Palestine ?

Are HAMAS protecting the people of Palestine from the Israelis, or from IDF?

 

I would argue that if Hamas ceased to exist - Palestine would be existing in a state of wealth and may well have already 'merged with Israel' in a safe two state society - this has not been allowed to happen and I don't believe that stumbling block to be excessive Israeli defence but to be aggression sponsored by outside factors; namely Iran.

 

 

Simplifying it down (which is very difficult with this conflict) I do standby my comment that I don't think is bias...

 

Anyone supporting Israel will automatically fail to see anything else as against them as anything other than anti-Israel.

Anyone supporting Palestine will automatically fail to see anything else against them as anything other than anti-Palestine. 

 

There is a middle ground where the 'balanced' opinion exists but the voice is overshadowed by the extremes (I've tried to visualise that in a very simple graphic below).

 

 

 

I would question 'how' those 20,000 children died ? - were they killed by IDF ? or through lack of aid reaching them ?  Its tragic and horrible, but there has been plenty of news surrounding Israel / IDF delaying Aid - but also of Hamas also hindering aid attempts.

 

 

 

You are presenting bias in your comments in this past series of sentences.

"Land owners against racist colonialist land thieves"

 

I suspect the opinions on this horrific situation are swayed by the belief or understanding of who the original land owners were - was it the Israelites / Judaea - or is that history so aged, that more recent rights take precedence and a few hundred years ago - those lands were Arab controlled.

 

The behavior of either side has not existed in a vacuum - I certainly do not support the actions of the IDF, but I support the actions of Hamas even less - the amount of Aid that has been sent to the Gaza is astronomical - where has that money ended up ? the area should be a riviera with the money thats been sent there.

 

 

 

Thank you very much for your meaningful and reflective answer.

 

This does not happen often in this sub forum, where BMs are throwing unsubstantiated and hateful accusations at each other most of the time.

 

I will try to respond in the same manner. (Apologies in advance for my bad English; I am not a native speaker).

 

I have observed that more than once anger and frustration had quite some influence on my posts, so considering myself a reasonable, educated and therefore self-critical person, I tried to find out why.

 

Born in Germany I grew up with guilt originating from the darkest part of our history leading to a lifetime duty to never let this happen again and to support the state of Israel.

 

A few years of my childhood I lived in a secular Muslim country, which was a shock for me at first but very soon I realized, that people from different cultures, religions and mentalities have way more in common than they have differences. I made friends, learned the language and was devastated when we hastily left as the place had turned into hell ruled by radical Islamists.

 

My friends and I sent each other letters, reminiscing about the time we had spent together and expressing our hope to reunite soon.

 

Then one day their letters stopped coming.

 

Years later I was heartbroken when I heard, that some of them had been arrested, tortured and executed for criticizing the government and refusing to believe in some bearded old man riding to the sky on a white camel.

 

So, if anything, I am biased against radical Islamists or any religion created by some shepherds or camel riders millennia ago being used in our days to justify crimes against innocent people.

 

However, October 7 happened and same as everybody, I was shocked and disgusted by the brutality and the savagery of Hamas and fully supported the counterattack.

 

But then I started to notice weird things.

 

After the Gazan death toll raised to 1000, then 2000 and a few days later 3000, a few people started questioning the actions of Israel or asking how the destruction of all those buildings could possibly secure the safe return of the hostages as they could be held captive in one of them.

 

The pro-Israelis did not respond in a way you would expect from someone who is acting according to our moral standards and international law.

 

Critics were either silenced or accused of  being Pro-Hamas and anti – semitic, even when they only had demanded more protection of the civilian population.

 

No one was safe and literally everybody, no matter if he was a respected defender of western values, a human rights judge, the leader of a modern western country not even the pope himself, from being labeled as pro terrorist and anti-Semitic.

 

At the same time more lies told by the IDF or Israeli spokespersons were debunked, starting with those 30 babies, beheaded and put in ovens and the gang rapes. The so-called “proofs” presented by the IDF were in parts just ridiculous like the list found in a tunnel with the “names of terrorists” which turned out to be a calendar or the interview with an Al Shifa nurse who was actually an Israeli actress, lying into the camera.

 

The international media used different expressions, where Hamas was always “heinous” or “abhorrent” and Israelis were “brutally murdered” while the IDF was “the most moral army of the world, defending Israel and protecting Gazan civilians by unaliving only terrorists”.

 

And everybody just bought that, while repeating : “Israel must defend itself. Israel has the right to defend itself. Do you think Israel has the right to exist? Do you condemn Hamas?”

 

It felt unreal, like a witch hunt where the hunters created an atmosphere of fear to silence any doubt of Israel´s actions, an atmosphere I knew too well as I had felt it before as a child when suddenly fanatics dictated wrong and right.

 

People speaking in favor of Gaza lost their jobs or were deported, congresses and peaceful demonstrations for Gaza, which are clearly basic rights in Germany,  were forbidden or brutally stopped by the police.

 

I did not understand why. Why would those who are supposed to protect western values like freedom, justice, human rights and freedom of speech act in such way?

 

My understanding of a real democracy is, that it must be able to tolerate opinions opposing the mainstream, at least when they are based on true facts.

 

Then I started educating myself and what I found out turned my world upside down:

 

I had been lied to my entire life. Most of the things I had been taught at school were simply made up or just focused on a certain part of history while completely ignoring others.

 

I was taught the story of people without the land coming to the land without people.

 

Not a single word about the Nakba and the Palestinians being killed or displaced while their villages were destroyed and their land stolen and all of that because of a claim on that land based on a book more than 3000 years old.

 

I found out that the West including my country, Germany, does support all the achievements of the post war generation like the establishment of international organizations and agreements (United Nations (UN), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva Conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) …

… except when it comes to Israel.

 

Here the rules are upside down.

 

Even when most countries decided resolutions against Israel, which is the country with by far the most condemnations by the UN, which alone should tell us a lot, the US has always protected them with their veto.

 

The Western countries, the USA, the UK and Germany which unequivocally support Israel no matter what, do that not only internationally but also on a national level where the basic rights of their citizens are sacrificed for Israel.

 

The main reason for my opinion on this suspect is not primarily the injustice Israel has brought on the Palestinian people in the last decades.

 

Let´s be realistic: Israelis live on stolen land but hey, who doesn´t?  

 

Most of us do, as someone was most likely already here, before our ancestors showed up.

 

What does infuriate me is when the rights, basic laws and justice systems, which treat every individual equally and grant us our freedoms and a life in security and free from fear is corrupted on our own soil.

 

What also enrages me is the level of idiocy atrocities are justified by Israel and their supporters same as the level of audacity in their obvious lies as if they assume their opponents’ IQ must be something below room temperature.

 

Since when is the best reaction if beloved ones are abducted and held hostage in a certain area to bomb the whole area??

 

Or

“Oh no, we did not kill and bury those 15 help workers, we have never heard about them.”

 “Ok, we gave them permission to drive through that area but never harmed them”

“All right, they are dead but Hamas killed them.”

“OK, we killed them but that was because they did not turn their light on.”

“All right, their lights were on but … but … but one of them knew someone whose uncle`s sister has a neighbor, who owns a dog which had intercourse with another dog which is suspected to have a Hamas owner”.

 

 

And what deeply worries me is how freely and without any doubt people born and raised in the West not only just accept all of that but wholeheartedly support it parroting those lies at every occasion.

 

Let`s have a meaningful debate, without any hate speech and parroted stupidity and with the understanding that the prerequisite of any real debate or discussion is to generally accept that there is a chance, no matter how small, that my opponent is right and I am wrong.

 

Cheers

 

Somjot

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

"IF Hamas removed all its weapons there maybe peace - If Israel removed all its weapons there would be no Israel ?" is this a valid statement ?

No, Hamas are fighting for freedom from Blockade, illegal occupation. Israel are fighting for land by making Gaza unliveable. Have you seen the photos of Gaza, 95% has been carpet bombed 

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The behavior of either side has not existed in a vacuum - I certainly do not support the actions of the IDF, but I support the actions of Hamas even less - the amount of Aid that has been sent to the Gaza is astronomical - where has that money ended up ? the area should be a riviera with the money thats been sent there.

Do you think all those people should just accept they have no future and can't leave Gaza because of the Occupying power? 

They tried peaceful protests and were killed and shot in the legs, during a peaceful protests.

How much should they take?

https://www.newarab.com/news/israeli-snipers-brag-about-deliberately-crippling-gaza-protesters

 

 

They tried negotiating but .,

50 minutes ago, JimCM said:

They tried negotiating but .,

 

Did they ??  the Kharotoum Resolution suggests otherwise.

- No peace with Israel, No negotiation with Israel, No recognition of Israel. 

 

 

Then there was camp david (Camp David 2000)

 

Dennis Ross (US Chief Negotiator)

After the Camp David summit (July 2000): in a 2002 interview he is quoted as saying:  “During the fifteen days there, he [Arafat] never himself raised a single idea.” 

Context: Ross argued that Arafat didn’t present any new counter-proposals.

 

Bill Clinton (US President)

Reflections published later, describing Camp David and its aftermath, wrote “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake.” 
Clinton blamed the failure of the peace process partially on Arafat’s rejection of what he considered a very strong offer.

 

 

Thus: Negotiations were certainly on the table, but the terms offered at Camp David were highly contested. Arafat rejected them on the grounds that they didn’t meet core Palestinian requirements on issues like borders, Jerusalem, and refugees, and many analysts and Palestinians have since argued that no subsequent proposal has genuinely resolved those fundamental gaps - or is that the Palestinians simply wont meet on fair grounds and expect too much ?

 

 

 

 

13 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Did they ??  the Kharotoum Resolution suggests otherwise.

- No peace with Israel, No negotiation with Israel, No recognition of Israel. 

 

 

Then there was camp david (Camp David 2000)

 

Dennis Ross (US Chief Negotiator)

After the Camp David summit (July 2000): in a 2002 interview he is quoted as saying:  “During the fifteen days there, he [Arafat] never himself raised a single idea.” 

Context: Ross argued that Arafat didn’t present any new counter-proposals.

 

Bill Clinton (US President)

Reflections published later, describing Camp David and its aftermath, wrote “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake.” 
Clinton blamed the failure of the peace process partially on Arafat’s rejection of what he considered a very strong offer.

 

 

Thus: Negotiations were certainly on the table, but the terms offered at Camp David were highly contested. Arafat rejected them on the grounds that they didn’t meet core Palestinian requirements on issues like borders, Jerusalem, and refugees, and many analysts and Palestinians have since argued that no subsequent proposal has genuinely resolved those fundamental gaps - or is that the Palestinians simply wont meet on fair grounds and expect too much ?

 

 

 

 

It’s misleading to blame Palestinians alone. While the Khartoum Resolution of 1967 declared “no peace, no negotiation, no recognition,” it reflected the post-war context, not a permanent refusal. By the 1990s, the PLO engaged in Oslo negotiations and mutual recognition.

At Camp David 2000, Arafat rejected Israel’s proposals because they failed to meet core Palestinian needs on Jerusalem, borders, and refugees. Even neutral analysts agree the offers were heavily skewed. Meanwhile, successive Israeli governments, including Netanyahu’s, took actions that undermined a two-state solution: expanding settlements in the West Bank, approving new housing in East Jerusalem, and refusing to freeze settlement growth during negotiations. Policies like these erode the viability of a Palestinian state and make compromise nearly impossible.

Negotiations require concessions from both sides, and Israel’s political and settlement policies show that structural obstacles were largely imposed by Israel, not Palestinians.

At least 22 Palestinians have been killed in a series of Israeli air strikes across northern and central Gaza, Hamas medical and civil defence officials have said. They said five sites had been hit, including residential homes. A senior Hamas commander was among the dead, according to local sources.

 

The Israeli military said it had struck targets in Gaza in response to an incident earlier on Saturday, when it said an "armed terrorist" had fired at soldiers after crossing the Strip's so-called "yellow line" designating areas under full Israeli control. Hamas denied this.

 

More than 310 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes since the ceasefire came into force, according to Gaza's health ministry. The territory's civil defence said Saturday's strikes by Israel targeted Gaza City in the north, as well as Deir al-Balah and Nuseirat camp in central Gaza.  In addition, three people were killed near a mosque in Deir al-Balah, the officials said.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20879zzqn8o

 

The Hamas officials said five people had been killed at the Abbas junction in the densely populated Rimal area of Gaza City. Witnesses said an Israeli strike set a car on fire.