US prepared to broker Gaza ceasefire, says Obama

thaibeachlovers · July 28, 2014

Every country has its allies and takes sides. The Americans give Israel 3 billion dollars in aid wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the Arab states to give the Palestinians 3 billion as well ? I don't understand why everyone expects America to bleed for the whole world. America is biased so they aren't a good broker for a peace deal,but who would be ? Perhaps Switzerland or Finland but the Muslims have, due to extremism,terrorism,middle aged type laws for their own people, destroyed any sympathy that they could have reaped in the west,China perhaps but they have Muslim problems as well, the Dalei Lama might be a good choice.

Are you suggesting the Arab dictatorships also provide an equivalent amount to fund Palestinian arms purchases? BTW combined EU countries provide more funding to Israel than the US.

At one point I believe it was mooted that a 'Marshall Plan' was proposed upon Palestinian recognition of the right to exist for the State of Israel. This deal has gone down the drain with the rise of Hamas.

Maybe a very good incentive is to fund, retrain and re-equip PA Fatah forces to destroy Hamas, a civil war that would be very bloody, but maybe could bring an end to the endless circle of death and destruction. It has been alledged, with Israeli support, arms have previously been supplied by Egypt to Fatah.

“The shipment included 2,000 AK-47 rifles, 20,000 magazines and two million rounds of ammunition. The arms and ammunition were transferred from Egypt to Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing, in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces and with the government's authorization. The four trucks carrying the weapons were accompanied by IDF Military Police to the Karni crossing, where they entered the Gaza Strip and were received by PA security personnel”

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israeli-defense-official-fatah-arms-transfer-bolsters-forces-of-peace-1.208469

And after the Palestinian civil war is over, who do you think the arms will be used against?

The US armed and trained the Afghanis to fight the Russians, and after the Russians left they got used against the US.

Off topic:

Err didn't the US invade Afghanistan. However, it's disputed whether US actually armed the Taliban (more like Pakistan?), many of the non Pashtun ethnic groups, who were equipped by the US, actually fought the Taliban.

How could the US arm the Taliban when they didn't exist in Afghanistan till 1996? The Russians left in 1988. You are referring to the civil war after the Russians left, but before the US invaded.

thaibeachlovers · July 28, 2014

I think Israel did expect to take casualties in case of a ground operation. So I don't think "taken by surprise" is exactly accurate. I also think it is clear that the Hamas tactic of using their civilian dead to further demonize Israel is working well for them. But on the other hand, at this point "PR" is not at the highest priority for the majority of the Israeli public.

If world opinion turns against israel, they will regret losing the PR campaign.

I'm sure that Israel would prefer that public opinion was on its side, but there are plenty of countries that have done just fine without it. I don't see why Israel would be any different.

Because israel depends on US aid to survive. Without US aid how long would they last? It might take 20 years, but eventually the US might abandon israel if they alienate the rest of the world. The Palestinian resistance is in it for the long haul, as the IRA was. Imagine the US with a Muslim president!

Edited July 28, 2014 by thaibeachlovers

Ulysses G. · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do Edited July 28, 2014 by Ulysses G.

thaibeachlovers · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do

Interesting. I wonder why the US continues to give them so much money then, especially considering they have to borrow money themselves to do so ( 17 trillion $ debt )?

simple1 · July 28, 2014

How could the US arm the Taliban when they didn't exist in Afghanistan till 1996? The Russians left in 1988. You are referring to the civil war after the Russians left, but before the US invaded.

Posts removed to enable response:

Correct, misread your post

Edited July 28, 2014 by simple1

Steely Dan · July 28, 2014

Given the israeli conditions for a ceasefire, it is not surprising that Hamas has rejected a ceasefire extension. Kerry is looking terribly impotent right now.

Watch Al Jazeera for the truth about what is happening in Gaza.
What is happening is nothing more than a slaughter of the innocents and 57 seconds does not count as a warning to evacuate. Could you get out of your house and far enough away not to be killed in 57 seconds?
If israel thinks it can kill it's way to "quiet" it is mistaken. For every child, woman and elderly person killed, 10 or more will become enemies of israel and the israelis will never know peace till they start talking to the Palestinians as equals.
The Irish fought England for 600 years till Tony started a real conversation with the IRA.

Over 1,000 dead, mostly children, women and elderly, none of whom are "terrorists".

Check out what happened in Shejaiya neighborhood.
Even the BBC is showing the destruction and the world is turning against israel for it's use of air, sea and artillery/ tank fire against civilian targets.
israel might be winning the battle, but it is losing public opinion and that will count for more in the long run.
Demonstrations against israel will only increase as long as israel carries out indiscriminate slaughter- they are happening all over the world.

No doubt israel has been taken by surprise by the Palestinian resistance- 40 dead israeli soldiers so far.
The west bank is beginning to revolt and perhaps the Lebanese will join in.
israel has sewn the wind, and now it might be seeing the hurricane starting.

There are two Al Jazeera feeds on the Gaza Strip, and they do not always carry the same story or commentary. Guess you are referring to Al Jazeera English.

Warning times - are longer that quoted on many occasions. Some are tiered, with the time quoted relevant to the last stage,
after several prior warnings were given. The IDF repeatedly called on Gazan's to evacuate certain areas, Hamas called them to stay. For those that are going to shout that they have nowhere to go - this is only partially true, most of the fighting is being carried out on the north part of the Gaza Strip and to a lesser degree along the the border with Israel (east). Obviously, the warning times for Israeli civilians of an impeding rocket attacks are just as short, sometimes even less than that.

Agreed that it doesn't matter much how right or wrong Israel is, there is no way global public opinion will not lent its support to the Palestinians when such images of death and destruction flood the media. Reasoned arguments, correct as they may be, do not stand a chance against dying children and wrecked homes. The Israeli effort on this front would be (or should be) more about damage control, less about claiming moral high ground.

And of course, the results of this current clash will fuel the conflict for years to come. Same old.

The point is, it seems that the Israeli government (or rather, the dominant right wing element), which is not too keen on getting anywhere with the peace process anyway, does not expect anything different. As far as I can tell, the rational is that as there is no viable way to cut a peace deal favorable to Israel, and as chances of getting the Hamas to play nice like the PA are slim, the present reality of repeated clashed is what we're in for. As long as this is kept on something considered a manageable level it will go on. As for global public opinion and global diplomatic pressure - the first is seen as inherently biased by most Israelis (doesn't matter if its tagged as anti-Israel, pro-Palestine or anti-Semitic), so no big loss there, and the second is deemed as manageable as well (whether this is a correct assessment is another matter). And, of course, the Palestinians themselves are playing a major part in ensuring this mind set is so hard to change - kicking the bucket is an art when it comes to their side, so does supplying the Israeli right wing with reasonable justifications for oh so many things.

The Israeli casualties were taken into account, not much surprise there. A couple of incidents where groups of soldiers were killed, yes - but more from an operational point of view. There is still, relatively, less public pressure from Israelis as far as the IDF death toll goes, very different from reaction during the last Lebanon incursion.

The West Bank does not get as much coverage as the Gaza Strip, but things are certainly boiling and may come to a head. If the situation does get out of control there, than this would definitely spell trouble for Israel and the Israeli government. At the same time this also touches on the PA's and Abass's standing, so might hold even more dire consequences for the Palestinians themselves.

Could be wrong, but so far the Hezbollah is not very involved (previous sporadic shootings from Lebanon were Palestinian), probably to do with the current mess in Syria, where it is neck deep supporting Assad's regime. Don't expect this to be much different in the near future.

Indeed, due to media spin, faux liberals and increasing bellicose Muslim populations in the West Israel doesn't have a hope of winning the PR war. Every time they go into Gaza they have less and less time to root out Hamas, who continue to be funded from numerous sources such as Iran, Qatar and the EU, hence allowing them to re-arm. So a clownishly inept Obama tries to negotiate a ceasefire, well I think the short term gains of accepting one don't justify the long term price, better to finish Hamas once and for all. Israel does have the support of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and imho should get the job over and done with instead of trying to keep onside a lame duck president who is more anti-Israel than even Carter was.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Ulysses G. · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do
Interesting. I wonder why the US continues to give them so much money then, especially considering they have to borrow money themselves to do so ( 17 trillion $ debt )?

One reason is that Israel is one of the few countries in the world, and the only Middle Eastern state, to routinely stand alongside the United States on strategic issues in the UN and other venues of international cooperation. Israel votes with the USA in the UN about 94% of the time. No other nation can match that record.
Israel is also a very powerful military ally. The security cooperation between Israel and the United States is far-reaching, and Israel has consistently been a major security asset to the United States - far more than any other state recipients of American funds.
Most of the money that America grants to Israel is used by Israel to buy goods and services - military and civilian - from the US, so that American aid money is recycled back into the American economy. Nearly 90% of US aid to Israel is military and Israel spends about 75% of that purchasing U.S. goods.

up-country_sinclair · July 28, 2014

Nicolas Sarkozy: “I cannot bear Netanyahu. He’s a liar,”

Barack Obama: “You’re fed up with him, what about me?” “I have to deal with him every day.”

http://world.time.com/2011/11/09/sarkozy-to-obama-i-cannot-bear-netanyahu-hes-a-liar/

Morch · July 28, 2014

"The Americas will broker a peace deal" - Don't know if to laugh or cry.

The Americans are dishonest brokers - they, or should we say their AIPAC puppet masters make sure that the Americans will do nothing except push the Zionist line, when they are instructed to do so.

America became irrelevant to the Palestinian perspective long ago, due to the systematic installation of Zionist 5th Columnists, in all American power structures. From the State department, to the Pentagon, from the World Bank to the New York Times, America is another Zionist Occupied territory.

Don't believe me? Simpy look at how Bloomberg, one of the most powerful men in USA, was bitch slapped by the Zionist lobby to fly to Occupied Palestine, in defiance of a aviation warning.

We have seen this play out time and time again, when the ROI on the Zionists extermination reaches the point that there are so few targets left, they roll the Americans in to 'broker' a peace deal.

And what is the meat of the 'deal' from the Palestinian perspective? Return to the daily humiliation and collective punishment being handed out by the Zionists, and we will stop sending cluster bombs and F16s at your children.

The entire world sees this sham for what it is, and the protests around the world attest to this. There is no justice possible for the Palestinians under the Americans - unless they care to provide the Palestinians the same 3 billion USD in aid and weapons.

The Palestinians will never get justice on the basis of sympathy or international law, they need might - but that's a separate topic

So, to some this all up: you do not approve of Israel, and of whatever you believe "Zionist" stands for. Alright. Not going to waste time trying to convince a true believer, but one thing did catch my eye - cluster bombs? For real? Do tell.

Stuff like this is exactly how things get coalesced into "facts". Them "facts" being used later on as basis for discussion. Makes debate rather tiresome.

Morch · July 28, 2014

"The Americas will broker a peace deal" - Don't know if to laugh or cry.

The Americans are dishonest brokers - they, or should we say their AIPAC puppet masters make sure that the Americans will do nothing except push the Zionist line, when they are instructed to do so.

America became irrelevant to the Palestinian perspective long ago, due to the systematic installation of Zionist 5th Columnists, in all American power structures. From the State department, to the Pentagon, from the World Bank to the New York Times, America is another Zionist Occupied territory.

Don't believe me? Simpy look at how Bloomberg, one of the most powerful men in USA, was bitch slapped by the Zionist lobby to fly to Occupied Palestine, in defiance of a aviation warning.

We have seen this play out time and time again, when the ROI on the Zionists extermination reaches the point that there are so few targets left, they roll the Americans in to 'broker' a peace deal.

And what is the meat of the 'deal' from the Palestinian perspective? Return to the daily humiliation and collective punishment being handed out by the Zionists, and we will stop sending cluster bombs and F16s at your children.

The entire world sees this sham for what it is, and the protests around the world attest to this. There is no justice possible for the Palestinians under the Americans - unless they care to provide the Palestinians the same 3 billion USD in aid and weapons.

The Palestinians will never get justice on the basis of sympathy or international law, they need might - but that's a separate topic

Every country has its allies and takes sides. The Americans give Israel 3 billion dollars in aid wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the Arab states to give the Palestinians 3 billion as well ? I don't understand why everyone expects America to bleed for the whole world. America is biased so they aren't a good broker for a peace deal,but who would be ? Perhaps Switzerland or Finland but the Muslims have, due to extremism,terrorism,middle aged type laws for their own people, destroyed any sympathy that they could have reaped in the west,China perhaps but they have Muslim problems as well, the Dalei Lama might be a good choice.

Are you suggesting the Arab dictatorships also provide an equivalent amount to fund Palestinian arms purchases? BTW combined EU countries provide more funding to Israel than the US.

At one point I believe it was mooted that a 'Marshall Plan' was proposed upon Palestinian recognition of the right to exist for the State of Israel. This deal has gone down the drain with the rise of Hamas.

Maybe a very good incentive is to fund, retrain and re-equip PA Fatah forces to destroy Hamas, a civil war that would be very bloody, but maybe could bring an end to the endless circle of death and destruction. It has been alledged, with Israeli support, arms have previously been supplied by Egypt to Fatah.

“The shipment included 2,000 AK-47 rifles, 20,000 magazines and two million rounds of ammunition. The arms and ammunition were transferred from Egypt to Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing, in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces and with the government's authorization. The four trucks carrying the weapons were accompanied by IDF Military Police to the Karni crossing, where they entered the Gaza Strip and were received by PA security personnel”

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israeli-defense-official-fatah-arms-transfer-bolsters-forces-of-peace-1.208469

For starters, there is no current talk (as far as I am aware) about arming the PA to take over the Gaza Strip. Doubtful they could manage as much anyway, for various reasons. Many on the non-hardline right wing in Israel voice the opinion that better a weaker version of the devil you know, than getting a worse opponent in its stead.

The link refers to something that took place about 8 years ago - different times, different situation. The weapons were not meant, as far as I recall and understand, for the PA to take on the Hamas, but to compensate for their military deficiency against a probable Hamas backlash. Israel did not want to be seen as directly involved, in a bid to not mess things further than they already were. If it wished to supply weapons to the PA it could have done so directly and more covertly than through involving the Egyptians.

Now I'll just read down the topic and see when this grows up into a full fledged conspiracy in someone's mind....

Loptr · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do

Interesting. I wonder why the US continues to give them so much money then, especially considering they have to borrow money themselves to do so ( 17 trillion $ debt )?

It's worse than that.. Uncle Sugar is funding both sides of the Israeli / Palestinian crisis... Just like they are funding Syrian Al Qaeda rebels (i.e. ISIS) along with continuing to send fund to Iraq... As a US citizen this is insanity...

Morch · July 28, 2014

"The Americas will broker a peace deal" - Don't know if to laugh or cry.

The Americans are dishonest brokers - they, or should we say their AIPAC puppet masters make sure that the Americans will do nothing except push the Zionist line, when they are instructed to do so.

America became irrelevant to the Palestinian perspective long ago, due to the systematic installation of Zionist 5th Columnists, in all American power structures. From the State department, to the Pentagon, from the World Bank to the New York Times, America is another Zionist Occupied territory.

Don't believe me? Simpy look at how Bloomberg, one of the most powerful men in USA, was bitch slapped by the Zionist lobby to fly to Occupied Palestine, in defiance of a aviation warning.

We have seen this play out time and time again, when the ROI on the Zionists extermination reaches the point that there are so few targets left, they roll the Americans in to 'broker' a peace deal.

And what is the meat of the 'deal' from the Palestinian perspective? Return to the daily humiliation and collective punishment being handed out by the Zionists, and we will stop sending cluster bombs and F16s at your children.

The entire world sees this sham for what it is, and the protests around the world attest to this. There is no justice possible for the Palestinians under the Americans - unless they care to provide the Palestinians the same 3 billion USD in aid and weapons.

The Palestinians will never get justice on the basis of sympathy or international law, they need might - but that's a separate topic

Every country has its allies and takes sides. The Americans give Israel 3 billion dollars in aid wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the Arab states to give the Palestinians 3 billion as well ? I don't understand why everyone expects America to bleed for the whole world. America is biased so they aren't a good broker for a peace deal,but who would be ? Perhaps Switzerland or Finland but the Muslims have, due to extremism,terrorism,middle aged type laws for their own people, destroyed any sympathy that they could have reaped in the west,China perhaps but they have Muslim problems as well, the Dalei Lama might be a good choice.

Are you suggesting the Arab dictatorships also provide an equivalent amount to fund Palestinian arms purchases? BTW combined EU countries provide more funding to Israel than the US.

At one point I believe it was mooted that a 'Marshall Plan' was proposed upon Palestinian recognition of the right to exist for the State of Israel. This deal has gone down the drain with the rise of Hamas.

Maybe a very good incentive is to fund, retrain and re-equip PA Fatah forces to destroy Hamas, a civil war that would be very bloody, but maybe could bring an end to the endless circle of death and destruction. It has been alledged, with Israeli support, arms have previously been supplied by Egypt to Fatah.

“The shipment included 2,000 AK-47 rifles, 20,000 magazines and two million rounds of ammunition. The arms and ammunition were transferred from Egypt to Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing, in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces and with the government's authorization. The four trucks carrying the weapons were accompanied by IDF Military Police to the Karni crossing, where they entered the Gaza Strip and were received by PA security personnel”

http://www.haaretz.com/news/israeli-defense-official-fatah-arms-transfer-bolsters-forces-of-peace-1.208469

And after the Palestinian civil war is over, who do you think the arms will be used against?

The US armed and trained the Afghanis to fight the Russians, and after the Russians left they got used against the US.

Well, that didn't take long...

What civil war are you on about?

The PA does not have the power to take on Hamas, Israel can't seem to manage it.

The US actually trains the PA's security forces.

Morch · July 28, 2014

I think Israel did expect to take casualties in case of a ground operation. So I don't think "taken by surprise" is exactly accurate. I also think it is clear that the Hamas tactic of using their civilian dead to further demonize Israel is working well for them. But on the other hand, at this point "PR" is not at the highest priority for the majority of the Israeli public.

If world opinion turns against israel, they will regret losing the PR campaign.

I'm sure that Israel would prefer that public opinion was on its side, but there are plenty of countries that have done just fine without it. I don't see why Israel would be any different.

Because israel depends on US aid to survive. Without US aid how long would they last? It might take 20 years, but eventually the US might abandon israel if they alienate the rest of the world. The Palestinian resistance is in it for the long haul, as the IRA was. Imagine the US with a Muslim president!

Israel was founded in 1948. USA aid became prominent only in the 1970's. Economic (civilian) aid ended in 2007. Most of the military aid is designated for purchases from USA firms, and can be viewed as a huge subsidy which benefits the USA weapon industry.

While USA's generosity is certainly important for Israel's survival, saying Israel would fall apart without it is not necessarily the case. I agree that elements of USA aid which do not act as subsidies (example, funding for extra Iron Dome batteries) and fall beyond the scope of guaranteed aid, could be hard to swallow for some, considering the USA's economic troubles.

Asiantravel · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do

Interesting. I wonder why the US continues to give them so much money then, especially considering they have to borrow money themselves to do so ( 17 trillion $ debt )?

One reason is that Israel is one of the few countries in the world, and the only Middle Eastern state, to routinely stand alongside the United States on strategic issues in the UN and other venues of international cooperation. Israel votes with the USA in the UN about 94% of the time. No other nation can match that record.
Israel is also a very powerful military ally. The security cooperation between Israel and the United States is far-reaching, and Israel has consistently been a major security asset to the United States - far more than any other state recipients of American funds.
Most of the money that America grants to Israel is used by Israel to buy goods and services - military and civilian - from the US, so that American aid money is recycled back into the American economy. Nearly 90% of US aid to Israel is military and Israel spends about 75% of that purchasing U.S. goods.

would Israel allow UN Peacekeepers into Gaza and the West Bank to provide security for the Palestinians and surrounding Israeli towns.?

Morch · July 28, 2014

Given the israeli conditions for a ceasefire, it is not surprising that Hamas has rejected a ceasefire extension. Kerry is looking terribly impotent right now.

Watch Al Jazeera for the truth about what is happening in Gaza.
What is happening is nothing more than a slaughter of the innocents and 57 seconds does not count as a warning to evacuate. Could you get out of your house and far enough away not to be killed in 57 seconds?
If israel thinks it can kill it's way to "quiet" it is mistaken. For every child, woman and elderly person killed, 10 or more will become enemies of israel and the israelis will never know peace till they start talking to the Palestinians as equals.
The Irish fought England for 600 years till Tony started a real conversation with the IRA.

Over 1,000 dead, mostly children, women and elderly, none of whom are "terrorists".

Check out what happened in Shejaiya neighborhood.
Even the BBC is showing the destruction and the world is turning against israel for it's use of air, sea and artillery/ tank fire against civilian targets.
israel might be winning the battle, but it is losing public opinion and that will count for more in the long run.
Demonstrations against israel will only increase as long as israel carries out indiscriminate slaughter- they are happening all over the world.

No doubt israel has been taken by surprise by the Palestinian resistance- 40 dead israeli soldiers so far.
The west bank is beginning to revolt and perhaps the Lebanese will join in.
israel has sewn the wind, and now it might be seeing the hurricane starting.

There are two Al Jazeera feeds on the Gaza Strip, and they do not always carry the same story or commentary. Guess you are referring to Al Jazeera English.

Warning times - are longer that quoted on many occasions. Some are tiered, with the time quoted relevant to the last stage,
after several prior warnings were given. The IDF repeatedly called on Gazan's to evacuate certain areas, Hamas called them to stay. For those that are going to shout that they have nowhere to go - this is only partially true, most of the fighting is being carried out on the north part of the Gaza Strip and to a lesser degree along the the border with Israel (east). Obviously, the warning times for Israeli civilians of an impeding rocket attacks are just as short, sometimes even less than that.

Agreed that it doesn't matter much how right or wrong Israel is, there is no way global public opinion will not lent its support to the Palestinians when such images of death and destruction flood the media. Reasoned arguments, correct as they may be, do not stand a chance against dying children and wrecked homes. The Israeli effort on this front would be (or should be) more about damage control, less about claiming moral high ground.

And of course, the results of this current clash will fuel the conflict for years to come. Same old.

The point is, it seems that the Israeli government (or rather, the dominant right wing element), which is not too keen on getting anywhere with the peace process anyway, does not expect anything different. As far as I can tell, the rational is that as there is no viable way to cut a peace deal favorable to Israel, and as chances of getting the Hamas to play nice like the PA are slim, the present reality of repeated clashed is what we're in for. As long as this is kept on something considered a manageable level it will go on. As for global public opinion and global diplomatic pressure - the first is seen as inherently biased by most Israelis (doesn't matter if its tagged as anti-Israel, pro-Palestine or anti-Semitic), so no big loss there, and the second is deemed as manageable as well (whether this is a correct assessment is another matter). And, of course, the Palestinians themselves are playing a major part in ensuring this mind set is so hard to change - kicking the bucket is an art when it comes to their side, so does supplying the Israeli right wing with reasonable justifications for oh so many things.

The Israeli casualties were taken into account, not much surprise there. A couple of incidents where groups of soldiers were killed, yes - but more from an operational point of view. There is still, relatively, less public pressure from Israelis as far as the IDF death toll goes, very different from reaction during the last Lebanon incursion.

The West Bank does not get as much coverage as the Gaza Strip, but things are certainly boiling and may come to a head. If the situation does get out of control there, than this would definitely spell trouble for Israel and the Israeli government. At the same time this also touches on the PA's and Abass's standing, so might hold even more dire consequences for the Palestinians themselves.

Could be wrong, but so far the Hezbollah is not very involved (previous sporadic shootings from Lebanon were Palestinian), probably to do with the current mess in Syria, where it is neck deep supporting Assad's regime. Don't expect this to be much different in the near future.
Indeed, due to media spin, faux liberals and increasing bellicose Muslim populations in the West Israel doesn't have a hope of winning the PR war. Every time they go into Gaza they have less and less time to root out Hamas, who continue to be funded from numerous sources such as Iran, Qatar and the EU, hence allowing them to re-arm. So a clownishly inept Obama tries to negotiate a ceasefire, well I think the short term gains of accepting one don't justify the long term price, better to finish Hamas once and for all. Israel does have the support of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and imho should get the job over and done with instead of trying to keep onside a lame duck president who is more anti-Israel than even Carter was.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

While calls for wiping out the Hamas can be heard from hardline right wing politicians and their supporters in Israel, I think that the more prevalent approach speaks about dealing Hamas a blow which would greatly weaken, but not destroy it as the main power in the Gaza Strip. Main reasons cited are worries that this might lead to breakdown of control and anarchy, which might result in AQ/ISIS-like outfit replacing Hamas. Better the devil you know, and all that.

Longer terms ideas are mentioned about facilitating greater involvement of the PA with Gaza Strip management, but not quite sure how this is to be achieved in a manner not making the PA seen as an accomplice to Israel, or indeed, if the PA is even in on it and actively involved. My guess is that the PA will tread very carefully, if at all, when it comes to relieving the Hamas.

Morch · July 28, 2014

Because israel depends on US aid to survive.

Wrong. Israel became economically independent and managed to reach a positive trade balance during the 2000s and is no longer dependent on foreign aid for survival. Foreign countries will continue to send aid as long as they believe it's in their interests to do

Interesting. I wonder why the US continues to give them so much money then, especially considering they have to borrow money themselves to do so ( 17 trillion $ debt )?

It's worse than that.. Uncle Sugar is funding both sides of the Israeli / Palestinian crisis... Just like they are funding Syrian Al Qaeda rebels (i.e. ISIS) along with continuing to send fund to Iraq... As a US citizen this is insanity...

Care to supply details on how the USA funds the Hamas?

Morch · July 28, 2014

One reason is that Israel is one of the few countries in the world, and the only Middle Eastern state, to routinely stand alongside the United States on strategic issues in the UN and other venues of international cooperation. Israel votes with the USA in the UN about 94% of the time. No other nation can match that record.
Israel is also a very powerful military ally. The security cooperation between Israel and the United States is far-reaching, and Israel has consistently been a major security asset to the United States - far more than any other state recipients of American funds.
Most of the money that America grants to Israel is used by Israel to buy goods and services - military and civilian - from the US, so that American aid money is recycled back into the American economy. Nearly 90% of US aid to Israel is military and Israel spends about 75% of that purchasing U.S. goods.

would Israel allow UN Peacekeepers into Gaza and the West Bank to provide security for the Palestinians and surrounding Israeli towns.?

The UN forces are peacekeepers in name only. More about monitoring than providing security. They do not provide security in Lebanon, for example.

Not sure how that relates to UG's post.

spidermike007 · July 28, 2014

I think Israel did expect to take casualties in case of a ground operation. So I don't think "taken by surprise" is exactly accurate. I also think it is clear that the Hamas tactic of using their civilian dead to further demonize Israel is working well for them. But on the other hand, at this point "PR" is not at the highest priority for the majority of the Israeli public.
If world opinion turns against israel, they will regret losing the PR campaign.

I'm sure that Israel would prefer that public opinion was on its side, but there are plenty of countries that have done just fine without it. I don't see why Israel would be any different.

Because israel depends on US aid to survive. Without US aid how long would they last? It might take 20 years, but eventually the US might abandon israel if they alienate the rest of the world. The Palestinian resistance is in it for the long haul, as the IRA was. Imagine the US with a Muslim president!

Wrong. Israel GDP is in excess of $250 billion per year. Official US aid is $3 billion per year, though if you include off the books assistance, loan guarantees, etc., it is five times that. Still not enough to cripple the country, though US aid is funneled directly to the military. Problem with that scenario is that the US has direct involvement in blowing up Palestinian mothers and children.

Spidermike
Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

Scott · July 29, 2014

Off-topic post deleted. This thread is still about the Gaza/Israeli situation, not the general state of affairs in the US.

thaibeachlovers · July 29, 2014

Given the israeli conditions for a ceasefire, it is not surprising that Hamas has rejected a ceasefire extension. Kerry is looking terribly impotent right now.

Watch Al Jazeera for the truth about what is happening in Gaza.
What is happening is nothing more than a slaughter of the innocents and 57 seconds does not count as a warning to evacuate. Could you get out of your house and far enough away not to be killed in 57 seconds?
If israel thinks it can kill it's way to "quiet" it is mistaken. For every child, woman and elderly person killed, 10 or more will become enemies of israel and the israelis will never know peace till they start talking to the Palestinians as equals.
The Irish fought England for 600 years till Tony started a real conversation with the IRA.

Over 1,000 dead, mostly children, women and elderly, none of whom are "terrorists".

Check out what happened in Shejaiya neighborhood.
Even the BBC is showing the destruction and the world is turning against israel for it's use of air, sea and artillery/ tank fire against civilian targets.
israel might be winning the battle, but it is losing public opinion and that will count for more in the long run.
Demonstrations against israel will only increase as long as israel carries out indiscriminate slaughter- they are happening all over the world.

No doubt israel has been taken by surprise by the Palestinian resistance- 40 dead israeli soldiers so far.
The west bank is beginning to revolt and perhaps the Lebanese will join in.
israel has sewn the wind, and now it might be seeing the hurricane starting.

There are two Al Jazeera feeds on the Gaza Strip, and they do not always carry the same story or commentary. Guess you are referring to Al Jazeera English.

Warning times - are longer that quoted on many occasions. Some are tiered, with the time quoted relevant to the last stage,
after several prior warnings were given. The IDF repeatedly called on Gazan's to evacuate certain areas, Hamas called them to stay. For those that are going to shout that they have nowhere to go - this is only partially true, most of the fighting is being carried out on the north part of the Gaza Strip and to a lesser degree along the the border with Israel (east). Obviously, the warning times for Israeli civilians of an impeding rocket attacks are just as short, sometimes even less than that.

Agreed that it doesn't matter much how right or wrong Israel is, there is no way global public opinion will not lent its support to the Palestinians when such images of death and destruction flood the media. Reasoned arguments, correct as they may be, do not stand a chance against dying children and wrecked homes. The Israeli effort on this front would be (or should be) more about damage control, less about claiming moral high ground.

And of course, the results of this current clash will fuel the conflict for years to come. Same old.

The point is, it seems that the Israeli government (or rather, the dominant right wing element), which is not too keen on getting anywhere with the peace process anyway, does not expect anything different. As far as I can tell, the rational is that as there is no viable way to cut a peace deal favorable to Israel, and as chances of getting the Hamas to play nice like the PA are slim, the present reality of repeated clashed is what we're in for. As long as this is kept on something considered a manageable level it will go on. As for global public opinion and global diplomatic pressure - the first is seen as inherently biased by most Israelis (doesn't matter if its tagged as anti-Israel, pro-Palestine or anti-Semitic), so no big loss there, and the second is deemed as manageable as well (whether this is a correct assessment is another matter). And, of course, the Palestinians themselves are playing a major part in ensuring this mind set is so hard to change - kicking the bucket is an art when it comes to their side, so does supplying the Israeli right wing with reasonable justifications for oh so many things.

The Israeli casualties were taken into account, not much surprise there. A couple of incidents where groups of soldiers were killed, yes - but more from an operational point of view. There is still, relatively, less public pressure from Israelis as far as the IDF death toll goes, very different from reaction during the last Lebanon incursion.

The West Bank does not get as much coverage as the Gaza Strip, but things are certainly boiling and may come to a head. If the situation does get out of control there, than this would definitely spell trouble for Israel and the Israeli government. At the same time this also touches on the PA's and Abass's standing, so might hold even more dire consequences for the Palestinians themselves.

Could be wrong, but so far the Hezbollah is not very involved (previous sporadic shootings from Lebanon were Palestinian), probably to do with the current mess in Syria, where it is neck deep supporting Assad's regime. Don't expect this to be much different in the near future.
Indeed, due to media spin, faux liberals and increasing bellicose Muslim populations in the West Israel doesn't have a hope of winning the PR war. Every time they go into Gaza they have less and less time to root out Hamas, who continue to be funded from numerous sources such as Iran, Qatar and the EU, hence allowing them to re-arm. So a clownishly inept Obama tries to negotiate a ceasefire, well I think the short term gains of accepting one don't justify the long term price, better to finish Hamas once and for all. Israel does have the support of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and imho should get the job over and done with instead of trying to keep onside a lame duck president who is more anti-Israel than even Carter was.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

How do you propose to do that- kill everyone in Gaza and the west bank?

Do you not get that the israeli assault is recruiting Palestinians for Hamas in greater numbers than they would ever have gained were the israelis not killing young men's siblings and relatives? Thousands of young Palestinian males will be queing to join up to strike back at israel and any country deemed aiding them. I anticipate an increase an increase in suicide bombings using young men without any hope of a future free from israeli collective punishment.

Even if, however unlikely, Hamas was eliminated, like ISIL, it will just come back in another form, but the result will be the same.

Till the occupation and collective punishment of Palestinians ends and Palestinians have their own country, don't expect an end to it.

Just look at the Irish resistance to English rule for 600 years for an idea of what to expect.

Credo · July 29, 2014

The conventional thinking on these issues is that there are two approaches to a problem like this:

1. Military

2. Political

In the case of Hamas the military solution is to closely related to the political solution.

thaibeachlovers · July 29, 2014

The conventional thinking on these issues is that there are two approaches to a problem like this:

1. Military

2. Political

In the case of Hamas the military solution is to closely related to the political solution.

I don't get what you are saying.

Currently, Hamas is losing the war, but israel is losing the propaganda battle, and where the people go, western politicians must eventually follow.

Credo · July 29, 2014

The conventional thinking on these issues is that there are two approaches to a problem like this:

1. Military

2. Political

In the case of Hamas the military solution is to closely related to the political solution.

I don't get what you are saying.

Currently, Hamas is losing the war, but israel is losing the propaganda battle, and where the people go, western politicians must eventually follow.

I am not 100% sure of what I am saying either, but if the Israeli politicians decide to stop fighting they can tell the Israeli military to stop and they will. In Hamas I am not sure who controls the militant wing and who is responsible for any political settlement. The power structure seems a little nebulous with Hamas.

Steely Dan · July 29, 2014

The conventional thinking on these issues is that there are two approaches to a problem like this:

1. Military
2. Political

In the case of Hamas the military solution is to closely related to the political solution.
I don't get what you are saying.
Currently, Hamas is losing the war, but israel is losing the propaganda battle, and where the people go, western politicians must eventually follow.

I am not 100% sure of what I am saying either, but if the Israeli politicians decide to stop fighting they can tell the Israeli military to stop and they will. In Hamas I am not sure who controls the militant wing and who is responsible for any political settlement. The power structure seems a little nebulous with Hamas.

I'm not sure Netanyahu will agree to a ceasefire, 86.5% of Israelis want to finish off Hamas, so he either follows overwhelming public opinion or he believes yet another guarantee from Kerry and the moving red line. I could be wrong, but I believe Hamas have gone too far now and they will now be dismantled, which contrary to widely held belief would IMHO be a good thing for the Palestinians in the long run.

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/07/27/israel-vs-hamas-ready-not/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

up-country_sinclair · July 29, 2014

US support for the Israeli regime goes against its strategic interests and stated values. However, young Americans are not blinkered on this issue like the old, and I'm confident we'll see the US position shift on Israel in the years to come because it doesn't make sense on any level.

Jingthing · July 29, 2014

The tunnels into Israel were a bridge too far. Israel must finish the job.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Ulysses G. · July 29, 2014

US support for the Israeli regime goes against its strategic interests and stated values. However, young Americans are not blinkered on this issue like the old, and I'm confident we'll see the US position shift on Israel in the years to come because it doesn't make sense on any level.

Sounds like a combination of wishful thinking and a very biased opinion. Israel is a far superior ally to any other in a very important region and that is very unlikely to change in any of our lifetimes. The truth is that we need them.

You are referring to one specific incident - the current violence - that has lasted a few weeks and trying to generalize about the whole conflict. That is absurd. Most Americans - young and old - think that Hamas is much more to blame of the two sides. No one in USA is all that crazy about Islamic terrorists, that refuse to make peace, and it is highly doubtful that they are going to get any more popular as time goes on.

Israel is not, of course, situated in some geographical backwater, but at the junction of paramount American interests. Its prominence on the eastern Mediterranean littoral, at the nexus of North Africa and Southwest Asia, has enabled the United States to minimize its military deployments in the area. In the Persian Gulf, by contrast, the absence of a dependable and sturdy ally like Israel has impelled the United States to commit hundreds of thousands of troops and trillions of dollars. Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig's observation 30 years ago still resonates today: "Israel is the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk, does not carry even one American soldier, and is located in a critical region for American national security."

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/25/the_ultimate_ally

Edited July 29, 2014 by Ulysses G.

up-country_sinclair · July 29, 2014

US support for the Israeli regime goes against its strategic interests and stated values. However, young Americans are not blinkered on this issue like the old, and I'm confident we'll see the US position shift on Israel in the years to come because it doesn't make sense on any level.

Sounds like a combination of wishful thinking and a very biased opinion. Israel is a far superior ally to any other in a very important region and that is very unlikely to change in any of our lifetimes. The truth is that we need them.

You are referring to one specific incident - the current violence - that has lasted a few weeks and trying to generalize about the whole conflict. That is absurd. Most Americans - young and old - think that Hamas is much more to blame of the two sides. No one in USA is all that crazy about Islamic terrorists, that refuse to make peace, and it is highly doubtful that they are going to get any more popular as time goes on.

If you were able to provide specific examples of how the US lockstep support of any Israeli action was in its strategic interest, you would have included it in your reply. You didn't, because you can't. If anything, US support for Israel is a liability that grows worse with each passing year and eventually it will reach the tipping point. Of this I have no doubt. It will take at least a generation (and perhaps two), but US policy towards Israel will be significantly different by the middle of the century.

America (in theory) supports the downtrodden and those in crisis. Younger Americans can see what Israel is doing in Gaza on social media, and they are horrified. Of course this doesn't mean that they support Hamas, but they do know that what Israel is doing in Gaza is inhumane and immoral.

The clock is ticking on the US providing cover for Israel to commit war crimes.

Ulysses G. · July 29, 2014

If you were able to provide specific examples of how the US lockstep support of any Israeli action was in its strategic interest, you would have included it in your reply. You didn't, because you can't.

That is what the article from Foreign Policy - The Ultimate Ally - is for. You are the one regularly tossing out irrational opinions, with absolutely nothing to back it up.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Ulysses G.

up-country_sinclair · July 29, 2014

OK you've edited your post to include:

1. A link to an opinion piece by the Israeli ambassador to the US.

2. Highlighted a quote by Alexander Haig (Alexender Haig!) made over 30 years ago.

3. The main objective of the opinion piece is a rebuttal of the "realists" who are essentially advocating what I've posted above: US support of Israel is not in its strategic interest. In other words, the neo-conservative agenda is counterproductive to the medium and long term goals of the US. I'm quite comfortable being in the "realist" camp.

Sign In

US prepared to broker Gaza ceasefire, says Obama

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US