the un also just picked saudi arabia to lead a women's rights forum.

 

 

just pointing that out. 

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

You should try knowing things...it helps. The resolution demands the release of the hostages. Looks like the Security Council agrees with me.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-security-council-demands-immediate-ceasefire-gaza-2024-03-25/

 

 

But when viewed through the oppressor/oppressed dynamic, the sheltering and support of an armed force that is not governed by the Geneva convention means Israel must be the only compliant party.  

 

It doesn't help that S. Africa continues its desperate attempt to deflect from their history with the "Apartheid isn't just a S. African thing" strategy. 

At this point, just reduce the Temple Mount to sand and then the true reason for the conflict will be clear.

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

Honest question -- given the fact that Hamas won't return the hostages and remains in control of Gaza, what do you suggest Israel do? They offered to have a cease fire if the hostages are returned, and Hamas said no. 

Ottoman. Empire.  

46 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

You should try knowing things...it helps. The resolution demands the release of the hostages. Looks like the Security Council agrees with me.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-security-council-demands-immediate-ceasefire-gaza-2024-03-25/

 

 

Vikas that is exactly the back and forth this resolution has had over the last month or so.  The US resolution which did not pass asked for the two things DEPENDENT of each other.  The new one the US eventually abstained from that has Israel all pissed is that it asks for the two separately and independently of each other. What passed makes it clear that Israel does not have the right to hold up aid because of the hostages.

1 hour ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Has any other civilization throughout world history lost multiple offensive wars and had a stake to claim land after losing? Winners and losers, that's the way it goes. Go find a Native American family and give them your home, land, and possessions if you want to take the moral high ground. They were conquered too. The difference is that this isn't a two-state or sharing of land issue. This is a one side wants the other one destroyed issue. There is no resolution to that. Which is probably the most comical part about the "We need a two-state solution!!!" debate. 

War is ugly. It's fair to criticize Netanyahu. Not going to argue with that. But there is no pretty solution to this issue. 

Has any other civilization in History had a completely different country draw arbitrary borders on their land to define a third entirely separate country on the basis of a debatable and entirely arbitrary historical claim?  You could maybe argue the partition of India and Pakistan was a similar dogs breakfast of diplomacy. Both sides of this conflict have committed atrocities in the last 75 years but again, America is allowed to fund and arm Israel without criticism from the west, but Iran is not allowed to similarly fund and arm the Palestinians.

Also the 1967 borders are internationally recognized Hamas have stated in the past they would likely agree to lay down their arms if Israel returned to the 1967 borders and removed blockades, and literally everyone tells Israel not to build new settlements in the West Bank, yet they're still shipping in New Yorker's and European's to "Their Ancestral Homeland", how much sympathy would Cree Indian's descendants get violently establishing an enclave in North Dakota and exerting control over the trade and travel into and out of the rest of the state because it's their ancestral homeland? .

You can't keep a population caged forever, every conflict ends with a political solution, even ones involving "Terrorists".

Just now, dawkins4prez said:

Vikas that is exactly the back and forth this resolution has had over the last month or so.  The US resolution which did not pass asked for the two things DEPENDENT of each other.  The new one the US eventually abstained from that has Israel all pissed is that it asks for the two separately and independently of each other. What passed makes it clear that Israel does not have the right to hold up aid because of the hostages.

It doesn't call for the release first, but both at the same time. So the cease fire isn't contingent on the hostage release and vice versa, but it does call for both to happen immediately. Had it not called for the hostage release I'm guessing we would have vetoed it again. Of course, as a UN resolution, it has about as much legal force as this post.

If Hamas released the hostages (assuming they are still alive, which is less likely by the day), I'd support a cease fire at the same time to allow aid to flow in. As the UN has called for. As Biden has called for. I don't think anyone is against both of those things happening. The issue is only one of them happening.

4 minutes ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

Has any other civilization in History had a completely different country draw arbitrary borders on their land to define a third entirely separate country on the basis of a debatable and entirely arbitrary historical claim?  You could maybe argue the partition of India and Pakistan was a similar dogs breakfast of diplomacy. Both sides of this conflict have committed atrocities in the last 75 years but again, America is allowed to fund and arm Israel without criticism from the west, but Iran is not allowed to similarly fund and arm the Palestinians.

Also the 1967 borders are internationally recognized Hamas have stated in the past they would likely agree to lay down their arms if Israel returned to the 1967 borders and removed blockades, and literally everyone tells Israel not to build new settlements in the West Bank, yet they're still shipping in New Yorker's and European's to "Their Ancestral Homeland", how much sympathy would Cree Indian's descendants get violently establishing an enclave in North Dakota and exerting control over the trade and travel into and out of the rest of the state because it's their ancestral homeland? .

You can't keep a population caged forever, every conflict ends with a political solution, even ones involving "Terrorists".

The entire continent of Africa, the Kurds, Native Americans, Bosnia, Ukraine,..., the list is pretty prolific throughout the entirety of human history.

And regarding your debatable and arbitrary claim, archeological evidence suggests the claim is anything but arbitrary.  But, this would require you to look beyond a historical horizon of 75 years.  

2 minutes ago, BBE said:

The entire continent of Africa, the Kurds, Native Americans, Bosnia, Ukraine,..., the list is pretty prolific throughout the entirety of human history.

And regarding your debatable and arbitrary claim, archeological evidence suggests the claim is anything but arbitrary.  But, this would require you to look beyond a historical horizon of 75 years.  

Wait...did he say Hamas would "agree to lay down their arms" if Israel went back to their 1967 borders??? Hamas doesn't believe Israel has a right to exist, but sure...they'd be cool if not for those damn post-1967 borders. 

Wow...

2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Wait...did he say Hamas would "agree to lay down their arms" if Israel went back to their 1967 borders??? Hamas doesn't believe Israel has a right to exist, but sure...they'd be cool if not for those damn post-1967 borders. 

Wow...

History is apparently hard.

36 minutes ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

 

You can't keep a population caged forever, every conflict ends with a political solution, even ones involving "Terrorists".

look @dawkins4prez, it's catching on!  So fetch!

8 minutes ago, paco said:

look @dawkins4prez, it's catching on!  So fetch!

Bonus points for the (un?)intentional meta reference. 

 

Even though you should really stop trying to make fetch a thing.

4 hours ago, dawkins4prez said:

Any act of war, any and all, from torture to mass rape to dropping nukes can be and will be framed as an existential necessity.  If the mass shooting in russia were in fact the doing of ukraine would anybody here cry foul?  Siege is not only completely inhumane towards the civilian population, it is also a tactic only available to the stronger force.

Nonsense

people would complain if ukraine targeted civilians for mass murder

2 hours ago, dawkins4prez said:

Vikas that is exactly the back and forth this resolution has had over the last month or so.  The US resolution which did not pass asked for the two things DEPENDENT of each other.  The new one the US eventually abstained from that has Israel all pissed is that it asks for the two separately and independently of each other. What passed makes it clear that Israel does not have the right to hold up aid because of the hostages.

Sure they do

2 hours ago, BBE said:

History is apparently hard.

Imagine that..a modern society pushing a primitive one out of existence…

13 hours ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

Maybe don't oppress people for seven and a half decades and get pissy when they decide to give you a smack in the mouth back?

The Palestinians revolted against Hamas?

6 hours ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

Has any other civilization in History had a completely different country draw arbitrary borders on their land to define a third entirely separate country on the basis of a debatable and entirely arbitrary historical claim? 

Students at Vanderbilt took over the dean’s office to protest for Hamas, were told if they leave to go to the bathroom they wouldn’t be allowed back in, then called 911 for this
 

 

On 3/28/2024 at 1:30 PM, Cochis_Calhoun said:

You can't keep a population caged forever

Exactly why their brethren in Egypt should open the Southern border of Gaza and take them in.  For that matter, all Arab countries should open up their land for Gazan refugees.  

Great point!

Quote

 

"You have to finish up your war,” Mr. Trump said. "You have to get it done. We have to get to peace. We can’t have this going on.”

That statement apparently troubled Mr. Kahana even more than Mr. Biden’s warnings to Israel. Mr. Biden has called for a six-week cease-fire in exchange for Hamas releasing Israeli hostages. In the interview excerpts released by Israel Hayom, Mr. Trump did not qualify his call for Israel to finish the war by insisting on the release of hostages.

"Trump effectively bypassed Biden from the left, when he expressed willingness to stop this war and get back to being the great country you once were,” Mr. Kahana wrote. "There’s no way to beautify, minimize or cover up that problematic message.”

 

 

2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

 

"sure, but like, if Trump was president Hamas would have been too scared of Trump's powerfully cut figure to start this war." -stupid MAGA supporter, probably

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

"sure, but like, if Trump was president Hamas would have been too scared of Trump's powerfully cut figure to start this war." -stupid MAGA supporter, probably

And of course this is the real reason:

Quote

 

But there is no getting around the division between Mr. Trump and congressional Republicans, who seem to be competing to see who can more ostentatiously demonstrate support for Mr. Netanyahu’s government. They are flying to Israel to meet with Mr. Netanyahu, planning to invite him to address Congress and generally urging Israel to do whatever it takes, for as long as it takes, to annihilate Hamas.

 

 

In contrast, Mr. Trump’s hedging commentary to Israel Hayom is only the latest in a long line of public statements he has made to undercut Mr. Netanyahu, whom he has still not forgiven for congratulating Mr. Biden as the winner of the 2020 election.

 

 

Yeowie !

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/building-close-iranian-embassy-hit-syria-iranian-media-report-2024-04-01/

 

as tragic as this whole Israel/Gaza situation is, it's delightful watching everyone panic not knowing where it falls vis a vis the ridiculous culture war