The US has bombed Fordow and other sites.

Hamas on the other hand -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14881371/hamas-gang-rape-victims-october-7-attacks.html

@CJsGoldfish The attack on the Al-Adhi hospital blamed on Israel has been debunked

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67144061

Apart from the Christian Church those pictures could be from anywhere, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan.

I'm not sure what your point is?

Maybe you can post these live instagram videos you claim to have seen?
Or at least give a link?
That would be useful.

Feel free to follow people on the ground in Palestine and youll come across many live videos!
No, I'm not that IT savvy.
So what you're saying is that there is no proof of what you claim?
Interesting

Cant say the proof doesnt exist if you refuse to look!
I don't have an Instagram account and I'm not in Gaza.

Right. Gotcha 😂

I know you are not IT savvy and all but all you have to do is click
here →https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/gallery/2024/feb/16/motaz-azaiza-israel-gaza-palestine-in-pictures

and here →https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/13/timeline-israels-attacks-on-hospitals-throughout-its-war-on-gaza

and here→https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/14/gaza-israelis-attacking-known-aid-worker-locations

or here→https://apnews.com/article/gaza-humanitarian-foundation-aid-israel-hamas-d9e205966fb08bdbba0a842e1762a322

Oh, that's right. You're "not very interested" 🙄
"Prove it!"

"No, not like that"

"Isn't it lucky then that you don't need an instagram account to access them"

Actually I do. I've been told I need to sign in to access them.

"Unless, of course, you just don't want to"

It's true I'm not very interested in viewing Pallywood Hamas propaganda,

Isn't it lucky then that you don't need an instagram account to access them 😄
Unless, of course, you just don't want to. Understandable considering your previous posts

You could always search Motaz Azaiza for other platforms to view a journalists on the ground view

Those are no use to me as I don't have an instagram a/c.

The info I saw coming out of Gaza was produced by Quds network which is bankrolled by Iran.and allied to Hamas. It is followed by young radicalised Arabs

Hmm, not exactly.
It has not been recognised as an independent crime but has most definitely been used (and defined) by UN Commissions
It's just that it also fits within the definition of Genocide, also stated by the UN so not unreasonable to use the term 🤷‍♀️

Hitting a hospital
https://www.instagram.com/p/DJoZ4futBnW/

A school
https://www.instagram.com/p/DKGQEFQzuTG/

For anyone wanting to see from the ground https://www.instagram.com/motaz_azaiza/

@AnnaBalfour"ethnic cleansing of Gaza"

Ethnic cleansing has not been defined and is not recognized as a crime under international law, according to the U.N.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

A bigger problem is that even if both sides were agree to a Two-State Solution where would it be located?

Gaza and the West Bank are separated by Israel, which is geographically problematic.

You only have to look at the formation of East and West Pakistan and the ensuing debacle to see how this would play out.

Your last sentence makes my point exactly re Hamas

Interestingly, you make no condemnation of the actions of King Hussein of Jordan on "Black September".
So, according to your mindset, it's OK for Arabs to massacre Palestinians but not for Israelis to attack terrorists in self defence?

That's rather strange logic?

i can accept there have been faults on both side. But your narrative that the Israeli government is blameless in creating this enduring situation and has actually supported real chances for a two state solution is revisionist in the extreme.

No, I am not agreeing with you. Far from it.

As long as Gaza is controlled by the genocidal terrorist group Hamas (which effectively means that the Palestinians are not speaking with one voice) there can be no solution.

As I said further up this thread, why would any group want to negotiate with another group that is Hell-bent on destroying it?

Palestinian beligerence has always been an obstacle to an equitable solution.

I won't list all the examples, but I'll just mention two.
In 1970 Palestinians living in Jordan were calling for the destruction of the Jordanian government,

The PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organisation) had became a state within the borders of Jordan and they set up their own laws. There were two attempts on King Hussein’s life, which lead to direct confrontation between the PLO and the Jordanian military in June of 1970. The Palestinians represented 2/3rds of the population of Jordan and did have the numbers on their side and Syrian military assistance, but not the air cover needed to win the war.

In September of 1970, the Jordanian military shelled the refugee camps. Rather than go through to find the terrorists and deal with them militarily, they chose the option of indiscriminate killing of civilians. 300,000 men, women, children, the elderly and infirm died as a direct action taken by Jordan. It was known as "Black September".

Had the Arab countries never declared war on the fledgling state of Israel and been able to accept a Jewish state as any other, there would have been no Arab refugees.
King Hussein has largely been given a 'free pass' as the direct actions he ordered his military to take. The Jordanian military was responsible for more loss of life driving the Palestinians out of Jordan than all the actions of the IDF put together.
Some of what Israel has been accused of doing in Gaza, without any facts to support the claims, was exactly what Jordan did.

In 1990-1991 Iraq invaded Kuwait. At that time there were 357,000 Palestinians living in Kuwait. They aligned themselves with the invading forces of Saddam Hussein and after the War was over were expelled. As most had Jordanian passports they went to Jordan
Kuwaitis said the anger against Palestinians was such that there was little chance that those who had left during the seven-month occupation could ever return, and relatively few of those remaining would be able to stay.

It seems to me that some Arabs and certainly the Palestinians make a habit of "biting the hand that feeds them".

This is why no Arab countries in the region want to aid them or take any of them as refugees.

@mrsrtobinson whatever the rationale he gave you are essentially agreeing with me. There are and were barriers on both sides - and Netanyahu has made it clear he doesn’t want a two state solution.

@fffiona
In his own words (2023)....
Netanyahu said, “I inherited the Oslo Accords... The decision to bring the PLO from Tunis, and plant it in the heart of Judea and Samaria (West Bank), and in Gaza, was a decision made and implemented before I became prime minister. I thought it was a terrible mistake and I still do.”

Addressing a reporter, the Israeli PM said, "You and your journalist friends have been blaming me for almost thirty years for putting the brakes on the Oslo Accords and preventing the Palestinian state. That is true,"

Netanyahu told reporters at the Tel Aviv press conference, as reported by The Times Of Israel.“I’m proud that I prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state because today everybody understands what that Palestine state could have been, now that we’ve seen the little Palestinian state in Gaza.
Everyone understands what would have happened if we had capitulated to international pressures and enabled a state like that in Judea and Samaria, surrounding Jerusalem and on the outskirts of Tel Aviv,” Netanyahu reportedly said.

(My italics)

From the perspective of many Israelis, the dynamics of Israeli-Palestinian relations since the signing of the Oslo agreement confirmed their worst fears: that the Oslo process would give a militant enemy the tools and launching areas for bloodthirsty terrorist attacks against Israelis.

The greatest Israeli anger was elicited by the fact that the Palestinian Authority was doing very little to prevent terrorist attacks emanating from its territory. It refused to take steps towards disarming terrorist militias, permitted terrorist organizations to operate open offices in its territory, and either refused to arrest terrorists or would adopt a policy of “revolving door” arrests–placing terrorists in prison for a few days and then releasing them.

A series of incidents caused the Israeli public to wonder whether Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had ever truly intended to lay down arms and seek negotiated peace agreements rather than armed struggle: Immense arms supplies to the Palestinian Authority were made public; captured documents indicated Palestinian Authority support for terrorist infrastructures; and Palestinian policemen took up arms against Israeli soldiers. For Israelis, this was the ultimate breach of agreement, rendering it moot.

@mrsrtobinson the definition of genocide has absolutely nothing to do with numbers - it is purely about intent:

"the deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of a large number of people from a particular national or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group"
I personally don't get involved at all in the discussion of whether it is genocide or not - it is a specific legal definition which has a really high bar of proof. I think there is a risk that focus on this detracts from what we know for sure - that Israel is defying International laws with devastating impacts on the Gazan population.

And you haven't responded to my earlier comment about Netanyahu openly admitting to derailing the Oslo Accords? You're still talking about all the opportunities missed by the Palestinians with no acknowledgement there were and are barriers on both sides to a two state solution.

@rainingsnoring "I am pro diplomacy as a tool to find the best route through discussion, with compromise on both sides. If anything can produce a long(er) lasting cessation of violence, it is that imho."

This ^ would be a reasonable approach if you were dealing with reasonable people. This isn't the case and I think in this instance it is incredibly naive to think it would work.
I also think your understanding of the history of the area is a bit weak.

In 2007 Hamas controlled Gaza after open fighting with it's rival political group Fatah.
Smai Abu Zubri, spokesperson at the time for Iran-backed Hamas claimed it was a “second liberation of Gaza from the collaborators”. Hamas made clear it's avowed goals of the destruction of the State of Israel.

When one side says it wants the other side dead, why would anyone make a deal with a people that demand your destruction?!

The Israeli Prime Minister at the time, Ehud Olmert suggested that the West should give “serious consideration” to posting a peacekeeping force in Southern Gaza, to stop weapons reaching Hamas via Egypt.

This was not implemented - a missed opportunity.

Since 1948, Arabs have been saying Jews don't have a right to their land. They have changed their stance slightly a few times, but for the longest time, the Arab League's policy towards Israel was "No Peace, No Recognition, No Negotiation". The Arab mentality was still towards having one strong islamic country and having Jews in Jerusalem went against that plan-- it was more about religion than territory.

Do you not think that this conflict is seen as a Religious War by the majority of the Arab World?
Maybe that is why Qatar is being a "sugardaddy" for many terrorist groups?

The Middle East didn't start out as Arab Muslim. Neither did Africa. They were conquered by Muslims and Arabs and their ethnicities were cleansed. I find it ridiculous that there are arguments that tiny Israel is somehow guilty of colonizing and ethnically cleansing a tiny bit of land smaller than the Isle of Man when the archeology there shows they're the dominant ethnicity in Israel for over 3600 years. Please explain to me how the Temple at Jerusalem is below the mosque if the Arabs were there first?

Palestinians have built a national culture on grievance and victimhood instead of setting goals that could win them independence.

It's very easy to dismissive others who shine a spotlight on you by saying that they are over emotional. It's called gaslighting.

I am not in a position to make a solution. None of us are, as you know.
Most people of sense realise that there is no, nice, clear cut 'solution' to such complicated and long standing problems. If that were the case, someone with decades of experience would have done this years ago. We also have the added complication that there are certain groups and individuals who have a heavy vested interested in keeping conflicts going.

You seem to be trying to reduce this extremely complicated issue to 'Hamas is bad'. That's a non starter in itself.
Me personally, I am against violent 'solutions' because that's an oxymoron in itself. I am pro diplomacy as a tool to find the best route through discussion, with compromise on both sides. If anything can produce a long(er) lasting cessation of violence, it is that imho.
One problem with people who come down 100% on one 'side' in any of these conflicts is that they never seem to offer any solutions. All that many of them do is complain about the other side and achieve nothing.

Thank you

There is so much nonsense and emotive rhetoric in this post I hardly know where to start.

However, what is your solution to the conflict?

There will be no peace until the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organisation Hamas is removed from Gaza.

How can Hamas be removed so the Palestinians can live in peace?

Retaliations, you mean. The UN has stated that Iran's counter strikes were legitimate self defence, under international law.