What does 'ceasing responsibility for life' mean?

That’s right - both sides are living with consequences. Which side do you think is suffering more? Which side has the bigger incentive to change their strategy?

as I asked earlier, but nobody wanted to answer: we’re 75 years in from the independence of the State of Israel. How is the Palestinian’s strategy working out for them?Are they happy with what they’ve achieved? Is it going to plan?

Yeah I’d think twice before shouting proudly about Israel’s credentials as a democracy.

first there’s the gem of Netanyahu saying some of its citizens (non Jews) aren’t equal to others.

Then you’ve got all that nasty apartheid business

Then you’ve got this lovely development that’s been brewing for a while now

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-66751706.amp

Truly a bastion of the democratic world!

Hamas terrorists invaded Israel. Now it will need to live with the consequences

Well you could reverse that and say Israel is living with the consequence of its actions.
I don’t think anyone has much sympathy for Hamas it’s the Palestinian civilians that cause the concern.

By 'it' do you mean the Palestinians?

What about the innocent Palestinian who has had their land taken from them and are now kept imprisoned in Gaza and the West Bank by the Israeli government? Restricting their ability to move freely and have access to food, water, electricity and medical care can’t be acceptable.

Hamas terrorists invaded Israel. Now it will need to live with the consequences. Israel is the only decent democratic regime out in the Middle East. We need to fight hard to preserve democracy and our freedoms. There are plenty on the planet from Hamas to Iran to Russia who want to take that away.

Agreed

id encourage everyone to please check out the following Instagram accounts of photo journalists from on the ground in Gaza to see the live reality of what’s happening there. Be informed and use your voice to raise awareness and put pressure on our leaders to end this nightmare.

Motaz_Azaiza

Wizard_bisan1

byplestia

There is a lot of loud “we’re going in any day now” and videos of Netanyahu slapping soldiers on the back going on. Too loud in one sense. Who knows what sleight of hand is really happening. Hoping lots of talking and negotiating going on all the while in the background.

The beginning of mass murder, not just in Gaza and the West Bank but when the increasingly angry neighbours become involved, Israel’s own citizens too. And then the US and Iran and everyone else.

Even if Netanyahu succeeds in murdering every man, woman and child trapped in that strip of land, unable to leave, he won’t have eliminated Israel’s enemies. He’ll have made many many more. I don’t think he cares. He just wants to score kills. He thinks he’s in a video game.

There’s a video at the top of the page I linked to that states that, despite agreeing to the Oslo accords, Israel continued to build settlements in the land recognised as Palestinian so I guess that probably had more to do with it.

Does that even make sense to you? So there's a peace process ,an Israeli politician (in opposition) goes to the Temple Mount (and while provocative, why shouldn't he? It's a public space.). And the Palestinians say, well, that's it, let's start a second intifada, blow up the entire peace process, give up on our dreams of our state, because someone visited the temple mount? It doesn't make sense because it's not the reason, it's an excuse. They'd planned and prepared for it

To be honest I can understand why his actions sparked riots and then the riots escalated. I very much doubt it was planned. What Arafat thought about it I don’t know.

There’s a useful summary of the history of Palestine (as it’s referred to) by the UN which mentions that the second infiada was triggered by Sharon (or at least that seems to be the implication)

https://www.un.org/unispal/history/

It’s strange, but I get the impression neither side were ready to give up the fight. The likes of Arafat and Sharon had been fighting their whole lives perhaps it was all they knew.

Does that even make sense to you? So there's a peace process ,an Israeli politician (in opposition) goes to the Temple Mount (and while provocative, why shouldn't he? It's a public space.). And the Palestinians say, well, that's it, let's start a second intifada, blow up the entire peace process, give up on our dreams of our state, because someone visited the temple mount? It doesn't make sense because it's not the reason, it's an excuse. They'd planned and prepared for it .

No, the real reason the second intifada happened was because Arafat was not willing to sign an end to the conflict which did not include a full right of return for all Palestinian refugees. He was a terrorsit his whole life and he didn't give it up in the end.

So why didn't Palestinians accept olmert's peace deal? Why did they even launch the 2nd intifada to begin with and oslo in favour of killing?

Ariel Sharon tends to get the blame for that, causing riots by visiting the Temple Mount.

It's a valid point and it worries me too. What's the end game here?

Yes, Hamas has to be destroyed. It poses an existential threat to Israel. But how??? It's not the fact that they welcome death and see it as a weakness that Israelis do not as you rightly point out but that they are so deeply embedded within a civillian population and have no concern for that population's safety and wellbeing. Israel can't (due to rules of engagement) and shouldn't do what Russia did in Chechnya.

Further, Hamas also has strong support in Gaza and you can't bomb that out of people's minds.

What will happen the day after the war ends? Where do we go? It's so worrying.

No. This time Israel has 350,000 well-trained and armed soldiers ready on the Gaza border. For comparison, the entire British Army is only about 100,000.

So? Israel bombed the hell out of Gaza in 2014. This didn’t get rid of Hamas or intimidate them. They’re Jihadists, they don’t care what you do. All the Muslims killed by the enemy are martyrs. Their reward will be in heaven.

So why didn't Palestinians accept olmert's peace deal? Why did they even launch the 2nd intifada to begin with and oslo in favour of killing?
Israel HAS come to the negotiating table, many times.
There's fault on both sides. Many Palestinians, especially in Gaza, believe in armed struggle and the destruction of israel.
Israel didn't occupy anyone prior to 1967, there was no peace. Israel tried to swap land for peace and was told no (the threes nos if Khartoum).
And a reminder that Hamas, voted in by gazans, began blowing up buses and cafes in the 90s in order to (successfully) derail the peace process
I don't agree with what's happening in the WB now and have a lot of criticism of israeli govt policy. And I hate the current government. But, my god, the Palestinians have not exactly been saints either.

Look, you're right about hamas. But what will holding them responsible do? Bring back those helpless babies? I know israel doesn't want fuel to go to hamas and there's a good likelihood they would steal from the hospitals (as they did from unrwa) but they need to figure out a way to get fuel to hospitals. Un convoy or something.

Israel is fighting a cruel enemy which has no regard for their own people - which they stated clearly and shown by their actions. But we can't just let helpless babies die from a lack of fuel. There has to be a way.

And aside from the moral imperative, the only ones who benefit from pictures of 130 dead babies is hamas. So Israel should be a bit smarter too.

Yep. Of course the solution will eventually need to be political. I want a just and fair solution for everyone, Palestinian and israeli, between the river and the sea. Neither of us are going anywhere.

But I also think we need to look at what's going on around us. Irans involvement, hezbolla provoking the northern border, what happened in Syria. In the short term, a military response might be needed, with all the pain and suffering that entails.

@squidnames Yes, or just on a wind up. I won't engage, I think. But I really think most people want the killing to stop. It's horrendous, and we never even had time to process the tragedies in Israel. Just straight into a hellish bloodbath of endless death of more innocent people.

I don't think killing 130 babies is "OK", and if it happens, I will hold Hamas responsible for it.

My opinions are clear and expressed concisely and politely. Hearing things that you don't agree with, and responding to them, is a luxury we are blessed with in the UK.

@ketchup07070 This poster sounds unhinged I'm shocked the posts have been allowed.

There is nothing moral or appropriate about an "equal" fight. The more unequal the fight, and the more decisive the long term result, the better. "Equal" fights between Israel and Hamas have so far got us nowhere.

Two US battle groups in the Eastern Mediterranean are keeping Hizb'allah from attacking Israel, because Iran sees it as an "unequal" fight. That's a good thing.

Unfortunately on October 7, Hamas didn't see enough inequality with the Israeli army, leading to the events on October 7. That was an error they will not be permitted to repeat.

The responsibility for the death of 130 babies in incubators, should it occur, will lie with the civil administration of Gaza, which is operated by Hamas. Hamas alone has the duty to keep its people safe. It has chosen not to do so, and now it will be responsible for the consequences.

However, we can see from the events of October 7 exactly what Hamas feels about the lives of babies.

They’re holding the whole of Palestinian to account for Hamas while being armed and backed by one of the worlds largest and most powerful military. This is shameful and far from an equal fight .

@mushti If you think killing 130 babies is OK I don't know what to say to you.