Iranian attack hit water desalination plant in Kuwait

There are also concerns that the 2SS proposed through the Oslo Accords was very much biased against the Palestinians.

https://www.scribd.com/document/425833333/The-Honest-Broker-is-Crooked

Who said no to the 2 state solution ? (Nov 2025)

Netanyahu: ‘There will not be a Palestinian state,’ even at cost of ties with Saudis | The Times of Israel

The Palestinian authority do though.

FactCheck: what is a two state solution and do Israelis and Palestinians want one? – Channel 4 News

From that 2nd article (Dec 2023):

"Despite the apparent lack of popular support for a two state solution, the leader of the Palestinian Authority – which controls the West Bank but not Gaza – Mahmoud Abbas, has recently repeated his desire for one. "

"In 2017, Hamas, the UK-designated terror group that controls Gaza, proposed what some observers saw as a move towards the two state solution."

And see how support for it has collapsed since 2012 among the Palestinians. Support lost can be regained.

"Gallup polling conducted between July and September this year (before the latest war began) found just 24 per cent of Palestinians would support a two state solution. That’s a massive collapse in support since 2012, when the figure was around 60 per cent."

So a big bit of one side says yes. The other bit of that side did say maybe. The Netanyahu side says a firm no. So what side has to give to at least start to break the deadlock? It can't be handwaved away by basically saying "but HAMAS". Change happens. It is Netanyahu who holds the reigns of change.

Do you agree that no change can happen until Netanyahu changes from his firm NO ?

I don't like to dwell too much on WW2 and the Nazis as nothing is really comparable to the holocaust and attempts to compare can potentially become offensive to Jewish people.

Just wanted to make a quick point which is that yes, the lessons from WW1 were learnt with WW2 about not punishing Germany too severely.

But also - Germany surrendered. That makes it much easier to move on and in time, forgive.

With Palestine, Hamas seem to have an ideological refusal to surrender, despite Gaza being decimated and the Hamas military having "lost" in the way Western countries would perceive winning and losing.

You re not accepting the history of the region... where each atrocity, from either side, has led to new hatred and new recruits.... never heard of the Nakba? the current Israeli attacks are based firmly on what happened after October 7th.

How would you break this cycle of violence?

On WW2, perhaps consider why the allies did not punish Germany like the did after WW1, they realised that had contributed to the rise of the Nazi's.

Yup. And Netanyahu says no to two state, but is bombing at the same time. Any terrorists he kills will be replaced, Even if not replaced on a 1 to 1 basis, bombing will never solve it. And the more innocents he kills, the grater that different cause becomes.

Netanyahu, or his successor, cannot keep saying no.

Re terrorists of the future. @Twiglets1 and I discussed this yesterday. There is a critical difference between WW2 and the Middle East of today.

In WW2, the root cause, the leaders, was removed. The ideology that drove the war came from them. They controlled the state and had all the propaganda. Once removed, that was all gone. And there was de-Nazification too.

In the Middle East, the root cause, Palestine, remains. Removing leaders achieves relatively nothing. Because there are new leaders waiting in the wings to pick up the flag. Even at an individual level, the root cause remains.

I don't really subscribe to the " it will make more terrorists." thing. Because the new bombing might not be a new long term root cause. It will be a cause to rally around while the bombing goes on, but when the bombing stops, that cause is gone. But so long as the root cause of Palestine remains, anyone killed fighting for that, will likely be replaced.

I can't think of any terror attacks done for historical revenge. The Nazis of today (very few of them), are not doing things because "you killed my grandad". No, they do things for what they see as ongoing issues.

Do you agree with that reasoning ?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/09/iran-war-britain-allies-europe-energy-social-policies

Now that we've got all of that killing and rage out of our system for a while we feel like we might be ready to talk now....honestly wtf is Israel?! If 100s of Israelis had just been slaughtered in a mass attack would Israel be willing to go to the table and talk it out? I think we all know the answer to that one.

Kier Starmer has called out Israel and said they must stop and what they are doing is wrong.

Hurrah!

Israel now seeking talks with Lebanese Govt....

What is it with these murderers? Kill and then have talks... so evil.

Do you have a link to where the US said that?

That’s interesting from Malley.

The US certainly didn’t move to correct the Pakistan announcement.

The US initially said that Lebanon was included

If you believe Iran when they say the US agreed that Lebanon was included in the deal, then you are believing the regime.

"As the ceasefire is between Iran and the USA, with no involvement of Israel, Pakistan's view on the statehood of Israel is irrelevant."

If the ceasefire had no involvement with Israel, why are they now being blamed for not agreeing to a part of it (the Lebanon part)? They must be telling the truth that they did not agree to it if they had no involvement in the deal.

Another article on it. I would agree with Robert Malley on this. America took their time suggesting Lebanon was not included.

Robert Malley, a former American envoy who led earlier US-Iranian negotiations, said: “I would trust the Pakistani mediator that Lebanon was included. They put out a statement that it was included and we did not hear any American correct the Pakistani version for many hours.
“It looks like a case of the US reneging and giving the Israeli prime minister [permission] to go ahead [with bombing] for another 24 hours before they are ‘restrained’”.

And even if Lebanon wasn't included in the ceasefire this is wrong regardless:
More than 200 people were killed by Israeli bombing, including strikes with heavy munitions on densely populated areas, which drew outrage from the International Committee of the Red Cross and other international humanitarian organisations.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/09/israel-bombing-lebanon-us-iran-ceasefire-condemnation?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcAREqdFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAwzNTA2ODU1MzE3MjgAAR55qdfVPg8gOc1GSqpXZ3XBpwP0DP55Eh2mFQhpDPYvrFELqfnWLCzToinDcw_aem_8BjpNqNHdhzx2JoqR1O-Uw

And the US trusts Pakistan as does Iran so they are in a very good position to broker a ceasefire as many analysts have commented on. Not sure why someone thinks they suddenly shouldn't be trusted in this process.

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/04/09/asia/pakistan-islamabad-talks-us-iran-ceasefire-intl-hnk

Its a funny one, America and Israel spout genocidal rhetoric and they don't mean it, it's hyperbole, it's just a few crazy cranks, why are you taking it seriously. Others spout genocidal rhetoric and that means it's justified to bomb their countries to shit. Even though Israel and the US have actually killed, maimed, displaced,starved far more people and caused far more destruction and devastation in the countries they have spouted genocidal rhetoric towards than Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran have.

Please stop lying about what i said OR quote where i said i believed the regime?

You re just making up stuff to support your weak argument and your belief that neither Israel or the USA can do any wrong.

What do you think "i will end their civilisation" means in practice?

As the ceasefire is between Iran and the USA, with no involvement of Israel, Pakistan's view on the statehood of Israel is irrelevant.

What matters is their opinion on the ceasefire.

The US president speaks genocide, not hyperbole

Pakistan did well to broker the deal but they cannot claim to be neutral.

They don't even recognise Israel as a sovereign state.

You are choosing to believe what Iran and Pakistan said so in this instance, yes you are believing the regime.

To say 10s of 1000s of Iranians would be dust suggests you believed Trump's hyperbole. Do you normally believe everything Trump says? It was known that what the US was threatening to target was infrastructure like bridges and power stations so there was no need for thousands of people to be killed at all apart from the last minute stunt played by the IRGC.

Lol but Israel and the USA are.... touching!

Without Pakistan, there would be no ceasefire and 10s of 1000s of Iranians would now be dust... as Israel and the USA drop whatever they can muster onto the people of Iran.

So yes i would take the word of the Pakistani's as they brokered the peace.

Where did i say i believe Iranian regime...?? i did not, so please don't distort what i ve written.

Pakistan have a mutual defence pact with Saudi. They are very keen to deescalate the war and not to be drawn in to it.

Pakistan aren't neutral as you well know.

You choose to believe Iran and Pakistan. I choose to believe the US and Israel.

That's it, really. People choose who to believe and it's all irrelevant really who we on MN believe because no one can tell another country what to do.

I hope that Israel will agree to a ceasefire with Lebanon but that is up to them. I'm sure they could be persuaded to do so for a permanent ceasefire but not so sure they will agree right now.