Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
forward.com
forward.com
Yes.
Well, yes and no. Of course(!) the residents should self-determine their own future. Here's the problem, the future they've built for themselves is one of jihad and butchery. That's a problem. Yes, I know you are going to make the "not all Gazans" argument. Of course(!) not all Gazans. BUT ... enough Gazans that it's a problem. The whole point of the mandate system was to provide support and protection until a population could develop the infrastructure and will to self-govern. Gaza (nor the West Bank) has not reached that capability yet. They could. They haven't. And yes, I know, the mandate system was fraught with concepts of imperialism and the demands that others take on a Western worldview. I am entirely sensitive to that. But I can only type so many words in a sitting on this kind of platform. And there are very few who are interested in my words at any rate.
Agree.Yes. This is a possibility to explore. One distinct advantage would be to remove Israel from the immediate equation, which hopefully, in turn, will lead towards a less ... jihadist ... view of Israel. The people of Gaza could avert blame to Japan, or Ireland, or Germany.
There are some serious drawbacks. Israel would have to trust that Japan, Ireland, Germany (or whichever countries) would protect them. And seems, at best, unrealistic, in the foreseeable future. What if Gaza should rise up against their oppressors? And Japan, Ireland, and Germany are bringing back their diplomats, and their businessmen, and their officials in body bags? Will those countries be able to stay the course? Will those countries have the fortitude to go street-by-street and house-by-house to root out Hamas jihadis? Especially under international pressure? Israel does it because her survival depends on it. Why would Japan, or Ireland, or Germany? See that has ALWAYS been the problem with international peacekeeping.
Good question. We need the equivalent of a Marshall plan, tailored to the Middle East.Agreed.
Agreed. But, assuming it is the BEST solution ... how could they be convinced to contribute?
Coyote,I’m interested in your words (though may not agree), and appreciate the effort you put into it! l do feel the mandate and that history has become a bit of a rabbit hole that I don’t think it is applicable to solving today’s problems.
In terms of the West Bank especially you can’t exclude Israel’s role in the failures due its policies. Gaza as well. To refuse to allow the Gazan’s back would signal two things.
It would tell the world that Israel’s underlying intent was to take more land (as is happening in the West Bank) and remove the troublesome native population (many of whom were already displaced from Nakhba). This happened once, to do it again would not only be morally wrong, it would tarnish Israel’s legitimacy in the international community for a long time.
It would also hugely inflame tensions and most likely end the ongoing normalization of relations between Israel and It’s Arab neighbors (and wouldn’t Iran just love that!).
It is hard to be dispassionate about this. People have strong ties to their homelands and in many cases it becomes part of their identity as does diaspora.
Agree.
I think the countries involved must include neighboring countries such as Egypt and Jordan, possibly Saudi Arabia who have a vested interest in keep Hamas out and Israel needs to be part of it as well. Israel’s security is a major concern, but so too is finally addressing the valid needs and rights of the Palestinians rather than excluding them from the process (as was done under the prior US administration and was being done with negotiations with the Saudis).
Good question. We need the equivalent of a Marshall plan, tailored to the Middle East.
Thank you. And ditto!I’m interested in your words (though may not agree), and appreciate the effort you put into it!
Israel's failure to do WHAT, exactly?In terms of the West Bank especially you can’t exclude Israel’s role in the failures due its policies.
Oh, no. No. No. No. No. Hard to the no. This is all a land grab?! The actual F? After the events of October 7? That Israel's intent is to take a few more square miles of land?! Oh, thank the sweet baby JC, they slaughtered 1400 of our innocent civilians and abducted another 245. This is exactly what we needed to take that tiny sliver of land.Gaza as well. To refuse to allow the Gazan’s back would signal two things.
It would tell the world that Israel’s underlying intent was to take more land (as is happening in the West Bank) and remove the troublesome native population (many of whom were already displaced from Nakhba).
If the "international community" won't support Israel's survival, is there any choice but to fight for it?This happened once, to do it again would not only be morally wrong, it would tarnish Israel’s legitimacy in the international community for a long time.
Meh. Not convinced at this point. The unity of the Arab world is starting to crack. With excellent reason. They don't want jihadis on their borders, or within their borders, any more than Israel does.It would also hugely inflame tensions and most likely end the ongoing normalization of relations between Israel and It’s Arab neighbors (and wouldn’t Iran just love that!).
Sure.I think the countries involved must include neighboring countries such as Egypt and Jordan, possibly Saudi Arabia who have a vested interest in keep Hamas out and Israel needs to be part of it as well.
Palestinians would be well served by addressing their own needs. They are the first that need to choose pro-Palestine, rather than anti-Israel. Right now, after October 7, Israel isn't going to think about anything other than its own security. Which is right. Palestinians need to step up.Israel’s security is a major concern, but so too is finally addressing the valid needs and rights of the Palestinians rather than excluding them from the process.
No, I agree with Sixties here. There are no unresolved refugee issues that Israel is responsible for solving. UNWRA needs to be dismantled. This unending counting of the refugees under circumstances that apply ONLY to Israel must not be allowed to continue. International law must apply to everyone equally. Any person who remains in the territory, that is: within the borders of the Mandate of Palestine is - by definition - not a refugee. Any person who has obtained citizenship (or should have obtained citizenship) in another state is - by definition - not a refugee.
The problem with refugees and camps and asylum-seekers and migrants - worldwide - is a MUCH bigger issue. I don't believe it can be solved by the current understanding of international law. But the law must apply to everyone equally. Israel can't be singled out.
Yes. I'm certain they will. This is a difficult and delicate subject. Perhaps too much so for this mode of communication. But it is a very different worldview.
Well, why would any nation take that on? Why does any nation accept refugees? Or not?
The reality is that there is no guarantee the people of Gaza will be permitted to return. Why? Because we can't permit Hamas to fester again. We can't allow people sympathetic to Hamas, to jihad, to "from the river to the sea, by any means necessary" return to Gaza. That is a hard nope. Otherwise, we will just be asking ourselves the very same questions next year, or the year after, or ten years from now. After more people are dead.
Counter education is an interesting question. What leads to this level of hate? It isn’t just a matter of what they are taught, it is what makes them receptive to it. Poverty, economic collapse, joblessness, instability, lack of agency, no future and no foreseeable change.Is it possible to screen the returnees? Permit only those willing to work towards peace living in an independent state side-by-side with Israel? How could we screen them effectively? What if we get it wrong? How do we counter-educate the children? Would we permit willing Jewish residents to foster a sense of trust and mutual respect?
Well, a lot of ethnic cleansing, and mutual population exchange has occurred in the world. Sometimes, with great success. I don't think this is as evil as it is made out to be. (And it does seem to only be considered evil when Israel does it. No one bats an eye at all the Jew-free places in the world.)
Glad we agree on thatSure. I absolutely agree. This is why we need a solution, and a drastic change to the status quo.
You'd have to give me examples, in order for me to address that fully. And differentiate between refugees and stateless persons. There are people who have been kept deliberately stateless. Not the same.So how does it apply only to Israel? There are ongoing refugee camps that are older than the Palestinians and they are still counted as refugees.
Hamas was the majority in the Palestinian Authority.Israel is facing all-too-predictable global pressure to scale back its military operation in Gaza to spare innocent lives and prevent a regional conflict that could draw in Iran, the United States, and other nations.
But critics have it backward. Those concerned about human rights and those seeking peace should be rooting for Israel’s full-scale destruction of Hamas—however long it takes or bloody it becomes. That may sound harsh, but it’s the only path to more human rights and more peace for both Israelis and Palestinians.
On human rights, Israelis deserve to live without fear of rocket attack, infiltration, and slaughter from across their border. But Gaza’s two million Palestinians also deserve peace as well as the prospect of a better life—both of which will remain elusive not because they live next to Israel but because they live under Hamas.
Hamas, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood movement, seized control of Gaza from the Palestinian Authority in a violent coup in 2007 and has ruled it since with an iron fist. It allows no elections; permits no free press; arrests, beats, and tortures its critics; and murders those suspected of collaborating, or seeking peace, with Israel.
-----
First and foremost, Israel’s destruction of Hamas would send a strong signal to Iran, which has providedhundreds of millions of dollars as well as weapons and military training for the group since the 1990s, trained hundreds of Hamas fighters in the weeks leading up to the group’s October 7 slaughter of more than 1,400 Israelis, and has since recruited Iranian men and boys to fight alongside Hamas.
After empowering its terrorist proxy in Gaza, Iran is now unleashing militant groups to attack U.S. forces in the region, threatening to attack Israeli and U.S. interests directly if the Jewish state continues its ground operations, and raising prospects that Hezbollah (its leading terrorist proxy) will step in as well.
Anything short of Hamas’ destruction will encourage Tehran to pursue its expansionist agenda across the region further.
While continuing to support Israel as global opposition mounts, Washington should (1) abandon efforts to nourish U.S.-Iranian rapprochement because they surely lead Tehran to question U.S. resolve and (2) impose the harshest possible financial and other sanctions on the regime, its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and key individuals.
Second, Israel’s destruction of Hamas would give pause to Moscow, which just hosted a meeting with top officials from Hamas and Iran, is building stronger military and economic ties to Tehran, and is watching events unfold in the Middle East and drawing conclusions about the major players.
(full article online)
The Case For A Full Israeli Victory over Hamas in Gaza
Backing Israel to the hilt will go a long way to ensuring regional and global stability.nationalinterest.org
