Iron Swords vs. Al-Aqsa Deluge - Israel/Palestinians (again)

[Rick]

9 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Ahh of course none will question how we control the US.

I admit to not paying much attention to foreign affairs as this is not that important to the U.S. compared to the main issue. So, again, out of honest curiosity, how did the U.S. create Hamas ?

[Ssnake]

By exporting a surplus contingent of military grade sarcasm.

[Mighty_Zuk]

19 minutes ago, Rick said:

I admit to not paying much attention to foreign affairs as this is not that important to the U.S. compared to the main issue. So, again, out of honest curiosity, how did the U.S. create Hamas ?

Read my comment, then see who I replied to and read his comment. All will become clear in time.

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 hours ago, Pavel Novak said:

But that would be further NATO escalation towards Russia! Or something like that I was told.

Its deeply curious how NATO advancing east is double plus ungood, but advancing into the Holy Lands, and towards those long established secular Democracies, Syria and Iran, is....

In light of how Tanknetters are at recognising sarcasm these days....

⚠️ Contains traces of sarcasm.

 

Edited April 7, 2024 by Stuart Galbraith

[sunday]

4 hours ago, Rick said:

How did the U.S. create Hamas?

It is likely you are wasting your time with some engagements.

Edited April 7, 2024 by sunday

[crazyinsane105]

21 hours ago, glenn239 said:

You said Israel has no choices.  But Israel does have a choice.  They can ask to join NATO. 

 

Last time…

NATO has been made to protect against Russia. It’s not meant to extend protection to countries in the Middle East fighting a never ending conflict centered around religion.

NATO countries include Turkey and Bosnia, neither of which will be keen on admitting Israel (along with a host of EU countries).

Israel can feel free to seek defense pacts with  individual countries, but NATO as a whole isn’t even worth discussing for obvious reasons.

[crazyinsane105]

“It doesn’t look like anyone is winning right now,” he said, “but there are many, many losers.”
 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/six-months-war-gaza-everyone-110022613.html

[glenn239]

9 hours ago, Pavel Novak said:

But that would be further NATO escalation towards Russia! Or something like that I was told.

If the importance of Ukraine is a 10 to Russia, Palestine is about a 1.  That is to say, I would bet the Russians would welcome NATO applying its energies and resources in a direction and purpose that is not stupid.

[glenn239]

21 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

If you say that NATO IS willing to fight someone like Hamas despite the usage of human shields, then NATO members have no right to lecture Israel on morality.

Bibi is an ass hat that demands a blank cheque to do whatever he wants, but if in the process of lashing out in various directions he triggers a regional war in which Israel is certain to be defeated, he will whine and plead for US and/or NATO intervention to save his ass.   Granted, if left to their own devices both Biden and Trump would do whatever Bibi wants, but the NATO public seems not in that mood.  

 

Edited April 7, 2024 by glenn239

[glenn239]

10 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

NATO has been made to protect against Russia. It’s not meant to extend protection to countries in the Middle East fighting a never ending conflict centered around religion.

NATO exists to defend European security against armed attack from any direction.  If you google the charter the Soviet Union is not even mentioned.  When originally formed, the Middle East was not a concern, the Soviet Union was the primary threat to Europe.  That was then.  Things started to change with the importance of Middle Eastern oil to the West, and with the proliferation in particular of long range missiles, now NATO has a southern front .    The Mediterranean is a NATO lake, and it has security interests on all of its coastal areas, including in Palestine.   

Quote

NATO countries include Turkey and Bosnia, neither of which will be keen on admitting Israel (along with a host of EU countries).

The problem being that NATO demands for Israeli admission into NATO will not be compatible with an Israeli free hand in Palestine.

 

[crazyinsane105]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Bibi is an ass hat that demands a blank cheque to do whatever he wants, but if in the process of lashing out in various directions he triggers a regional war in which Israel is certain to be defeated, he will whine and plead for US and/or NATO intervention to save his ass.   Granted, if left to their own devices both Biden and Trump would do whatever Bibi wants, but the NATO public seems not in that mood.  

 

Israel won’t win a regional war, but neither will any country involved. That’s probably what is stopping all sides from launching an all out confrontation 

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

NATO exists to defend European security against armed attack from any direction.  If you google the charter the Soviet Union is not even mentioned.  When originally formed, the Middle East was not a concern, the Soviet Union was the primary threat to Europe.  That was then.  Things started to change with the importance of Middle Eastern oil to the West, and with the proliferation in particular of long range missiles, now NATO has a southern front .    The Mediterranean is a NATO lake, and it has security interests on all of its coastal areas, including in Palestine.   

The problem being that NATO demands for Israeli admission into NATO will not be compatible with an Israeli free hand in Palestine.

 

What does Israel have anything to do with Middle Eastern oil? This is a very strange argument. Israel is nowhere close to any oil producing Arab country, and none of the oil producing Arab countries are looking to be involved in the current conflict. I found it strange that people always equate Israel to Arab oil (fun fact: largest supplier of oil to Israel happens to be Russia follow by Azerbaijan). 
 

Palestine-Israel is a localized conflict that neighboring countries aren’t jumping into (minus Iran and their proxies). It has very little to do with EU security. There aren’t even refugees coming in from Gaza, so there isn’t even that specific element for the EU to worry about.
 

The main problem with Israel joining NATO is that, NATO countries do not formally accept Israeli annexations in West Bank (and many aren’t too excited about the territory Israel gained in ‘67 against Syria or Jordan, but unofficially accept it). Of course a free hand against Palestine will also be restricted,  but that’s not the only issue. 

[TrustMe]

Israel gets it's oil mainly from Egypt. Prior to the Iranian revolution it got it's oil from Iran.

Edited April 7, 2024 by TrustMe

[Mighty_Zuk]

3 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Bibi is an ass hat that demands a blank cheque to do whatever he wants, but if in the process of lashing out in various directions he triggers a regional war in which Israel is certain to be defeated, he will whine and plead for US and/or NATO intervention to save his ass.

Then why are Biden and every other western leader so keen on helping Netanyahu win the next elections? (even if they're hopeless). Instead of working to have him replaced, they're boosting his popularity.

[crazyinsane105]

1 hour ago, TrustMe said:

Israel gets it's oil mainly from Egypt. Prior to the Iranian revolution it got it's oil from Iran.

Incorrect. Top suppliers are Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkey, and several other countries (Kazakhstan is a big one as well). Egypt had a natural gas pipeline that extended to Israel, but given the new found reserves off Israeli coastline, this pipeline may no longer be as relevant.

Oil producing countries from ME don’t supply oil to Israel (at least not directly).

Edited April 7, 2024 by crazyinsane105

[txtree99]

7 hours ago, glenn239 said:

NATO exists to defend European security against armed attack from any direction.  If you google the charter the Soviet Union is not even mentioned.  When originally formed, the Middle East was not a concern, the Soviet Union was the primary threat to Europe.  That was then.  Things started to change with the importance of Middle Eastern oil to the West, and with the proliferation in particular of long range missiles, now NATO has a southern front .    The Mediterranean is a NATO lake, and it has security interests on all of its coastal areas, including in Palestine.   

The problem being that NATO demands for Israeli admission into NATO will not be compatible with an Israeli free hand in Palestine.

 

Why would NATO even entertain admitting Israel?  your alternate universe is bizarre…

[glenn239]

15 hours ago, txtree99 said:

Why would NATO even entertain admitting Israel?  your alternate universe is bizarre…

NATO can't allow Israel to get curb stomped, and NATO can't allow Israel to perpetually do what it's doing.  

[txtree99]

8 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

NATO can't allow Israel to get curb stomped, and NATO can't allow Israel to perpetually do what it's doing.  

Again. Your alternate reality.   NATO is not going to invite Israeli, and your reasons are insane.  

[glenn239]

21 hours ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Israel won’t win a regional war, but neither will any country involved. That’s probably what is stopping all sides from launching an all out confrontation 

IMO, the USAF is what is exercising regional deterrence at the moment.  The other major factor is that the Arab states in general have little interest in a war with Israel.   

Quote

What does Israel have anything to do with Middle Eastern oil? This is a very strange argument. Israel is nowhere close to any oil producing Arab country, and none of the oil producing Arab countries are looking to be involved in the current conflict. I found it strange that people always equate Israel to Arab oil (fun fact: largest supplier of oil to Israel happens to be Russia follow by Azerbaijan)

 I said that the G7 gained a security interest in the region with the rise of the Arab oil states.  I didn't say that Israel had anything to do with securing those interests.  

Quote

Palestine-Israel is a localized conflict that neighboring countries aren’t jumping into (minus Iran and their proxies). It has very little to do with EU security. There aren’t even refugees coming in from Gaza, so there isn’t even that specific element for the EU to worry about.

Iran would be quite surprised to discover that if it gets into a war with the US in the Middle East because of Israel that its missiles cannot hit US bases and interests, including inside NATO territory.

Quote

The main problem with Israel joining NATO is that, NATO countries do not formally accept Israeli annexations in West Bank (and many aren’t too excited about the territory Israel gained in ‘67 against Syria or Jordan, but unofficially accept it). Of course a free hand against Palestine will also be restricted,  but that’s not the only issue. 

Hmmn.  Sounds like Israel would have to do a real solution to the Palestinian problem rather than the stall for time bullshit they've been spewing for 40 years.

[glenn239]

Just now, txtree99 said:

Again. Your alternate reality.   NATO is not going to invite Israeli, and your reasons are insane.  

NATO cannot allow Israel to get curb stomped by an Arab coalition, and NATO also cannot allow Israel to do this type of thing in the future.   

[txtree99]

You do realize how NATO works in the real world?   There is no chance that Israel gets invited and all 30 members agree.   

7 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

NATO cannot allow Israel to get curb stomped by an Arab coalition, and NATO also cannot allow Israel to do this type of thing in the future.   

 

[Perun]

Hamas attack could be most bigger Israeli victory if Israeli goverment acted smart but they didnt so now they lost the war.

 

 

[Perun]

Six months to the day of the Oct. 7 massacre, the Israeli military pulled out of the entire southern half of the Gaza Strip, in the stunning first move that seemed to indicate a reversal of the relentless offensive that followed the unprovoked Hamas attack.

The result of Israel’s war in Gaza is a strategic victory for Iran and Hamas, who do not care about the loss of Palestinian life.

Israel has been isolated and weakened. It is closer than ever to arms embargoes and economic sanctions due a fraying relationship with its greatest ally, the United States; its population is rattled; its economy is damaged; and the hopes for peace with Saudi Arabia have been sidelined. All of this was predictable when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to take the bait and rumble into Gaza, instead of building a global and regional coalition against Hamas, creating pressure for a release of the hostages and using the moral high ground to pocket peace with Saudi Arabia and much of the rest of the Gulf.

Here are six important points to weigh as Israel renews hostage negotiations.

Rafah was a no-go
Israel had backed itself into an impossible corner. Most of the Gaza Strip’s population was crammed into an enclave around the town of Rafah on the Egyptian border, which had become the last redoubt of Hamas. With so many people in such a small, besieged area, credible reports of famine and disease had sapped Israel of international legitimacy and support for a move into Rafah that would probably be a bloodbath.

There was also an impasse over how to get the civilian population out of Rafah, which all sides wanted. Hamas insisted on no security checks for the departing population; Israel rightly objected, fearing Hamas terrorists would sneak out with civilians. In this context, there is a benefit to Israel ceding the southern half of Gaza back to Hamas: The population can now be more widely dispersed, making it more plausible to strike at Hamas without hitting civilians. A bit of the pressure on the humanitarian situation will also be eased.

Waning international support
In a war, it is not necessarily so that the side that lost more civilians is in the right. The world — including almost every government in the West — has enormous sympathy for Israel’s goal of removing Hamas from control of Gaza, and of course for recovering its hostages. After the massacre’s extraordinary barbarism, and with Hamas leaders promising more of the same, that’s hardly surprising.

While there is a shared desire to remove Hamas from power, it doesn’t mean that Israel’s supporters would back all methods. The credit line was never infinite. After 30,000 casualties in Gaza (13,000 of which the Israeli military claims are Hamas militants), Israel’s international goodwill has essentially run out.

Restricting humanitarian aid
Israel played games with humanitarian aid, which did it no reputational favors. It’s not crazy to claim that countries at war do not provide aid to the enemy population; I do not recall airdrops of aid to the population of Dresden. But in today’s environment, collective punishment against a captive population will not fly.

Israel officials have admitted that they can triple the speed of inspection of aid trucks going in. Did they really need to wait for Biden to read Netanyahu the riot act last week, after seven World Central Kitchen aid workers were killed in Israeli strikes?

Israelis claim that they wanted humanitarian gestures in exchange, like access to the hostages. But you cannot make your own human decency hostage to reciprocity from terrorists.

A turning Israeli public
Israel presented early on two goals that seemed contradictory, and insisted that they are not: fighting Hamas to the finish and engineering the return of the 200-plus hostages taken on the day of the attack. What was undeniably contradictory was timelines: Israel might finish off Hamas in three years, or 10, but the hostages are running out of time (sources estimate that at least 30 of the remaining 134 hostages in Gaza are already dead). Israeli public opinion is now demanding that the hostages’ fate be made the priority.

In Israel’s parliamentary system, Netanyahu can ignore public opinion for as long as the 63 lawmakers in his coalition back him. So far they have done so, but if any of them desire to continue a career in politics, they’ll be reading the polls: three-quarters of the Israeli public want the current government gone. If one is to assume that most of Israel’s Haredim are automatically on Netanyahu’s side, then that means 90% or so of non-Haredi citizens are fed up. Breaking points are approaching.

The US and its role in hostage negotiations
The U.S. is investing an enormous effort in what comes next. The head of the CIA, William Burns, is back in Cairo for a new round of talks on a hostage deal. Yoav Gallant, Israel’s defense minister, said today that Israel is “at a suitable point” to make the difficult deal necessary to bring the hostages home. “We’ll be able to bear heavy prices.”

Crazily, the viability of a deal remains with Hamas’ leader in Gaza and Oct. 7 mastermind, Yahya Sinwar. He has been insisting on no deal unless Israel pulls back fully from Gaza. That would enable a Hamas victory narrative despite the group’s thrashing and the obliteration of much of the strip, and this Israel cannot allow. What’s realistic is a partial hostage release for a temporary ceasefire. The question, incredibly, comes down to whether this one terrorist will now change his tune.

There is still time to flip the narrative. Israel can choose to accept the Biden Doctrine, which involves restoring the Palestinian Authority to Gaza and agreeing in theory on talks for a two-state solution. In exchange, Israel would get peace with Saudi Arabia, a Western-Sunni-Israeli alliance against Iran and a new credit line from the U.S. for further fighting against Hamas, even if the group does not lay down its arms.

Netanyahu is refusing Biden’s overtures for fear of the extreme right members of his coalition bringing down his government. That fear is well-founded. He must choose between being a patriot or a politician.

https://forward.com/opinion/600751/israel-6-months-war-gaza/

[sunday]

There is this pretty unconfirmed rumour:

Quote

This explains why today Israel announced a complete withdrawal from Gaza.

Iran has reportedly communicated to the United States through the Sultanate of Oman, that the Islamic Republic intends to directly strike Israel, unless the U.S. guarantees an immediate permanent ceasefire in Gaza & no Israeli ground invasion of Rafah – Exclusive sources to Jadeh Iran

So basically Iran has given the U.S. a choice: You can avoid a direct attack on Israel, by signing a permanent ceasefire in Gaza & an official guarantee of no Rafah operation.

@Middle_East_Spectator

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

2 hours ago, txtree99 said:

You do realize how NATO works in the real world?   There is no chance that Israel gets invited and all 30 members agree.   

No way Israel also agrees to join NATO if they beg it to.

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

NATO cannot allow Israel to get curb stomped by an Arab coalition, and NATO also cannot allow Israel to do this type of thing in the future.   

NATO not supporting Israel from the outside is exactly what makes members skeptical of its efficacy. Sweden and Finland just joined but members are still arming up. They oppose Israel politically, they damn near abandon Ukraine, and if the baltics get invaded and the US is busy elsewhere - say goodbye to the little 3. They are showing weakness, and adversaries smell blood.

Israel also has no reason to relinquish some of its sovereignty to an organization that would clearly rather leech off others than actually invest in their defense.

[bojan]

On 4/7/2024 at 6:32 PM, crazyinsane105 said:

...NATO countries include Turkey and Bosnia...

Bosnia is not in NATO.