Does Donald J Trump have Gaza Strip blood on his hands?

I'm sorry, but I'd just like to point out that's a very American (or imperialist) way of thinking - the idea that civilians on one side deserve to be killed more than on the other. And "If they continue to vote for Hamas" - that's just applying your own norms onto a completely different context.

Of course there can be no justification for a terrorist attack. Yet that's not what you call it when your side does it. You're in favor of Ukrainians killing Russians, right? Because they're the ones who are living under military occupation... right?

Gaza is nor occupied. Gaza has their own government with their own leaders who they vote into power.  They vote for Hamas.  Everyone (the voters included) knows Hamas is a terrorist organization.  
If the people in Gaza wanted peace it is available Israel has offered it over and over. All they have to do is agree not to attack Israel.  But they do not agree, they want instead wipe Israel off the map.

Israel has always tried to avoid civilian casualties.  Normally telling them ahead of time to leave the area  before they strike. 

Civilians who attack other civilians, decapitate children, kill the old and inform and take hostages, deserve whatever they get in retaliation.  

Yes, I'm in favor of Ukrainians killing Russians who committed an unprovoked attack on them.  Just as Israel has a right to defend itself, so does Ukraine.  

The Palestinians have been offered a two-state solution which they have repeatedly refused.  When certain territory that had been under Israel's jurisdiction were ceded back to them, they were handed citrus groves which could have helped them jump-start economy.  What did they do?  They burned everything to the ground.  The only solution the Palestinians will accept is the death of every single Israeli and that is not going to happen.  

You both seem blind to the conditions there, though I can't pretend to know either. Not to mention that the matter is nowhere near as simple as to say Palestine rejects a two-state solution, but of course you feel the need to condemn them for not agreeing to terms made up by the militarily superior. 

I knew the word "unprovoked" would come up. Let's ask this question: what methods have Israel and the US not employed to provoke an attack of this kind? Because it's difficult to come up with anything new.

What saddens me is that so many people who enjoy saying they're in favor of peace ignore how the greater powers can push others into lose/lose situations. "They should just accept what they're told." It's the same thing with Ukraine, which was pushed into war from two sides, East and West. But, quite the way it happened in 2001, once the other side retaliates, it's presented as the start of conflict.

You don't see that this benefits Israel? They now have the excuse to be as ruthless as they want to be - and I'm guessing they will take it. Now, airstrikes aren't conceived of as terror because, according to m2c, people were told to go. Go where and do what?

No, I don't know what the conditions in Gaza are like or were like.  What I do know is that they haven't had a fair (or even unfair) election there in 18 years.  Seems as though the people suppressing the Palestinians are their own people as much as anyone else.  If the only solution to the problem is for every Israeli to be removed from the face of the earth, which is pretty much what Hamas wants, no other solution is going to work.  If that makes me an imperialist, then so be it - I've been called worse.  I'd be willing to bet that any Palestinian living in Israel is ten times better off than the best conditions of any Palestinian in Gaza.

What you write about elections here contradicts the earlier "if they continue to vote for Hamas"... Especially when most of their population is very young - from what I've read, 75% of people in Gaza City are under the age of 25. 

We don't have to agree; I react harshly because I feel for everyone caught up in this, and have to react to statements such as the one about crushing Palestinians. All the blame goes to Hamas, and none at all to those creating the conditions for their rise. I'm repeating myself, but we've seen this sort of thing before.

They are oppressed by their leadership.  Hamas oppresses them.  Israel did not cause rise to Hamas.  
Israel has tried to allow the people there to have it better. But anytime materials come in to help the people, it is used to make weapons to attack Israel.    The EU install new pipelines so the Gaza people could have fresh clean water. The pipes were dug up by Hamas to make rockets to fire at Israel.    That is oppression by their leaders...not Israeli. 

Israel is nicer than I would be...I would take the land and deport them. You cannot allow people to attack you day in and day out. 

Israel is going to kill ever Hamas member. And install a new gov for Gaza civilians.  Again nicer than I would be....I would deport them all. 

Your views are one-sided, and the example of water precisely illustrates how this situation has been created. Gaza was once known for its plentiful waters - are you going to blame Hamas for the dramatic rise in population density, and for decades of overpumping groundwater? You point the finger at people without questioning why they're angry, when even something as basic as water has been a contentious issue for so long. Hamas boasted in advance that they could dig up the water pipes and weaponize them; but by your logic, Israel has the right to bomb whomever they please if they warn them first.

How about you give the right example by relinquish your weapons, considering how many Americans they kill each year? Of course, your right to resistance is greater than anyone else's. Meanwhile, those with the power use even water as a weapon.

You would "deport" them where? Who is supposed to accept the deportees? Are you again ignoring that's what has been happening for decades? Have you ever heard of illegal Israeli settlements? Constantly encroaching on another's territory? Once again, there's a parallel here.

They are angry because they lost their wars.  Israel won the wars.  The mistake they are making is allowing people who hate them to remain on their land. (They won the wars)   

If I won 2 houses in a legal suit and allow one of the previous owners (lost the legal suit) to continue to live in the other house, but they keep attacking my house or my kid and property and even damaging the house they are in, etc then I would make those people in my other house leave.   I would not care where they went but they would leave.
In the case of Israel, if it were me I would ask them where they want to go and buy them a one way ticket.  If they did not choose then I would choose for them. (It should be a Muslim country) Why do you think other countries do not want them? 

Israel does not have 'illegal settlements',   they own the land.  They won the wars.   Just as USA won the US-Mex war, we are not giving back the southern part of US and Irsael should never have given any land back for "peace" that never comes. 

And no Americans 2nd amendment right to keep and bare arms is not going anywhere. And what just happened in Israel is a prime example of why.  Israel should never have disarmed there people. 

How would Israel have won the wars without the support of those who happened to prosecute Jewish people for centuries? They are the ones profiting from this set-up, economically and politically.

A more accurate comparison would be to think of it as your family owning a home for many generations, which a third party then obliges you to share with someone who had left long before you, while you become a second-rate occupant.

"Why do you think other countries do not want them?" -- That's one way of ignoring the international implications. Palestinians have been pushed into ghettos and attacked in Syria as well.

That 3rd party would have obligated me to share AFTER they beat me in court. 
You forget there has NEVER been a country/nation/kingdom/empire of Palestine.  The Ottoman Empire owned the land (someone else before that and someelse before that...) and they were defeated in WWI.   No one helped Israel in the war for independence. It was Israel vs several Arab countries.   Israel won.  You can disagree or not but the fact is Israel exists and it is not going to be wiped off the map.  So IF the people do not want to live in peace....they should leave and go to somewhere where they can live in peace. 


If I could not live in peace with my neighbors,  I would not be their neighbor.  (One of us would be leaving....it would be the one who does not own the land) 

You miss the point, as no one here denies Israel's right to sovereignty. But I can see why you need to make excuses; otherwise, you'd have to face that your modern nation was built on forceful removal just the same.

It was built on a the result of a lost war.  The Ottoman Empire lost.  
Then Britain was in charge and then they said they had enough and then Israel declared their independence....and then was attacked. Israel won the war.  Wars like elections have consequences.   

If as you say most of the people in  Gaza are under 25 yrs old then none were around back when the Arabs lost the wars.  They should either choose to live in peace or choose to leave and live somewhere else. Or at least get leaders who are trying to help them.  ie. Use the new water pipes for water. Leaders who do not hid weapons in schools, hospitals and other places to use them as human shields. 

Hello my:

How do you get the land?  How do you identify who's Hamas and who isn't?  You can't get rid of Hamas without getting rid of 2,000,000 civilians.

Look..  I'm a Jew..  I hate Hamas too, but I don't hate the Palestinians. 

excon

How did Isrsel get the land? They won the wars.   The declared their independence when Britain decided to leave the area.  And they were immediately attacked. They won the war.  

I do not hate anyone. But if you cannot life peacefully with you neighbor....you should leave.  Palestinians have repeatedly shown they cannot live peacefully with Israel.  If they cannot, they should leave and go to somewhere where they can live in peace with their neighbors. 

You are correct that most Palestinians are under the age of 25.  I would not wish what has happened in Israel and now Gaza on any country, but if you poke the bear, don't be surprised if it rises up and crushes you in defense of itself.  

I just came upon this on another site.  Perhaps it will clarify why I believe the Palestinians are the ones who have no interest in peace.  The only condition that would make the Palestinians happy would be the complete and utter annihilation of Israel.  

"Unfortunately only one side wants to negotiate for peace.

All of the proposals rejected by the Arabs and the Palestinians

1919 – Arabs of Palestine REFUSE to nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.

1920 – San Remo conference decisions, REJECTED.

1922 – League of Nations decisions, REJECTED

1937 – Peel Commission Partition, REJECTED.

1938 – Woodhead partition proposal, REJECTED

1947 – U.N. General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR, 181), REJECTED

1967 – Israel's outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 242), REJECTED.

1978 - Bagin/Sa'dat peace proposal, except by Egypt, REJECTED

1994 - Rabin/Hussein Peace agreement REJECTED by the Arab League, except Egypt.

1995 – Rabin's Contour for Peace, REJECTED

2000 – Barack/Clinton peace offer, REJECTED

2001 – Barack's offer at Tabba, REJECTED

2005 - Sharon's peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, REJECTED

2008 - Olmert/Bush peace offer, REJECTED.

2009 to 2021 – Netanyahu's repeated invitations to peace talks, REJECTED

2014 – Kerry's Contours for Peace, REJECTED"

Yep.

To say nothing of the UN resolution equating Zionism with racism.

This comes down to good old-fashioned antisemitism, plain and simple.

The UN has typically been biased against Israel.  Nothing new there.  

I don't have an overview of negotiations nor what they entailed, but I do know that this list exclusively compiles supposed rejections from one side while neglecting to mention the other. For instance, the most recent UN resolution was voted against by Israel and the US, even as it was passed 165 - 6. Whosoever put this list together is also clearly biased to say Palestine rejected all of these. Just look up the 2000 Camp David Summit (here called "Barack/Clinton peace offer," although it misspells the name of Israeli Prime Minister Barak; nothing to do with Barack Obama).

Now, Hamas will never succeed in what they're trying to do; therein lies the tragedy, where civilians on both sides suffer for nothing. By this point, that has probably become inevitable. But firstly, I don't believe this couldn't have been avoided (ages ago), and secondly, we cannot allow our governments to bring us to ignore their shortcomings as well as how they profit from such conflicts. I want to stress this second point, because I don't think these would be the views of actual pro-peace people, if their views weren't purposefully clouded by (inter)national media.

Violence is rarely the way to achieve peace but it seems that this is the way it has been determined probably since time began.  I agree that the extreme loss of life that has already occurred and that will occur in the future will not bring the desired result for either party.  

Trump resonantly criticized Israel's Prime Minister calling him dumb and he also said the Hezbollah militants are very smart. Cheering helps so maybe Trump will soon have a little more blood on his hands. Cheers!

 

This post was edited by Nanoose at October 13, 2023 8:19 AM MDT