[Skynet]

Imagine now trouble with a country who has military industrial complex (like Iran).

Some light armed could conquer israeli land what would trouble look like with the Persian Army.

How will Syria react?

[annatar1914]

Another non state actor with a militia holds more ground than state actor militaries are managing elsewhere. There's something important to notice with this.

[Skynet]

I ask me why they can not find a compromise like line 1967 and live peace, instead to kill each other.

[Istanbuller]

Give Netanyahu's fascist stance on Palestine, it is probably a false flag attack by Israel.

[Robert Urbanek]

Egypt supposedly controls much of what enters the Gaza Strip. One must suspect that safeguard has been compromised and wonder why.

[Skynet]

@Robert Urbanek When Egypt would not controle the entrance to Gazastrip... there would be 1 Million AK-47's delivered to Gaza.

Reportedly the Hamas attacked with IDF weapons and uniforms, in the Darknet are Uzzi's and Tar-21's the runner.

[Rich]

Give Netanyahu's fascist stance on Palestine, it is probably a false flag attack by Israel.

How on Earth is this a false flag? There's huge numbers of Hamas fighters getting killed. I remember after 9/11 the Islamophiles said the Muslims would never do this, this must be a false flag, I said even if 9/11 was a false flag so what, the mass murder of the 2nd Algerian civil war certainly wasn't.

I won't complain about Hamas's civilian hostage taking, they're doing whatever's necessary to advance their cause. Now we don't don't know yet whether Natanyahu's man enough. We don't know whether he's just another empty wind bag politician, but if he does really punish Hamas, I hope there's no whining about it, by those that support Hamas or those who claim to oppose it, but seem to systematically oppose any action to really undermine it.

Biden's sending a carrier group. This is a good first step, but here there's no excuse for not using American fire power.

[QatzelOk]

Give Netanyahu's fascist stance on Palestine, it is probably a false flag attack by Israel.

It does seem like it could be another false flag on the part of ever-expanding Israel.

And if it is a false flag, then the bought-and-paid-for media will spend the next few weeks telling us how bad-ass and strong that Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah are.

We will soon "find out" about some menacing arm that is being fabricated by the bad guys, and that the West itself and all its hard-working innocent people are at risk if "we let them get this new technology."

Or does anyone think that Israel is too honest and other-centric to initiate a false flag before another war of expansion?

[starman2003]

Or does anyone think that Israel is too honest and other-centric to initiate a false flag before another war of expansion?

If they wanted expansion why did they pull out of Gaza and Lebanon years ago? Or why didn't they reconquer during the previous fights with hez and Hamas? And does a "false flag" operation have to cost 700 Israeli lives??

[Potemkin]

If they wanted expansion why did they pull out of Gaza and Lebanon years ago? Or why didn't they reconquer during the previous fights with hez and Hamas? And does a "false flag" operation have to cost 700 Israeli lives??

@starman2003, consider what you are doing. You’re trying to reason with @QatzelOk.

[Tailz]

If they wanted expansion why did they pull out of Gaza and Lebanon years ago? Or why didn't they reconquer during the previous fights with hez and Hamas? And does a "false flag" operation have to cost 700 Israeli lives??

They (Israel) could never have kept Gaza, it's too heavily populated with Palestinians for such a small area. To hold it, they needed to police millions of hostile Palestinians which meant risking Jewish lives and risked ultimately having to absorb millions of Palestinians into the Israeli voting population or do some serious ethnic cleansing.

The Withdrawal let the Israeli side set the border rather than having the border set by negotiations, while also containing the most firebrand elements in as small a space as possible that has since pretty much been walled off.

Plus it puts them (Israel) in a good political blame game position because they can claim exactly what you're claiming. "If we are such horrible people, why did we give up Gaza peacefully in return for no concessions?"

Bait and switch...

Lebanon is another situation entirely. If I remember correctly, that was international - mostly American - pressure on Israel. While I think they had no real plans to hold the territory, instead deny its use close to the border - which has pretty much been the situation.

[starman2003]

They (Israel) could never have kept Gaza, it's too heavily populated with Palestinians for such a small area. To hold it, they needed to police millions of hostile Palestinians which meant risking Jewish lives and risked ultimately having to absorb millions of Palestinians into the Israeli voting population or do some serious ethnic cleansing.

You could say the same about the West Bank, yet they've held it for over 56 years. And if they want a "war of expansion" inevitably they'll have to "swallow" large numbers of arabs.
Anyway ethnic cleansing is now all too possible on the West Bank.

[Tailz]

You could say the same about the West Bank, yet they've held it for over 56 years. And if they want a "war of expansion" inevitably they'll have to "swallow" large numbers of arabs.

The situation with the West Bank is vastly different, the Zionist settler groups are committed to settling the West Bank, far more than they were with the Gaza Strip. Even the political establishment is invested in West Bank Settlements, with a number of political leaders living in West Bank Settlements. It's a far larger land mass, with far more Jewish Settlements, Jewish religious sites, infrastructure, etc. The geographic dynamics pretty much put the occupied territory within the heart of Israel itself. Plus Israel views its security as being dependent upon holding and controlling access through the West Bank - unlike Gaza, an attack from Gaza is dangerous and deadly as we can see, but it is not an existential threat to Israel's existence as what an attack via the West Bank would be as it would come via a power such as an actual Arab state instead of Militants). Plus the Palestinian population in the West Bank is relatively more peaceful than that of the Gaza Strip, with a great many Palestinians from the West Bank working in Israeli settlements or Israel proper.

So no, you can't say the same thing as the dynamics are differnt.

Anyway ethnic cleansing is now all too possible on the West Bank.

Already been happening. Settlement activity has always been low key aimed at supplanting Arabs with Jews, bit by bit, House by House, grove by grove, farm by farm. The settlers don't hide this fact.

Certainly, if they just rounded up all the Arabs and bussed them out of the West Bank (as a previous Mayor of Jerusalem once recommended), there would be an international outcry of ethnic cleansing. Instead, the Zionists are using the Soviet Salami technique, "Slice by Slice." They have been at it for years, they are in no rush.

[starman2003]

Already been happening. Settlement activity has always been low key aimed at supplanting Arabs with Jews, bit by bit, House by House, grove by grove, farm by farm. The settlers don't hide this fact.

Certainly, if they just rounded up all the Arabs and bussed them out of the West Bank (as a previous Mayor of Jerusalem once recommended), there would be an international outcry of ethnic cleansing. Instead, the Zionists are using the Soviet Salami technique, "Slice by Slice." They have been at it for years, they are in no rush.

But the far-right government wants to accelerate the process. Even before the current conflict, it seemed nobody of much importance cared about the Palestinians anymore. One by one arab governments were ditching them as "normalization" proceeded. Hamstrung by pro-israel groups, US officials are limited to lip service; they're in no position to take action. The upshot is that Israel had veritable carte blanche to proceed with "cleansing."
The conflict will probably make things worse. Nutanyahu may be criticized for initial losses but from now on there will be minimal if any resistance to the far-right agenda.
I have doubts the "creeping annexation" strategy, as a way to minimize opposition, will ultimately work. At a certain point, the Israelis, having taken the bulk of Palestinian land, will have to eject the Palestinians. They'd be herded into ghettos or something yet they'd erupt like the Gazans and be thrown out.
Given the stranglehold the zionists have over the media and shaping of opinion in the west, they probably would be willing to risk international condemnation, which would be surprisingly muted outside the near east. There is no shortage of politicians who've sold out so completely to zionists the latter could build gas chambers and crematoria for the Palestinians and still be exculpated...

[Tailz]

But the far-right government wants to accelerate the process.

Of course, Netanyahu created a government by making deals with the most right-wing elements of Israeli society. So of course once they were in power, those elements pushed for their agendas. If my memory serves me correctly, there is even one group that wants to level the Dome of the Rock and rebuild the Temple. I think that has been the only group that Netanyahu has actually pushed back on their demands.

Even before the current conflict, it seemed nobody of much importance cared about the Palestinians anymore.

Sadly the Palestinians were always a cause of convenience for other world powers.

One by one arab governments were ditching them as "normalization" proceeded.

Because its more profitable to be Israel's friend than Israel's enemy. Being Israel's friend brings you concessions from the US. And so once more, the Palestinians are the cause of convenience.

I have doubts the "creeping annexation" strategy, as a way to minimize opposition, will ultimately work.

I think 700,000+ Jewish settlers in the West Bank would disagree with you.

At a certain point, the Israelis, having taken the bulk of Palestinian land, will have to eject the Palestinians.

Not unless they politically disempower them, which they have already done with the Basic Law: Israel - The nation state of the Jewish people

Article 1, C: The fulfillment of the right of national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

[starman2003]

I think 700,000+ Jewish settlers in the West Bank would disagree with you.

I don't doubt that annexation will work or become reality. I just think at a certain point it'll have to involve forcible, mass expulsion--and killing--of Palestinians.

[QatzelOk]

If they wanted expansion why did they pull out of Gaza and Lebanon years ago? Or why didn't they reconquer during the previous fights with hez and Hamas? And does a "false flag" operation have to cost 700 Israeli lives??

Short-term losses in order to secure long-term victory.

This concept is why the formulaic "why did they do THIS if they wanted THAT?" doesn't really work.

[skinster]

If they wanted expansion why did they pull out of Gaza and Lebanon years ago? Or why didn't they reconquer during the previous fights with hez and Hamas? And does a "false flag" operation have to cost 700 Israeli lives??

The removal of 6000-7000 Jewish settlers in Gaza didn't mean pulling out of Gaza. They still occupy Gaza, from the land and from the air and shoot Palestinians who swim 20 metres out of the sea of Gaza. It wasn't an act of "goodwill" to remove illegal settlers from occupied-Palestinian territory, they just moved them to occupy the West Bank, another place they live illegally, if international law is anything to go by. The move out of Gaza was in part to populate the West Bank with illegal settlers and illegal settlements and to use Gaza as a prison camp where they could conduct period wars and then sell weapons they used in these wars, which they would mark as 'battle-tested' and so make them more likely to be sold.

And they left Lebanon because of Hezbollah. They still occupy parts of it though, the Sheba farms areas, if I remember correctly.

As for trying to "reason with" Qatz, do you have anything to say about the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians, @Potemkin? or is this issue of settler-colonialism in the 21st century too "complex" for a socialist like you?

[starman2003]

The removal of 6000-7000 Jewish settlers in Gaza didn't mean pulling out of Gaza. They still occupy Gaza, from the land and from the air

Its has been characterized as a vast prison, but the Israeli departure from the place itself was a victory, no?

It wasn't an act of "goodwill" to remove illegal settlers from occupied-Palestinian territory, they just moved them to occupy the West Bank, another place they live illegally, if international law is anything to go by. The move out of Gaza was in part to populate the West Bank with illegal settlers and illegal settlements

But it needn't have been a question of either/or. They could've settled both areas. I guess it wasn't politically feasible to do what they had to do to securely settle gaza, until now when they have a pretext for genocide or ethnic cleansing.

And they left Lebanon because of Hezbollah.

Gaza was deemed to be too much trouble as well. But a new government with a pretext is a different matter...

[skinster]

Its has been characterized as a vast prison, but the Israeli departure from the place itself was a victory, no?

Of course not, since it ratcheted up the blockade and siege and has resulted in bombing campaigns ever since.

But it needn't have been a question of either/or. They could've settled both areas.

It was a case of moving them out of Gaza to make it a concentration camp that they periodically bother while increasing settlement of the West Bank. That's what happened.