[Pants-of-dog]

Making whataboutisms about colonialism does not change or refute the fact that Israel is engaging in settler colonialism and therefore has a systemic bias towards, and financial incentive for, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[QatzelOk]

...letting civilians leave combat zones...

This was also called "Trail of Tears" because a *combat zone* is in reality *a violent genocide in progress with public consent from the genociding side*.

... Orthodox Judaism is irredeemably racist. ...

If you wanted to rule over the Arabs with an iron fist and no mercy, you could hardly have chosen a better group for the job.

Best Capos billions of dollars can buy:

*Inventing things = making them up and selling them

[wat0n]

This was also called "Trail of Tears" because a *combat zone* is in reality *a violent genocide in progress with public concent from the genociding side*.

No, a combat zone is an area where there are two forces fighting each other.

Evacuating civilians from such areas is fairly standard.

[Godstud]

Gaza looks like Hiroshima.

You have Hamas to thank for that. Hamas are not freedom fighters, but terrorists who see using the Palestinian populace as pawns in their game.

Israel is also braking international law by bringing in settlers in occupied areas.

International Law. What is that exactly? Who enforces it? Is it actually enforced?

You know what is against international Law? Lobbing missiles and rockets into another country.

Negotiations even with terrorists work, Al Qaida and Taliban made peace with the USA.

Now I know you're trolling!!

@Pants-of-dog Everything you post is Whataboutisms and Colonization/Genocide lies from your Cult of Victimhood. You'd be better of keeping that idiotic rhetoric in colleges where the smooth brains will absorb the lies, fully.

[Skynet]

International Law. What is that exactly? Who enforces it? Is it actually enforced?

You know what is against international Law? Lobbing missiles and rockets into another country.

UN-Charta, the security council should enforce the international law, but the USA uses its veto to protect the crimes of Israel, without US the conflict would be solved within months, by a two state solution and line 1967.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Pants-of-dog Everything you post is ….lies

No, and I predict that you will refuse to provide an example of me posting anything incorrect.

[Skynet]

The military expert Scott Ritter on Gaza-Israel war:

[Godstud]

No, and I predict that you will refuse to provide an example of me posting anything incorrect.

Deny. Deny. Deny. You post that males can become women. If that isn't a lie, then I don't know what is.

You also constantly state that Canada is committing genocide, on an ongoing basis, but have yet to provide me with a list of the dead.

[starman2003]

Whatever suspending the peace treaty means, it'd be supposed to be temporary. That wording suggests it'd be resumed sooner or later anyway, so Israel may assume they'd eventually get away with the ethnic cleansing rather intact. They could even consider it a free pass actually.

That's what Israel may assume or hope for but I wouldn't be confident. While "suspend" suggests only a temporary measure, I assume Jordan would make a resumption of relations conditional on allowing the Palestinians to return to gaza or the west bank.
Btw according to one source, Egypt says an expulsion of Palestinians would cause a "rupture" in relations, even a "serious military escalation" so it doesn't look like Jordan is alone in this. Btw, Egypt has also rejected billions in aid, forgiveness of debt and EU money in exchange for taking Palestinians into sinai, so it looks like they're serious.
The present Israeli government may not be deterred by such consequences. To people like smotrich and ben gvir, getting the entire west bank for jews is worth far more than relations with Jordan or other arab states. They'd be happy to eject the Palestinians and wouldn't let them back in.


As an aside, as my username indicates, I've been in the pofo for 20 years now. Dunno what the average is.

[Beren]

I assume Jordan would make a resumption of relations conditional on allowing the Palestinians to return to gaza or the west bank.

At least it'd be their initial request.

However, Gaza and the West Bank are two different issues because there's no Hamas in the West Bank.

Egypt says an expulsion of Palestinians would cause a "rupture" in relations, even a "serious military escalation" so it doesn't look like Jordan is alone in this. Btw, Egypt has also rejected billions in aid, forgiveness of debt and EU money in exchange for taking Palestinians into sinai, so it looks like they're serious.

Sure, they seriously don't want them.

The present Israeli government may not be deterred by such consequences.

Maybe because we just don't know what the actual consequences would be and for how long they'd last. It could be somewhat rough to them but they shouldn't expect or be afraid of anything that much serious, although they still should be careful.

[wat0n]

However, Gaza and the West Bank are two different issues because there's no Hamas in the West Bank.

There are Hamas cells in the West Bank, it doesn't rule it though.

[Beren]

There are Hamas cells in the West Bank, it doesn't rule it though.

The point is there's nothing in the West Bank the Israelis couldn't handle, so they just wouldn't feel like driving the Palestinians out of there that much anyway. On the other hand, though, things in Gaza got out of hand indeed, so ethnic cleansing the Gaza Strip may have occurred to them.

[wat0n]

The point is there's nothing in the West Bank the Israelis couldn't handle, so they just wouldn't feel like driving the Palestinians out of there that much anyway. On the other hand, though, things in Gaza got out of hand indeed, so ethnic cleansing the Gaza Strip may have occurred to them.

Things got out of hand in Gaza because Hamas was allowed to rule it. I don't think ethnic cleansing has or will happen precisely because Egypt won't accept any Gazan refugees.

[Beren]

Things got out of hand in Gaza because Hamas was allowed to rule it. I don't think ethnic cleansing has or will happen precisely because Egypt won't accept any Gazan refugees.

Hamas could rule it because Gazans are more radical, which can't be expected to change, so the Israelis may just feel like removing them.

[wat0n]

Hamas could rule it because Gazans are more radical, which can't be expected to change, so the Israelis may just feel like removing them.

Hamas could rule Gaza because it was militarily stronger than the PA there.

[Beren]

Hamas could rule Gaza because it was militarily stronger than the PA there.

All the reasons you can mention can be traced back to the fact that Hamas is more popular in Gaza than the PA is, which is due to their more radical approach to Israel.

[wat0n]

All the reasons you can mention can be traced back to the fact that Hamas is more popular in Gaza than the PA is, which is due to their more radical approach to Israel.

Depends on when. You don't really need to be popular if you have enough guns.

I would not be so sure Hamas is currently more popular than the PA in Gaza, but I don't doubt that was the case in 2006.

[QatzelOk]

All the reasons you can mention can be traced back to the fact that Hamas is more popular in Gaza than the PA is, which is due to their more radical approach to Israel.

Why would millions of people living in a refugee camp-prison who get bombed every few years by a racist apartheid state... radicalize?

Don't they know that there is no alternativeTM ?

If they would just sit quietly in their bunkers... they could become SingaporeTM.

[Beren]

Depends on when. You don't really need to be popular if you have enough guns.

I would not be so sure Hamas is currently more popular than the PA in Gaza, but I don't doubt that was the case in 2006.

All in all Gaza is rather doomed to be Hamas territory anyway, so it could be alluring for Israel to ethnic cleanse it, although it's not feasible. Neither is rooting out Hamas, so I really wonder if how they mean to resolve the problem. I don't think they'd consider sending in an international military force workable. They'd be regarded as occupiers either and the whole thing would collapse sooner or later anyway.

[Rich]

This is a lie. Its not just a lie but its an absurd lie. What has Israel ever done for western interests in the Middle East? If Israel had remained in occupation of one or both banks of the Suez Canal, then yes it would have been useful . I wish Israel had kept control of the Canal. But it didn't.

Why do people think Stalin backed the Zionists after the Second World War? Because he felt sorry for the Jews? No he backed the Zionists because he thought the Jews would be winners and the Muslims losers. Stalin was right in this but it was irrelevant. Stalin's Soviet successors switched to supporting the Muslim loser regimes. because Israel had nothing to offer. Israel doesn't sit on top off the oil. Israel doesn't control the Canal. These are the things that matter.

Actually thinking about it Israel' destruction of the Iraqi nuclear facilitates in 1982, was of help to the West. But that's it. That's the one time I can think of where they gave something back. The international Jewish Supremacist lie machine and the international Marxist lie machine both push this lie that in some mysterious but always undefined way Israel is some great protector of Western interests in the Middle East.