an end to hostilities would be a good start. this is not hard. (obviously i dont respond to many_names, i have his posts blocked).

to expand on my point re: end to hostilities. the problem from any way you look at this, is that the level of, action, taken, by israel, cannot be forgotten. Whats even worse is that Israel has shown no indication of ceasing its activities in the west bank, and therefore every day there is another seed being planted (a metaphor - implying every evil deed is sowing a seed of hate and revenge).

Israel would have to do a complete rethink of its long term strategy, but its political establishment does not have the ability to do this, ergo, I can describe exactly how israel should push toward peace, but the problem is that from a cultural perspective israel is not ready for that, as they are too busy doing their thing in gaza, the westbank, lebanon etc.

if you want me to do a full answer, as to how that would happen, i will write it, but halting settlement expansion would be the key element (you know, after a ceasefire).

This post was edited by ferdia on Nov 26 2024 05:45am

I think halting settlement expansion is something that should happen.
Nevertheless, you described only Israel’s wrong doings. What about the Palestinians ? What is their end game ? What do they want ?
You think they would like self determination ? If yes, where ?

I’ve already wrote it several times in this thread. The ones not ready for peace are the Palestinians. You hold much for the settlements in the West Bank but that’s just a fraction of the Israeli public. A very loud one but still a fraction. In the moment that the Israeli public will see improvements in the readiness of the Palestinians, peace will be achieved shortly.

this was not your question, your question was:



I stand by my response, which was:



so keeping it simple to 1 step at a time

step 1: a ceasefire.

its not rationale to say Palestinians are not ready for peace when it is Israel doing all the bombing and displacement (and refusing peace deals). Your argument that Palestinians are not ready for peace is like a bucket with a lot of holes in it - it does not hold water.

Look, i get it, Hamas are a terrorist organization, and yes one man's terrorist, another's freedom fighter, and yes Oct 7th, but seriously look at the conflict over the last number of decades. it just goes on and on, and it will keep going on and on while Israel continues to adopt this US style disproportionate response*. you cannot expect a different result if you keep doing the same thing. As i said before you either kill them all (genocide), displace them all (ethnic cleansing), or you are going to have to find a way live in peace side by side (two state solution). i accept that 1 & 2 is the Israeli governments plan, and that this is going to take a few more decades, ERGO, more of the same in a few years time. Israel is adopting a strategy that is simply taking too long to get to a conclusion, its as simple as that. You cannot move on as a culture if you are still doing the same stuff that you have been doing for decades.

*disproportionate responses are, in my opinion, stupid. Tit-for-tat is a balanced strategy that fosters cooperation by responding proportionally to actions: kindness with kindness and hostility with hostility. It promotes fairness and discourages escalation, maintaining stability in relationships or conflicts. In contrast, a disproportionate response often leads to a cycle of retaliation, escalating tensions and creating unnecessary animosity. This approach undermines trust, alienates potential allies, and wastes resources. While it may seem effective in asserting dominance, it often produces short-term gains at the cost of long-term stability. Tit-for-tat, with its fairness and predictability, encourages mutual respect and accountability, making it the more sustainable and effective strategy.

the response to Oct 7th is by all accounts, disproportionate. every day israel continues this extermination is a further day of escalation. the sooner Israel understands that, the better, for Israel.

TLDR: the strategies being adopted by Israel in the short term (bombing) and long term (displacement) are not expected to change. Therefore the situation is only expected to remain negative. for decades.

This post was edited by ferdia on Nov 26 2024 12:47pm

sorry for double post, but looking at the Israeli conflict is like looking at simple math 1+1 = 2. when you do stuff, the results are self evident. If the bombing ended tomorrow, next year or in 10 years, the cycle of violence will still continue.

Heavy bombardment of Gaza and displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank—reflect long-standing Israeli policies aimed at addressing security concerns while asserting control over disputed territories. However, these policies have faced widespread criticism for their humanitarian impacts, their potential to perpetuate cycles of violence, and their failure to bring about long-term peace. Here’s an analysis:

1. Consequences of Military Actions in Gaza

Destruction and Humanitarian Crisis: The frequent bombings of Gaza, often in response to rocket attacks by militant groups like Hamas, lead to widespread destruction of infrastructure, loss of civilian lives, and displacement. The blockade further exacerbates economic hardship and limits rebuilding efforts.
Radicalization and Resistance: Such policies can fuel anger, resentment, and a sense of injustice among Palestinians, leading to increased support for militant groups and revenge-driven acts, including terrorism.
Global Perception: These actions damage Israel’s international reputation and relations, especially in regions sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, while sometimes sparking debates within Israeli society.

2. West Bank Displacement

Expansion of Settlements: Continued expansion of Israeli settlements, often accompanied by displacement of Palestinian communities, is widely seen as undermining the feasibility of a two-state solution. This contributes to tensions on the ground and internationally.
Palestinian Resistance: Displacement policies provoke resistance in the form of protests, civil disobedience, and sometimes violent clashes. This perpetuates cycles of unrest and repression.

3. Impacts on Israeli-Palestinian Relations

These policies deepen mistrust between Israelis and Palestinians, making negotiations for peace nearly impossible. Many Palestinians view them as evidence of a broader agenda to undermine their national aspirations.
Conversely, many Israelis view such measures as necessary for security in the absence of a reliable peace partner, given the persistent threat of terrorism.

4. Lack of Policy Change

Political Stalemate: The Israeli government has shown little inclination to change its policies, largely due to internal political dynamics, including the influence of right-wing coalitions that support settlement expansion and a hardline stance against Hamas.
Security Doctrine: The Israeli military’s strategy focuses on deterrence through overwhelming force, which has become deeply entrenched.
Palestinian Leadership Divide: Divisions between Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank further complicate the prospect of any unified approach to peace.

5. Implications for the Future

Prolonged Conflict: Without significant changes, the cycle of violence and retaliation is likely to persist for decades, as neither side achieves its goals.
Human Cost: Civilians on both sides will continue to bear the brunt of the conflict, with Palestinians disproportionately affected due to systemic disadvantages.
Stagnation of Peace Efforts: The lack of viable alternatives or willingness to engage in meaningful negotiations suggests that the status quo will prevail, perpetuating instability.

Conclusion

For the situation to change, both sides would need to make bold moves toward reconciliation and mutual understanding, supported by international mediators. However, current policies and leadership trends indicate that such a shift is unlikely in the near future. Consequently, the region is poised for continued conflict and stagnation unless external and internal pressures force a reevaluation of strategies.

This post was edited by ferdia on Nov 26 2024 01:02pm

you cant fix this psychopathy

The idea that Lebanese army will safe-guard and hold the south empty of Hezbollah longterm is doubtful. Either way, I think this will de-escalate a conflict that had no win condition or benefits for either side. Certainly both sides will claim the other a loser. Hezb will claim Isreal lacked ability to meaningfully penetrate into lebanon, and Israel that hezb lost a lot of leadership.

Both are kind of true, but considering the speed of the negotiated settlement (1+month?) both sides knew that this was a pointless exercise

This post was edited by ownyaah on Nov 26 2024 04:16pm

2006 all over again, Israel learned nothing and killed thousands of innocent people

Afaik, uncle sam and its greatest ally have confirmed on the cessation of hostilities, but hezbollah hasnt said anything yet. I could totally be misinformed though

Does Hezbollah have anyone left to say anything? Legit curious

Ya, thats the beauty of a decentralized insurgency. Theres a chance that Naim Qassem (new homeboy) will be more radical than Nasrallah, but who knows. Its kinda like the same thing with hamas; their numbers have actually grown since oct7th and i can guarantee they are far more dangerous than their predecessors.

I dont personally believe that israel has secured its strategic objectives in southern lebanon, so this deal kinda seems like an israeli L, but they did severely fuck up hezbollahs depots/logistics, while maintaining a superior K/D ratio, so i might just be biased on this one.