Israel–United States relations and associated politics

[Holman]

So, yeah, I didn't find it on par with the MAGA like videos it's being compared to. FWIW.

MAGA videos aren't funny for people not knowing everything (or even much) about a particular issue; they're funny for people digging in with completely absurd and false claims.

For these college kids to compete with that, it would need to be not just "I want my university to not support Israel's war" but instead "Israelis are lizard people" or "My university is researching bioweapons DNA-targeted at Palestinians."

[Carpet_pissr]

Well, college-age kids are drinking a lot less. Maybe these schools should host nickel beer nights or something.

Idle, sober hands...

They are probably taking edibles instead. Delta 8 et al.

[Isgrimnur]

Gaza war: US 'hopeful' Hamas will accept Israel's new ceasefire offer

The US secretary of state hopes Hamas will accept what he has called Israel's "extraordinarily generous" offer for a Gaza truce and hostage release deal.

Antony Blinken was speaking as a Hamas delegation discussed the new proposal with mediators from Egypt and Qatar.

A source close to the talks told the BBC they were cautiously optimistic.

The proposal includes a 40-day truce in return for the release of hostages and the prospect of displaced families being allowed back to northern Gaza.

It reportedly also involves new wording on restoring calm meant to satisfy Hamas's demand for a permanent ceasefire.
...
On Saturday, the Axios news website cited Israeli officials as saying the proposal included a willingness for the return of people to northern Gaza and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the east-west corridor that divides the territory and prevents freedom of movement.

[waitingtoconnect]

Well, college-age kids are drinking a lot less. Maybe these schools should host nickel beer nights or something.

Idle, sober hands...

They are drinking less because it cost $9 for a pint of beer at a bar now.

[GreenGoo]

Anyone who has even been a kid knows there are cheaper ways to get drunk. Paying retail isn't how I did it in Uni, and I would guess most people didn't. And that was 35 years ago. I would assume kids these days can figure it out too.

I would be very surprised to find out cost is the driving factor for reduced alcohol consumption among college students. But I've been surprised before.

[Unagi]

Anyone who has even been a kid knows there are cheaper ways to get drunk. Paying retail isn't how I did it in Uni, and I would guess most people didn't. And that was 35 years ago. I would assume kids these days can figure it out too.

It's not clear to me what you may be hinting at.
Why so coy?

Moonshine?
Theft?
Liquor Cabinet?

[GreenGoo]

Beer/liquor store?
Student pub?
Girls/guys night/hour?

I actually didn't think I was being coy, honest. There are plenty of ways to get discounted booze, and that's in Ontario which is *heavily* regulated by government (less so today than 35 years ago). I would assume any free'ish market would have many more ways to get cheap booze.

Anyone leaving their apartment/house/dorm and going to a bar without at least a buzz on first has got money to burn, I assume, at which point $9 pints aren't an issue. For the rest of us, retail is for suckers (tongue in cheek )

[Unagi]

Ahhh, Okay - I hear ya.
I thought you were talking about getting booze -for free-, not just -not buying a pint at the bar-

[Blackhawk]

When I was that age*, it was usually a half-gallon of whatever the absolute cheapest vodka in town, plus a couple of two-liters of (whatever), and some plastic cups.

*When I was actually that age, I rarely drank. A couple of years earlier, when I was still in high school, is when I learned how to booze up cheaply.

[Pyperkub]

I found this humorous (tho I dislike seeing "zionists" anywhere, as it's usually all about provoking a reaction):

[waitingtoconnect]

When I was that age*, it was usually a half-gallon of whatever the absolute cheapest vodka in town, plus a couple of two-liters of (whatever), and some plastic cups.

*When I was actually that age, I rarely drank. A couple of years earlier, when I was still in high school, is when I learned how to booze up cheaply.

I hearby proclaim Grogwins law which says that every thread about university students will degenerate to a discussion on alcohol.

[Dogstar]

Israel warns the US it might retaliate against the PA over potential ICC warrants and arrests. There have been a couple of ICC stories this week. One had the US potentially pressuring the ICC to avoid issuing warrants in the hopes of getting everyone to accept the ceasefire deal and holding off any action in Rafah. Another one had US Congress members threatening sanctions on the ICC for any action on Israel period.

[El Guapo]

Helpful NYT column this morning on the the likelihood of a ceasefire deal:

Israel and Hamas have been talking for months about a deal to release the hostages held in Gaza and to halt the war there. Today, I’ll explain why they haven’t agreed on a renewed cease-fire — and what will determine whether they do.

At times, Israel has been a reluctant negotiator. It has been hesitant to withdraw its troops, free more Palestinian prisoners or allow Gazans to return to their homes — or what remains of them — in the north.

But American officials said that in recent weeks Israel had made several major concessions. Now Hamas seems like the reluctant party. It has not embraced the Israeli compromises, frustrating American attempts to stop, at least temporarily, the war in Gaza.

The negotiations have real consequences: For weeks, Israel has said it is preparing to invade Rafah, where around one million Palestinian civilians and thousands of Hamas fighters have taken refuge. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, pledged yesterday to strike Rafah with or without a hostage deal. Thousands more civilians could die.

But some involved in the discussions — Americans, Egyptians and Qataris have been mediating — worry that Hamas appears willing to sacrifice even more Palestinian civilians. Its officials believe that the deaths in Gaza erode support for Israel around the world.

Americans do not want Israel to strike Rafah with a major ground offensive, at least not without a better plan to protect civilians. A hostage agreement appears to be the best way to at least delay such an operation.

A map showing the Gaza Strip, and major cities like Gaza City, Khan Younis and Rafah.
By The New York Times
In early April, William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, who has been the lead hostage negotiator, laid out a new plan. It gave in to a key Hamas demand: Palestinians taking refuge in southern Gaza would be free to return to their homes in the north as part of an initial hostages-for-prisoners exchange.

Hamas said no. It told negotiators that it could not meet one of the conditions, because it did not still have 40 living hostages who were female, ill or elderly. And it was not willing to liberate captured soldiers to make up the difference, at least not without a promise from Israel to end the war.

After the Hamas rejection, negotiators scrambled to make a new plan. The U.S. also put pressure on Israel to make a deal. This week Israel conceded, telling negotiators it would accept fewer hostages — 33 — and release more Palestinians from its prisons for each hostage set free. Hamas has said it is considering the new Israeli offer.

American officials believe that Israel has conceded everything it can, raising doubts in Washington about whether Hamas really wants a deal. Hamas, of course, believes there is one more concession Israel could give: announce an end to the war.

This is a familiar conundrum in the Middle East. Every Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiation has stumbled over what arbiters call “the final status.” And so, from the beginning, the American strategy has been to work for a temporary cease-fire — and then use that to bring home hostages, release Palestinian prisoners and expand humanitarian aid. The first hostage release in exchange for a temporary halt broke down. But American officials hope that another release might help cajole both sides toward a permanent cease-fire.

Some people briefed on the negotiations blame Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas military leader who helped mastermind the Oct. 7 attacks, for the impasse. He has monitored the talks from his hiding space deep in the tunnels below Gaza. Sinwar is protected, according to American and Israeli officials, by at least 15 hostages he is using as human shields. Those captives prevent Israel from assassinating him.

While American officials have long understood that Hamas does not intend to release the Israeli soldiers it holds without a promise of a more lasting cease-fire, Washington hoped Sinwar would see that he could help Gazans by doing what was necessary to halt the war — perhaps releasing the remaining women and older men.

Sending home those hostages, Americans hope, would help Israel see that it had achieved enough in its war. True, Hamas is not destroyed, but it is in no position to mount another attack like Oct. 7. Its ability to command forces is dramatically weakened.

But that all requires Hamas saying yes to a first phase. So far, the answer has been no.

FWIW I would recommend the NYT's daily 'The Morning" newsletter - I have found it pretty reasonable, informative, and objective on this and on other issues.

[Dogstar]

Helpful NYT column this morning on the the likelihood of a ceasefire deal:

Thanks for posting this. It has the unfortunate ring of truth that Hamas is likely willing to sacrifice more Palestinian civilians in order to continue to paint Israel in a bad light, which both absolutely sucks and highlights the difficulty in establishing a long-term plan for peace in the area as long as Hamas is there and that's one of their tenets. I desperately hope saner minds persuade and prevail.

[Zarathud]

Hamas is waiting for its propaganda and worldwide protests to achieve what it cannot militarily. If students want peace, they should be protesting Hamas.

[GreenGoo]

Thanks for posting this. It has the unfortunate ring of truth that Hamas is likely willing to sacrifice more Palestinian civilians in order to continue to paint Israel in a bad light, which both absolutely sucks and highlights the difficulty in establishing a long-term plan for peace in the area as long as Hamas is there and that's one of their tenets. I desperately hope saner minds persuade and prevail.

This was literally the plan from the start. Literally. And it's working great. I have no idea what negotiations can offer that would encourage Hamas to comply.

[Kurth]

Thanks for posting this. It has the unfortunate ring of truth that Hamas is likely willing to sacrifice more Palestinian civilians in order to continue to paint Israel in a bad light, which both absolutely sucks and highlights the difficulty in establishing a long-term plan for peace in the area as long as Hamas is there and that's one of their tenets. I desperately hope saner minds persuade and prevail.

This was literally the plan from the start. Literally. And it's working great. I have no idea what negotiations can offer that would encourage Hamas to comply.

Nothing. And that’s especially the case while we have escalating student protests here in the U.S.

This could not have gone any more according to Hamas’s plan.

From a cynical, heartless, Machiavellian strategic perspective, the October 7 attacks on Israel were perfectly executed by Hamas and are rewarding them beyond their wildest dreams.

[hepcat]

However, I do think it's safe to say that poor leadership on the part of Netanyahu is also a contributing factor. A less embattled (read: struggling to stay in power) and more intelligent leader would have been able to see through Hamas' plan and/or not used it for their own political efforts.

[El Guapo]

However, I do think it's safe to say that poor leadership on the part of Netanyahu is also a contributing factor. A less embattled (read: struggling to stay in power) and more intelligent leader would have been able to see through Hamas' plan and/or not used it for their own political efforts.

Also that Netanyahu went into this war dependent upon extremist parties in his coalition. That was a huge problem because the extremist leaders both: (1) have produced a steady stream of "hey, wouldn't it be nice if the Palestinians were dead?" type quotes which, even though those leaders are not in the war cabinet, at least feed into the worst worries about and images of Israel; (2) made it difficult (even if Netanyahu wanted to) to plan around a reasonable "end of the war" plan (because those extremist leaders are by definition not about reasonable outcomes).

I suspect this has made it difficult for the Israeli government to plan around anything other than punishing Hamas.

[GreenGoo]

However, I do think it's safe to say that poor leadership on the part of Netanyahu is also a contributing factor. A less embattled (read: struggling to stay in power) and more intelligent leader would have been able to see through Hamas' plan and/or not used it for their own political efforts.

Well, yes. Hamas hoped Netanyahu would oblige, and he did. He didn't have to fall into the trap, so...here we are.

[Kurth]

However, I do think it's safe to say that poor leadership on the part of Netanyahu is also a contributing factor. A less embattled (read: struggling to stay in power) and more intelligent leader would have been able to see through Hamas' plan and/or not used it for their own political efforts.

Well, yes. Hamas hoped Netanyahu would oblige, and he did. He didn't have to fall into the trap, so...here we are.

Could someone have done better than Netanyahu in responding to October 7? Unequivocally, yes.

But I don’t know what a good response would have looked like. The trap Hamas set was nearly perfect. Viciously attack a people who have been victimized and brutalized throughout history and then merge back into a civilian population and use them as human shields, further boosting your position with every subsequent civilian death.

After what Hamas did on October 7, there was no scenario - regardless of who was in charge - that didn’t involve Israel leaving no stone unturned to annihilate Hamas. None.

Remember, an overwhelming majority of Israeli’s support destroying Hamas.

[waitingtoconnect]

However, I do think it's safe to say that poor leadership on the part of Netanyahu is also a contributing factor. A less embattled (read: struggling to stay in power) and more intelligent leader would have been able to see through Hamas' plan and/or not used it for their own political efforts.

Also that Netanyahu went into this war dependent upon extremist parties in his coalition. That was a huge problem because the extremist leaders both: (1) have produced a steady stream of "hey, wouldn't it be nice if the Palestinians were dead?" type quotes which, even though those leaders are not in the war cabinet, at least feed into the worst worries about and images of Israel; (2) made it difficult (even if Netanyahu wanted to) to plan around a reasonable "end of the war" plan (because those extremist leaders are by definition not about reasonable outcomes).

I suspect this has made it difficult for the Israeli government to plan around anything other than punishing Hamas.

They haven’t really punished hamas though in terms of its high level leadership because in reality hamas are Iranian proxies or mercenaries and much of the leadership lives in exile not in Gaza. The leaders on the ground are likely middle management. If they are smart and we know they are the real leadership is likely in the shadows. We saw in the October 7 attacks North Africans in the news reporting.

All too often it’s the civilians who pay the price for the idiocy and wants of their leaders in the Middle East.

[hepcat]

I think a lot of folks want Hamas destroyed. The problem is the scorched Earth approach that is resulting in a pr win for Hamas and their desire for the alienation of Israel. They're killing more civilians than they are Hamas. That approach has a shelf life. And that time has passed for most.

[Blackhawk]

I think, if I were in Nettedyahoo's shoes, I'd be looking at the options for an international response, finding a way to go in with allies/the UN, etc, both for the resources and to avoid the kind of fallout they're experiencing. It would have also ruined Hamas' plan.

Of course, I'm far from national leader material, so what do I know?

[waitingtoconnect]

I think, if I were in Nettedyahoo's shoes, I'd be looking at the options for an international response, finding a way to go in with allies/the UN, etc, both for the resources and to avoid the kind of fallout they're experiencing. It would have also ruined Hamas' plan.

Of course, I'm far from national leader material, so what do I know?

In Bibis case he’s considering that he’s likely to go to jail for corruption if he isn’t prime minister…

[Victoria Raverna]

I don't think it is possible to destroy Hamas by bombing and killing them. You can kill all of the Hamas fighters and it'll only result in Hamas 2.0 later.

The only way to destroy Hamas is to convince Palestinians to be against Hamas. To do that, you can always kill all Palestinians then there won't be anyone left to support Hamas. But if that is not acceptable, you need to show them that peace with Israel is a better choice for them to be able to live freely. One way to do that is to show that Palestinians who choose peace with Israel (the ones in West Bank) are rewarded for choosing that. That means don't steal more lands from West Bank. Stop settlers from attacking Palestinians at West Bank.

[Kurth]

I think, if I were in Nettedyahoo's shoes, I'd be looking at the options for an international response, finding a way to go in with allies/the UN, etc, both for the resources and to avoid the kind of fallout they're experiencing. It would have also ruined Hamas' plan.

Of course, I'm far from national leader material, so what do I know?

An international task force run by who? The U.N.? The U.S.? There’s no way we were going to do it. And you can’t seriously think the EU was going to wade into Gaza while simultaneously dealing with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The Arab states? Let’s not even go there.

So where would this international response come from?

Criticize Israel all you want - much of it is deserved - but don’t delude yourself into thinking there was ever a viable path that involved letting an international force respond to Hamas.

And do you really think the Israelis would outsource the response to October 7? Never.

[Blackhawk]

I think, if I were in Nettedyahoo's shoes, I'd be looking at the options for an international response, finding a way to go in with allies/the UN, etc, both for the resources and to avoid the kind of fallout they're experiencing. It would have also ruined Hamas' plan.

Of course, I'm far from national leader material, so what do I know?

An international task force run by who? The U.N.? The U.S.? There’s no way we were going to do it. And you can’t seriously think the EU was going to wade into Gaza while simultaneously dealing with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The Arab states? Let’s not even go there.

So where would this international response come from?

Criticize Israel all you want - much of it is deserved - but don’t delude yourself into thinking there was ever a viable path that involved letting an international force respond to Hamas.

And do you really think the Israelis would outsource the response to October 7? Never.

Do you think I have a working knowledge of UN policy when it comes to attacks on members by other governments? Thus my phrasing, "I"d be looking at the options", implying some amount of research or consultation.

[Dogstar]

I don't think it is possible to destroy Hamas by bombing and killing them. You can kill all of the Hamas fighters and it'll only result in Hamas 2.0 later.

The only way to destroy Hamas is to convince Palestinians to be against Hamas. To do that, you can always kill all Palestinians then there won't be anyone left to support Hamas. But if that is not acceptable, you need to show them that peace with Israel is a better choice for them to be able to live freely. One way to do that is to show that Palestinians who choose peace with Israel (the ones in West Bank) are rewarded for choosing that. That means don't steal more lands from West Bank. Stop settlers from attacking Palestinians at West Bank.

I think that you’re right. Bombing is not the path to a lasting or even tenuous peace, and it’s more than likely formenting more long-term resistance in the Palestinian people. There needs to be a vision presented with equal rights and representation, with a rebuilt (and hopefully semi-prosperous) Gaza, with hopefully safety for both civilian populations. There has to be something to hope for and to buy into, with concrete steps shown, for the population to turn away from Hamas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blackhawk]

The best way to put down a rebel/insurgent group (or whatever you'd call them) is to get rid of the motivation for them.

That ship may have sailed, though. The motivation may not be founded in policy anymore so much as in plain old hatred. And the only way to get rid of that kind of hatred is to stop generating it and wait generations for it to die out.

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't think it is possible to destroy Hamas by bombing and killing them. You can kill all of the Hamas fighters and it'll only result in Hamas 2.0 later.

The only way to destroy Hamas is to convince Palestinians to be against Hamas. To do that, you can always kill all Palestinians then there won't be anyone left to support Hamas. But if that is not acceptable, you need to show them that peace with Israel is a better choice for them to be able to live freely. One way to do that is to show that Palestinians who choose peace with Israel (the ones in West Bank) are rewarded for choosing that. That means don't steal more lands from West Bank. Stop settlers from attacking Palestinians at West Bank.

I think that you’re right. Bombing is not the path to a lasting or even tenuous peace, and it’s more than likely formenting more long-term resistance in the Palestinian people. There needs to be a vision presented with equal rights and representation, with a rebuilt (and hopefully semi-prosperous) Gaza, with hopefully safety for both civilian populations. There has to be something to hope for and to buy into, with concrete steps shown, for the population to turn away from Hamas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds great, but just one problem: the Israeli govt. is not interested in that.

[Blackhawk]

Sounds great, but just one problem: the Israeli govt. is not interested in that.

And that, in a nutshell, is why all of the great ideas in the world are just wishful thinking: they don't wanna.

[Victoria Raverna]

Then the "If students want peace, they should be protesting Hamas" is wrong. They still need to protest against Israel, too.

[Isgrimnur]

[hepcat]

[LawBeefaroni]

I think, if I were in Nettedyahoo's shoes, I'd be looking at the options for an international response, finding a way to go in with allies/the UN, etc, both for the resources and to avoid the kind of fallout they're experiencing. It would have also ruined Hamas' plan.

Of course, I'm far from national leader material, so what do I know?

An international task force run by who? The U.N.? The U.S.? There’s no way we were going to do it. And you can’t seriously think the EU was going to wade into Gaza while simultaneously dealing with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The Arab states? Let’s not even go there.

So where would this international response come from?

Criticize Israel all you want - much of it is deserved - but don’t delude yourself into thinking there was ever a viable path that involved letting an international force respond to Hamas.

And do you really think the Israelis would outsource the response to October 7? Never.

They need to follow, and then go after, the money. Hamas leaders are making millions off the conflict and are worth billions. Cut them off or send in the Mossad with Beretta 71s.

We know who they are and where they are. The problem is it is highly inconvenient politically to go after the billionaire ruling class.

Ismail Haniyeh. Worth over $4B. Lives in Qatar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ismail_Haniyeh

Mousa Abu Marzook. Worth over $3B. Lives in Qatar. Bonus: Colorado State University master's graduate and Lousiana Tech doctorate. Held a US green card.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook

Khaled Mashal. Worth over $4B. Lives in Qatar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_Mashal


Hey, remember that 2022 World Cup in...Qatar? Yeah, these guys all attended that party while the world cheered.



You cut them off and take them out. That's how you beat Hamas.

If you actually want to. Bombing Gaza just makes them richer. If I were more cynical, I'd think that was the goal.

[Isgrimnur]

The political and economic ruling class absolutely assign value to human lives. And it is not a high value.

[Pyperkub]

I don't think it is possible to destroy Hamas by bombing and killing them. You can kill all of the Hamas fighters and it'll only result in Hamas 2.0 later.

The only way to destroy Hamas is to convince Palestinians to be against Hamas. To do that, you can always kill all Palestinians then there won't be anyone left to support Hamas. But if that is not acceptable, you need to show them that peace with Israel is a better choice for them to be able to live freely. One way to do that is to show that Palestinians who choose peace with Israel (the ones in West Bank) are rewarded for choosing that. That means don't steal more lands from West Bank. Stop settlers from attacking Palestinians at West Bank.

I think that you’re right. Bombing is not the path to a lasting or even tenuous peace, and it’s more than likely formenting more long-term resistance in the Palestinian people. There needs to be a vision presented with equal rights and representation, with a rebuilt (and hopefully semi-prosperous) Gaza, with hopefully safety for both civilian populations. There has to be something to hope for and to buy into, with concrete steps shown, for the population to turn away from Hamas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds great, but just one problem: the Israeli govt. is not interested in that.

Oh, and if you think Hamas wants equal rights for Palestinians (vis a vis Hamas leadership and power sharing), you may want to think that one over.

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't think it is possible to destroy Hamas by bombing and killing them. You can kill all of the Hamas fighters and it'll only result in Hamas 2.0 later.

The only way to destroy Hamas is to convince Palestinians to be against Hamas. To do that, you can always kill all Palestinians then there won't be anyone left to support Hamas. But if that is not acceptable, you need to show them that peace with Israel is a better choice for them to be able to live freely. One way to do that is to show that Palestinians who choose peace with Israel (the ones in West Bank) are rewarded for choosing that. That means don't steal more lands from West Bank. Stop settlers from attacking Palestinians at West Bank.

I think that you’re right. Bombing is not the path to a lasting or even tenuous peace, and it’s more than likely formenting more long-term resistance in the Palestinian people. There needs to be a vision presented with equal rights and representation, with a rebuilt (and hopefully semi-prosperous) Gaza, with hopefully safety for both civilian populations. There has to be something to hope for and to buy into, with concrete steps shown, for the population to turn away from Hamas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds great, but just one problem: the Israeli govt. is not interested in that.

Oh, and if you think Hamas wants equal rights for Palestinians (vis a vis Hamas leadership and power sharing), you may want to think that one over.

I do not, and never have.

[Pyperkub]

Yeah, the only thing worse than Israeli rule of Palestinians is probably Hamas rule of Palestinians...