Israel-Gaza war

[Pres Mike]

It seems the pause in fighting for a week has allowed the global media to move on from the conflict. This will give Israel even more of a free hand.

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

[All Along The Watchtower]

It’s Time to Scrap the Abraham Accords

…the real premise of the Accords was proving that the Palestinian issue was no longer an obstacle for Israel’s relationships in the region, as Arab states dropped their demand for a Palestinian state as a condition to normalizing ties with Israel. The pact promised regional security despite allowing Israel to bypass the rights of 6 million Palestinians living under daily brutality, military occupation, and apartheid rule to establish alliances with authoritarian regional regimes.As many of us predicted at the time—myself included—that was always bound to fail. The shocking Hamas attack on Oct. 7, killing 1,200 people in Israel, has now made that clear to all.

Rather than curbing Israeli abuses, the Accords emboldened successive Israeli governments to further ignore Palestinian rights. In the first year after the Accords, settler violence dramatically increased in the West Bank. Following the election of Israel’s most right-wing government in history in 2022, cabinet ministers openly called for the annexation of the West Bank and announced massive settlement expansions. In the year leading up to Oct. 7, Israeli forces had already killed almost 200 Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel has rained destruction on Gaza since the Hamas attack, killing at least 15,500 people, 70% of them women and children, while floating plans echoed by Israel’s Intelligence Minister to forcibly displace Gazans to Egypt and pushing the Egyptian government to offer them permanent housing and residence permits in the Sinai. Dozens of scholars have described Israel’s campaign as a genocide.

Let’s be clear: Continued Arab adherence to the Accords signals continued support for Israel, rewarding it with the military, economic, and trade development that were always the primary goal. That is why we at the Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), a rights group set up by Jamal Khashoggi, have publicly called on the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan to immediately withdraw from the Accords and, alongside peace treaty signatories Egypt and Jordan, end all military coordination with Israel.

Both the Trump and Biden administrations hailed the Accords as an important effort to expand peace in the Middle East, going so far as to coax signatory Arab states with a host of goodies to persuade them to establish a formal relationship with Israel. These include selling 50 long-desired F-35 fighter jets to the tiny UAE; recognizing Morocco’s illegal annexation of Western Sahara, making the U.S. the first country in the world to do so; and removing Sudan from the list of designated terrorist states and loaning it $1.5 billion. The Accords were focused on each state’s own strategic interests, particularly in building a regional alliance less reliant on Washington.

Yeah, ultimately a consistent anti-Israeli stance in 2023 means turning on a large number of Arab countries. It's the logic of the Libya intervention times a zillion.

Dictatorships, not countries.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Theoretically, I agree with the idea Israel should just drop the idea of being a Jewish State simply because I think defining your country excessively through a religion or race is naturally bigoted - but that multicultural interpretation can also be validly interpreted as something that weakens the idea of national identity that many places have and WEAKENS diversity too because of that.

Like, if Israel isn’t a Jewish majority State, then where you would find a Jewish majority State?

"If Utah isn't a Mormon majority state, then where would you find a Mormon majority state?"

Reactionary Libertarian:

The notion of states based on ethnicity has led to unprecedented peace in Europe.

It helped create World War II and led to the Yugoslavian genocides, which were only 30 years ago.

If you believe in states based on ethnicity, you're saying Hitler was justified for the Anschluss and taking the Sudetanland. You're saying modern-day Republika Srpska should be ceded by Bosnia and become part of Serbia. (The Balkans as a whole would be greatly redrawn, I'll appoint you to be the guy that gets to deal with the aftermath of that.) You believe Turkish Cyprus should be recognized as a country because the people on that side of Cyprus are ethnically different from those in the South. Quebec should be its own separate country on the American border, splitting the rest of Canada in two. All Indian and First Nations reservations in the U.S. and Canada become sovereign. Sections of the American Southwest should become a new Latino-based state. You believe that the state of Belgium should disappear. You believe that there needs to be a bunch of Arab/Muslim-based island states all around Europe that would make it look like all the German minor states prior to confederation. You believe Hungary should get larger. You believe that all Russian-dominated exclaves outside Russia's borders should be assumed into Russia proper. While Russia would probably then separate into, I don't know, 10-20 different countries. Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq should get disintegrated. Israel should be made smaller to have a section ceded for its residents that are Arabs.

That is your principle you stated of nation-states based on ethnicity.

Ethno-nationalism has long been fashionable on the Right.

[Dan the Roman]

Multiculturalism has never worked in practice except in one of two cases

1. Where one group is dominant and kindly "pretends" to share power equally conditional on all real power remaining in its hands for an emergency - This is the Western liberal model (Sorry folks it is kind of a scam in that in most places it has never been tested under stress and the evidence is it will collapse into type 2 very quickly)

2. An "armed peace" where power-sharing takes place in a political cold war, with voters entirely disempowered, and every side using the threat of turning the cold war hot to block majority or non-sectarian rule - this is Northern Ireland, Lebanon, and to a degree Malaysia - the most "successful version

Humans don't share power. Not in companies. Not in mod teams. Not in companies. Not in clubs. Most certainly not in states.

[Reactionary Libertarian]

Theoretically, I agree with the idea Israel should just drop the idea of being a Jewish State simply because I think defining your country excessively through a religion or race is naturally bigoted - but that multicultural interpretation can also be validly interpreted as something that weakens the idea of national identity that many places have and WEAKENS diversity too because of that.

Like, if Israel isn’t a Jewish majority State, then where you would find a Jewish majority State?

"If Utah isn't a Mormon majority state, then where would you find a Mormon majority state?"

Reactionary Libertarian:

The notion of states based on ethnicity has led to unprecedented peace in Europe.

It helped create World War II and led to the Yugoslavian genocides, which were only 30 years ago.

If you believe in states based on ethnicity, you're saying Hitler was justified for the Anschluss and taking the Sudetanland. You're saying modern-day Republika Srpska should be ceded by Bosnia and become part of Serbia. (The Balkans as a whole would be greatly redrawn, I'll appoint you to be the guy that gets to deal with the aftermath of that.) You believe Turkish Cyprus should be recognized as a country because the people on that side of Cyprus are ethnically different from those in the South. Quebec should be its own separate country on the American border, splitting the rest of Canada in two. All Indian and First Nations reservations in the U.S. and Canada become sovereign. Sections of the American Southwest should become a new Latino-based state. You believe that the state of Belgium should disappear. You believe that there needs to be a bunch of Arab/Muslim-based island states all around Europe that would make it look like all the German minor states prior to confederation. You believe Hungary should get larger. You believe that all Russian-dominated exclaves outside Russia's borders should be assumed into Russia proper. While Russia would probably then separate into, I don't know, 10-20 different countries. Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq should get disintegrated. Israel should be made smaller to have a section ceded for its residents that are Arabs.

That is your principle you stated of nation-states based on ethnicity.

I think you have grossly misunderstood me. I am saying that empires, multiethnic states and states with a large ethnic population outside their proper borders have more war. You listed a bunch of examples where this happened. Yugoslavia has a war because it was multiethnic! Breaking it up into states for Serbs, Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, etc. has lead to peace! The solution to Hitler wanting to take areas where Germans lived was forcing all those Germans to move to Germany, thus voiding the claims.  This isn’t a question of whether people “should” be able to get along in multiethnic states, in an ideal world. It’s just noting reality and the fact that when each ethnicity has its own state, there is much more peace. It doesn’t mean we should actively try to redraw borders, but it does mean that borders that divide different ethnicities are more peaceful. And it means saying Israel and the Palestinians should NOT share one secular state is the pragmatic, pro-human rights position.  

[Storr]

Multiculturalism has never worked in practice except in one of two cases

1. Where one group is dominant and kindly "pretends" to share power equally conditional on all real power remaining in its hands for an emergency - This is the Western liberal model (Sorry folks it is kind of a scam in that in most places it has never been tested under stress and the evidence is it will collapse into type 2 very quickly)

2. An "armed peace" where power-sharing takes place in a political cold war, with voters entirely disempowered, and every side using the threat of turning the cold war hot to block majority or non-sectarian rule - this is Northern Ireland, Lebanon, and to a degree Malaysia - the most "successful version

Humans don't share power. Not in companies. Not in mod teams. Not in companies. Not in clubs. Most certainly not in states.

I'm not sure what category the Swiss or Belgian examples would be. Devolved culturalism, having empowered ethnic regions which make up a country?

[MT Treasurer]

Killing of Reuters Journalist Was ‘Apparently Deliberate’ Israeli Strike, Group Says

An Oct. 13 strike that killed a videographer for the Reuters news agency and injured six others in southern Lebanon was carried out by the Israeli military and appeared to be a deliberate attack, Human Rights Watch said on Thursday.

The watchdog group said that evidence it had reviewed — including dozens of videos of the incident, photographs and satellite images, and interviews with witnesses and military experts — showed that the journalists were not near areas where fighting was taking place and that there was no military objective near their position.

“The attack on the journalists’ position directly targeted them,” the report said, labeling the attack a war crime.

The Israeli authorities did not immediately respond to the report.

Reuters published its own investigation on Thursday and said that an Israeli tank crew had killed its journalist and wounded the others.

“The evidence we now have, and have published today, shows that an Israeli tank crew killed our colleague Issam Abdallah,” the Reuters editor in chief, Alessandra Galloni, said in a statement. She called on Israel “to explain how this could have happened and to hold to account those responsible.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/07/world/middleeast/reuters-journalist-killed-lebanon-israel-hrw.html

Israel's war crimes just keep piling up.

Israel has been deliberately targeting journalists for a long time. Like with the countless other war crimes, when you’re given a blank check and guaranteed impunity, there is nothing that will deter you from going on like this. That’s why those unconditionally backing Israel deserve just as much blame as the Netanyahu government itself.

It’s not that difficult, and you don’t need a lot of "nuance" or ten paragraphs to understand why Israel has been behaving the way they have.

[oldtimer]

Multiculturalism has never worked in practice except in one of two cases

1. Where one group is dominant and kindly "pretends" to share power equally conditional on all real power remaining in its hands for an emergency - This is the Western liberal model (Sorry folks it is kind of a scam in that in most places it has never been tested under stress and the evidence is it will collapse into type 2 very quickly)

2. An "armed peace" where power-sharing takes place in a political cold war, with voters entirely disempowered, and every side using the threat of turning the cold war hot to block majority or non-sectarian rule - this is Northern Ireland, Lebanon, and to a degree Malaysia - the most "successful version

Humans don't share power. Not in companies. Not in mod teams. Not in companies. Not in clubs. Most certainly not in states.

I'm not sure what category the Swiss or Belgian examples would be. Devolved culturalism, having empowered ethnic regions which make up a country?

An ability to block efforts to be sidelined through peacefull means, the peacefull variant of No.2.

Let's call it Federalism, because it also exists in Countries that give equal representation to local territories, not just by population.

[Silent Hunter]

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Theoretically, I agree with the idea Israel should just drop the idea of being a Jewish State simply because I think defining your country excessively through a religion or race is naturally bigoted - but that multicultural interpretation can also be validly interpreted as something that weakens the idea of national identity that many places have and WEAKENS diversity too because of that.

Like, if Israel isn’t a Jewish majority State, then where you would find a Jewish majority State?

"If Utah isn't a Mormon majority state, then where would you find a Mormon majority state?"

Reactionary Libertarian:

The notion of states based on ethnicity has led to unprecedented peace in Europe.

It helped create World War II and led to the Yugoslavian genocides, which were only 30 years ago.

If you believe in states based on ethnicity, you're saying Hitler was justified for the Anschluss and taking the Sudetanland. You're saying modern-day Republika Srpska should be ceded by Bosnia and become part of Serbia. (The Balkans as a whole would be greatly redrawn, I'll appoint you to be the guy that gets to deal with the aftermath of that.) You believe Turkish Cyprus should be recognized as a country because the people on that side of Cyprus are ethnically different from those in the South. Quebec should be its own separate country on the American border, splitting the rest of Canada in two. All Indian and First Nations reservations in the U.S. and Canada become sovereign. Sections of the American Southwest should become a new Latino-based state. You believe that the state of Belgium should disappear. You believe that there needs to be a bunch of Arab/Muslim-based island states all around Europe that would make it look like all the German minor states prior to confederation. You believe Hungary should get larger. You believe that all Russian-dominated exclaves outside Russia's borders should be assumed into Russia proper. While Russia would probably then separate into, I don't know, 10-20 different countries. Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq should get disintegrated. Israel should be made smaller to have a section ceded for its residents that are Arabs.

That is your principle you stated of nation-states based on ethnicity.

I think you have grossly misunderstood me. I am saying that empires, multiethnic states and states with a large ethnic population outside their proper borders have more war. You listed a bunch of examples where this happened. Yugoslavia has a war because it was multiethnic! Breaking it up into states for Serbs, Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, etc. has lead to peace! The solution to Hitler wanting to take areas where Germans lived was forcing all those Germans to move to Germany, thus voiding the claims.  This isn’t a question of whether people “should” be able to get along in multiethnic states, in an ideal world. It’s just noting reality and the fact that when each ethnicity has its own state, there is much more peace. It doesn’t mean we should actively try to redraw borders, but it does mean that borders that divide different ethnicities are more peaceful. And it means saying Israel and the Palestinians should NOT share one secular state is the pragmatic, pro-human rights position.

I think you need to read history more.

(You realize the ethnic-based states were all created after World War I, not World War II right?)

[Pres Mike]

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

No. The international community can rebuild Gaza like it did after 2014. That would be faster and more humane than mass tent cities in the Sini Desert without water. Why folks keep arguing for this solution is crazy to me.

All it does it allows Israel to bulldoze cities in the Gaza Strip and build luxury beach homes and illegal settlements.

[Silent Hunter]

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

No. The international community can rebuild Gaza like it did after 2014. That would be faster and more humane than mass tent cities in the Sini Desert without water. Why folks keep arguing for this solution is crazy to me.

All it does it allows Israel to bulldoze cities in the Gaza Strip and build luxury beach homes and illegal settlements.

Not tent cities. Getting them somewhere safer. Gaza is in a lot worse state than in 2014. It's going to need demolishing and rebuilding anyway.

[Meclazine for Israel]

IDF soldier talking about the mission to protect the Jewish state.

"while all those celebrating Hanukkah light the first candle, the IDF will be here, on the ground watching over our home".

Hanukkah

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0j69ZhixfI/

In Yemeni news, Iran backed Houthi's have drawn the ire of the White House.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ap-red-sea-yemen-houthi-treasury-b2460434.html

"The White House also announced Thursday that it was encouraging allies to join the Combined Maritime Forces, a 39-member partnership that exists to counter malign action by non-state actors in international waters, as it looks to push back against the Houthis. The State Department and Pentagon are leading the effort to expand the maritime partnership after three commercial vessels were struck by missiles fired by Iranian-back Houthis in Yemen earlier this week."

Financiers hit with sanctions were reportedly located in places such as Lebanon, Turkey, Dubai, Russia and St. Kitts and Nevis.

[Pres Mike]

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

No. The international community can rebuild Gaza like it did after 2014. That would be faster and more humane than mass tent cities in the Sini Desert without water. Why folks keep arguing for this solution is crazy to me.

All it does it allows Israel to bulldoze cities in the Gaza Strip and build luxury beach homes and illegal settlements.

Not tent cities. Getting them somewhere safer. Gaza is in a lot worse state than in 2014. It's going to need demolishing and rebuilding anyway.

Not tent cities? You plan to build housing for 2.5 million over night? Just supplying enough tents might be impossible in the short term.

The Sini is also a DESERT. Belive it or not, Gaza is not a desert. A misconception that people are fighting over sand. In reality, the Gaza Strip and West Bank is the best land in the middle east for settlements.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Furthermore, isn’t there an ongoing insurgency in Sinai?

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Considering the 1947 precedent that fleeing your home means you never get to come back I'd imagine Gazans wouldn't be particularly keen on that plan even if you somehow convinced Sisi to risk his regime's entire existence to make things easier for Biden.

However, there is another neighbouring country that has a far greater economic and state capacity and that country is Israel. Why aren't they taking in refugees? It's not like there's any shortage of land in the Negev, and unlike the Sinai you wouldn't be feeding a preexisting insurgency in a region that's already barely governed.

[Reactionary Libertarian]

Theoretically, I agree with the idea Israel should just drop the idea of being a Jewish State simply because I think defining your country excessively through a religion or race is naturally bigoted - but that multicultural interpretation can also be validly interpreted as something that weakens the idea of national identity that many places have and WEAKENS diversity too because of that.

Like, if Israel isn’t a Jewish majority State, then where you would find a Jewish majority State?

"If Utah isn't a Mormon majority state, then where would you find a Mormon majority state?"

Reactionary Libertarian:

The notion of states based on ethnicity has led to unprecedented peace in Europe.

It helped create World War II and led to the Yugoslavian genocides, which were only 30 years ago.

If you believe in states based on ethnicity, you're saying Hitler was justified for the Anschluss and taking the Sudetanland. You're saying modern-day Republika Srpska should be ceded by Bosnia and become part of Serbia. (The Balkans as a whole would be greatly redrawn, I'll appoint you to be the guy that gets to deal with the aftermath of that.) You believe Turkish Cyprus should be recognized as a country because the people on that side of Cyprus are ethnically different from those in the South. Quebec should be its own separate country on the American border, splitting the rest of Canada in two. All Indian and First Nations reservations in the U.S. and Canada become sovereign. Sections of the American Southwest should become a new Latino-based state. You believe that the state of Belgium should disappear. You believe that there needs to be a bunch of Arab/Muslim-based island states all around Europe that would make it look like all the German minor states prior to confederation. You believe Hungary should get larger. You believe that all Russian-dominated exclaves outside Russia's borders should be assumed into Russia proper. While Russia would probably then separate into, I don't know, 10-20 different countries. Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq should get disintegrated. Israel should be made smaller to have a section ceded for its residents that are Arabs.

That is your principle you stated of nation-states based on ethnicity.

I think you have grossly misunderstood me. I am saying that empires, multiethnic states and states with a large ethnic population outside their proper borders have more war. You listed a bunch of examples where this happened. Yugoslavia has a war because it was multiethnic! Breaking it up into states for Serbs, Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, etc. has lead to peace! The solution to Hitler wanting to take areas where Germans lived was forcing all those Germans to move to Germany, thus voiding the claims.  This isn’t a question of whether people “should” be able to get along in multiethnic states, in an ideal world. It’s just noting reality and the fact that when each ethnicity has its own state, there is much more peace. It doesn’t mean we should actively try to redraw borders, but it does mean that borders that divide different ethnicities are more peaceful. And it means saying Israel and the Palestinians should NOT share one secular state is the pragmatic, pro-human rights position.

I think you need to read history more.

(You realize the ethnic-based states were all created after World War I, not World War II right?)

They started being created around WWI, but there were still many ethnicities outside the borders of the states, and conquering other areas was still seen as acceptable. WWII started because Hitler wanted lands where Germans lived but were outside of Germany. After WWII there were population transfers and things were much more peaceful. The wars afterwards- like Yugoslavia- were about ethnic groups breaking away for their own states. Wars in post-colonial Africa are common because of borders that don't take tribes into account. It's clear the idea that ideally, each ethnic group gets its own state has been great for peace and stability. Do you think the way colonial powers set borders in Africa and the Middle East were acceptable? If you don't, why not?

[Meclazine for Israel]

University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magillanti has the little red laser dot on her back after not denouncing comments regarding genocide of Jewish people.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/07/business/penn-emergency-meeting-liz-magill/index.html

"The University of Pennsylvania’s board of trustees held an emergency meeting Thursday, and the powerful Wharton Board of Advisors that leads the university’s prominent business school called for a leadership change at the university, as school president Liz Magill faces scathing criticism over her performance at a House hearing earlier this week."

The bad reports on social media about her speech are deafening with financiers of the University threatening to withdraw hundreds of millions of dollars in funding if she is not removed.

The woman from Harvard can join her based on what I saw at the White House hearing. Simply appalling that they even have to think about it.

[Blue3]

https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1732892743188521437?s=46&t=fXGbuzJ5t_xzX4...
https://twitter.com/redstreamnet/status/1732762635731390594?s=46&t=fXGbuzJ5t...

[NOVA Green]

Furthermore, isn’t there an ongoing insurgency in Sinai?

This is true, although arguably the Egyptian military policy of containment in the past couple years has been somewhat effective in limiting the capability of Islamic insurgents, and in particular the EAF "Buffer Zone" on the Gaza Border, and the shift of the insurgency to the Western part of North Sinai would minimize any potential "spill-over".

It should also be noted that this insurgency does not exhibit "Internationalist" tendencies, but rather is localized with very specific grievances against the Egyptian Government under the military regime, and gross patterns of human rights abuses which have pushed much of the population into passive support for what is relatively small number of active armed insurgents.

https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/82218

https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/insurgency-in-sinai-challenges-and-prospects/

https://www.arab-reform.net/publication/the-egyptian-armys-counterinsurgency-history-past-operations-and-the-sinai-campaign/

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

No. The international community can rebuild Gaza like it did after 2014. That would be faster and more humane than mass tent cities in the Sini Desert without water. Why folks keep arguing for this solution is crazy to me.

All it does it allows Israel to bulldoze cities in the Gaza Strip and build luxury beach homes and illegal settlements.

There is no question that there would likely be a large pool of international donors willing to chip in to rebuild Gaza... in particular the Oil Rich Gulf Kingdoms, who are effectively doing their own version of virtue singling on Gaza, without undertaking or supporting any real actions, including most recently at the Organization of Islamic Co-operation (OIC), which met in Riyadh on November 11th.

Regardless, for me the biggest question is why the international community is not doing more to force a change to Israeli military tactics, which have effectively left huge chunks of Gaza virtually depopulated and uninhabitable.

If every building that has a suspected tunnel underneath it can be turned into a pile of rubble, that means the vast majority of the housing stock of Gaza can be turned into rubble.

Winter is coming where the average temp is 8 degrees Celsius (46 degrees Fahrenheit), combined with various storms from the Mediterranean, which have already hit massive tent cities involving refugees from North Gaza, with people sleeping in mud.

Combine that with no real access to clean drinking water or toilets, and you've got an *existing* major humanitarian crisis waiting to happen.

Add to that the fact that Israel will likely continue their strategy of "Force Protection", combined with methodical levelling and clearing of any structure which they claim is a "Legitimate Military target", as well as continued forced relocations of civilian populations, I strongly suspect this situation will continue to deteriorate.

[NOVA Green]

What worries me is Nakba 2.0 happening. What happens if fighting gets so intense in southern Gaza that Egypt allows people to flee? 45% of all homes in the Gaza Strip has been destroyed, mostly in the North. If if the same happens in the south, we could be looking at 2.5 million homeless people. It would be the greatest humantarian crisis in 100 years.

Sadly, not. 100 years covers the Second World War, Cambodia and Syria. Among many others.

A mass displacement into Egypt might be the lesser of two evils at this point; better that than staying in the ruins of Gaza.

Please also add Sudan to the list, where it is currently estimated that in addition to the 3.5 Million prior internal refugees from Dafur back in the days, toss another 6.3 Million into the mix, with countless numbers of civilian casualties, ethnic "cleansing", massacres and violence, much of it at the hands of the RSF, while these stories barely merit any coverage within the international media.

Respect you Silent Hunter, but totally agree with Pres Mike as to *why* should the residents of Gaza be forced to leave their homes and lands because of the crimes of Hamas and a Far-Right aligned Israeli Government which is more than willing to annex more territory using any means necessary, which in this case gave those forces within Israeli society greater influence when it comes to Gaza.

[NOVA Green]

University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magillanti has the little red laser dot on her back after not denouncing comments regarding genocide of Jewish people.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/07/business/penn-emergency-meeting-liz-magill/index.html

"The University of Pennsylvania’s board of trustees held an emergency meeting Thursday, and the powerful Wharton Board of Advisors that leads the university’s prominent business school called for a leadership change at the university, as school president Liz Magill faces scathing criticism over her performance at a House hearing earlier this week."

The bad reports on social media about her speech are deafening with financiers of the University threatening to withdraw hundreds of millions of dollars in funding if she is not removed.

The woman from Harvard can join her based on what I saw at the White House hearing. Simply appalling that they even have to think about it.

Question for my Australian friend, who apparently does not have a War he is opposed to...

What do you mean by continually referring to "little red dots"?

In the past, you have generally used this phrase to describe Israeli "Targeted Assassinations" of HAMAS political and military leaders.

Now apparently you are using it to refer to a University of Pennsylvania President.

Are you suggesting that Israel should assassinate a University President in the USA?

Do you think they might?

Honestly, get rid of your little red dots and hit lists since:

1.) You are implicitly legitimizing political violence against a University President because of statements, which may well have been taken out of context, for some statements with which you might disagree with.

2.) Instead of any actual attempt to discuss issues, you are simply choosing to jump into "clickbait politics", heavily driven by Global Rightwing Media empires (Including in your home country of Australia where Fox Corp originated), while promoting the virtue signaling of the "Jews for Jesus" crowd, which is heavily influential among the US-HOUSE-PUB is somehow representative of US public opinion.

3.) Jewish-American public opinion regarding the current events in Gaza are extremely complicated, and the attempt to simplify the issue when it comes to certain Colleges and Universities (Many of which have large Jewish-American populations, including vocal activists calling for Peace, Humanitarian Pauses, Ceasefires, while also talking about the historical context), appears to be simply yet another attempt to neglect any honest discussion, but rather another attempt to promote endless war.

You choose the language of war, while many of us with Jewish-American family backgrounds yearn for peace.

[GeneralMacArthur]

The United Kingdom evidently believes the Palestinian Authority taking over administration of Gaza is the correct outcome and is taking steps to make that happen:  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-preparing-west-bank-leaders-to-govern-gaza-0qptjrnqs

This is the first indication we've had from any stakeholder in the conflict regarding what they believe should happen to Gaza after the war is over.

[pppolitics]

Is this ISIS?

No, it's the IDF (Israel Defence Forces).

[Vosem]

Regardless, for me the biggest question is why the international community is not doing more to force a change to Israeli military tactics, which have effectively left huge chunks of Gaza virtually depopulated and uninhabitable.

Because the standard of care that Israel has shown is much higher than the normal one, and no country wants to set the precedent that they cannot defend themselves in more-or-less the manner that Israel is doing now (really a more aggressive manner).

Anyway, good to see some of the first mass surrenders today. Hopefully this will happen to the remaining militant groups in Gaza as well, followed ultimately by Doha and New York.