[Goose]

My instinct says Biden would want to go into this meeting with some confidence that he'll be able to announce humanitarian aid or safe zones or hostage releases or some other progress.  Or at least not at a moment when the hostilities are dramatically escalating.  Do any of you also infer that Biden believes that a ground invasion won't start at least until after he leaves and that there may be humanitarian progress between now and Thursday?

Israel will not start a ground invasion of Gaza until Biden leaves, baring Hamas doing something really unforeseen. That part is pretty much for sure. I expect the US and other nations are madly trying to put something together that will "prevent" a ground war, or, failing that, will get as many Palestinians out of harm's way as possible. Egypt is supposedly in "talks" to accept up to 100,000 refugees. I expect the PA will take few if any, for several reasons. One, they aren't exactly swimming in resources themselves, in space, facilities, or money. Two, the refugees would have to get there, which given no air service in Gaza would probably involve transit through Israel. Three, the last thing the PA wants in the West Bank is a bunch of Hamas supporters. The PA got run out of Gaza by Hamas. They don't want a repeat. Jordan may take a few, but they have hosted Palestinian refugees before and it most emphatically didn't end well for either party. I doubt that has been "forgotten" by either party. Jordan also wants nothing to do with an "inoculation" of Hamas. The PLO was bad enough. Biden will be lucky if he gets even a token "solution".

There is some hope that Hamas is beginning to see a bit of sweet reason. They say they will free the hostages if Israel doesn't destroy Gaza. Probably too late for that offer to have any traction, but maybe something can be worked out. There is hope, but IMO not much.

[Goose]

My instinct says Biden would want to go into this meeting with some confidence that he'll be able to announce humanitarian aid or safe zones or hostage releases or some other progress.  Or at least not at a moment when the hostilities are dramatically escalating.  Do any of you also infer that Biden believes that a ground invasion won't start at least until after he leaves and that there may be humanitarian progress between now and Thursday?

Israel will not start a ground invasion of Gaza until Biden leaves, baring Hamas doing something really unforeseen. That part is pretty much for sure. I expect the US and other nations are madly trying to put something together that will "prevent" a ground war, or, failing that, will get as many Palestinians out of harm's way as possible. Egypt is supposedly in "talks" to accept up to 100,000 refugees. I expect the PA will take few if any, for several reasons. One, they aren't exactly swimming in resources themselves, in space, facilities, or money. Two, the refugees would have to get there, which given no air service in Gaza would probably involve transit through Israel. Three, the last thing the PA wants in the West Bank is a bunch of Hamas supporters. The PA got run out of Gaza by Hamas. They don't want a repeat. Jordan may take a few, but they have hosted Palestinian refugees before and it most emphatically didn't end well for either party. I doubt that has been "forgotten" by either party. Jordan also wants nothing to do with an "inoculation" of Hamas. The PLO was bad enough. Biden will be lucky if he gets even a token "solution".

There is some hope that Hamas is beginning to see a bit of sweet reason. They say they will free the hostages if Israel doesn't destroy Gaza. Probably too late for that offer to have any traction, but maybe something can be worked out. There is hope, but IMO not much.

[TrumpCard]

My instinct says Biden would want to go into this meeting with some confidence that he'll be able to announce humanitarian aid or safe zones or hostage releases or some other progress.  Or at least not at a moment when the hostilities are dramatically escalating.  Do any of you also infer that Biden believes that a ground invasion won't start at least until after he leaves and that there may be humanitarian progress between now and Thursday?

Israel will not start a ground invasion of Gaza until Biden leaves, baring Hamas doing something really unforeseen. That part is pretty much for sure. I expect the US and other nations are madly trying to put something together that will "prevent" a ground war, or, failing that, will get as many Palestinians out of harm's way as possible. Egypt is supposedly in "talks" to accept up to 100,000 refugees. I expect the PA will take few if any, for several reasons. One, they aren't exactly swimming in resources themselves, in space, facilities, or money. Two, the refugees would have to get there, which given no air service in Gaza would probably involve transit through Israel. Three, the last thing the PA wants in the West Bank is a bunch of Hamas supporters. The PA got run out of Gaza by Hamas. They don't want a repeat. Jordan may take a few, but they have hosted Palestinian refugees before and it most emphatically didn't end well for either party. I doubt that has been "forgotten" by either party. Jordan also wants nothing to do with an "inoculation" of Hamas. The PLO was bad enough. Biden will be lucky if he gets even a token "solution".

There is some hope that Hamas is beginning to see a bit of sweet reason. They say they will free the hostages if Israel doesn't destroy Gaza. Probably too late for that offer to have any traction, but maybe something can be worked out. There is hope, but IMO not much.

I like how you went through each of the participants in the planned summit in Amman.  I agree that there's probably a reason that each of them is involved.  Of course, Biden's plans easily could blow up in his face, but it's interesting to try inferring what Biden envisions.  

--Even if Biden just gets Egypt to accept all the non-Hamas foreign nationals in Gaza, that would be a nice win.  Egypt hosting 100,000 Gazans would be big.  Also, Egypt has said it would only host Gazans if Israel allows aid to flow in the other direction, which means Biden might get two wins in one.  

--Like you, I don't foresee Jordan or the PA hosting many Gazans.  Biden may have included Abdullah and Abbas just to give them credit for having a seat at the table where something good happens.  I don't think there's any good alternative to Abbas as the successor to Hamas in leading Gaza. Abdullah doesn't seem essential, but, for some reason, Biden has hosted Abdullah in the U.S. three times already and apparently sees Abdullah as a trusted partner in the peace process.  I'm not sure I see his value, but maybe he's the neutral moderator.

[TrumpCard]

My instinct says Biden would want to go into this meeting with some confidence that he'll be able to announce humanitarian aid or safe zones or hostage releases or some other progress.  Or at least not at a moment when the hostilities are dramatically escalating.  Do any of you also infer that Biden believes that a ground invasion won't start at least until after he leaves and that there may be humanitarian progress between now and Thursday?

Israel will not start a ground invasion of Gaza until Biden leaves, baring Hamas doing something really unforeseen. That part is pretty much for sure. I expect the US and other nations are madly trying to put something together that will "prevent" a ground war, or, failing that, will get as many Palestinians out of harm's way as possible. Egypt is supposedly in "talks" to accept up to 100,000 refugees. I expect the PA will take few if any, for several reasons. One, they aren't exactly swimming in resources themselves, in space, facilities, or money. Two, the refugees would have to get there, which given no air service in Gaza would probably involve transit through Israel. Three, the last thing the PA wants in the West Bank is a bunch of Hamas supporters. The PA got run out of Gaza by Hamas. They don't want a repeat. Jordan may take a few, but they have hosted Palestinian refugees before and it most emphatically didn't end well for either party. I doubt that has been "forgotten" by either party. Jordan also wants nothing to do with an "inoculation" of Hamas. The PLO was bad enough. Biden will be lucky if he gets even a token "solution".

There is some hope that Hamas is beginning to see a bit of sweet reason. They say they will free the hostages if Israel doesn't destroy Gaza. Probably too late for that offer to have any traction, but maybe something can be worked out. There is hope, but IMO not much.

I like how you went through each of the participants in the planned summit in Amman.  I agree that there's probably a reason that each of them is involved.  Of course, Biden's plans easily could blow up in his face, but it's interesting to try inferring what Biden envisions.  

--Even if Biden just gets Egypt to accept all the non-Hamas foreign nationals in Gaza, that would be a nice win.  Egypt hosting 100,000 Gazans would be big.  Also, Egypt has said it would only host Gazans if Israel allows aid to flow in the other direction, which means Biden might get two wins in one.  

--Like you, I don't foresee Jordan or the PA hosting many Gazans.  Biden may have included Abdullah and Abbas just to give them credit for having a seat at the table where something good happens.  I don't think there's any good alternative to Abbas as the successor to Hamas in leading Gaza. Abdullah doesn't seem essential, but, for some reason, Biden has hosted Abdullah in the U.S. three times already and apparently sees Abdullah as a trusted partner in the peace process.  I'm not sure I see his value, but maybe he's the neutral moderator.

[BigJohn043]

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

[BigJohn043]

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

[TreesAndBirds]

1697547947[/url]']

1697428011[/url]']

1697420821[/url]']

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

I think the world would love Egypt to govern Gaza. Would give them tons of money, the World Cup, the Olympics, and virtually anything else they want. I think the chances are very small. I think the chances are incrementally higher if Hamas is destroyed in advance and the time period is limited with the expectation of a UN monitored election which occurs after a “re-education” period where some effort is made to disabuse the citizenry of the hate that Hamas has instilled. We did this after WW2 and I think Gaza perhaps needs to be treated similarly to the defeated powers in WW2. Although as part of this Israel needs to try again with some concessions, although it cant be seen to be rewarding terrorism.

[TreesAndBirds]

1697547947[/url]']

1697428011[/url]']

1697420821[/url]']

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

I think the world would love Egypt to govern Gaza. Would give them tons of money, the World Cup, the Olympics, and virtually anything else they want. I think the chances are very small. I think the chances are incrementally higher if Hamas is destroyed in advance and the time period is limited with the expectation of a UN monitored election which occurs after a “re-education” period where some effort is made to disabuse the citizenry of the hate that Hamas has instilled. We did this after WW2 and I think Gaza perhaps needs to be treated similarly to the defeated powers in WW2. Although as part of this Israel needs to try again with some concessions, although it cant be seen to be rewarding terrorism.

[GK3]

1697547947[/url]']

1697428011[/url]']

1697420821[/url]']

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

I think the world would love Egypt to govern Gaza. Would give them tons of money, the World Cup, the Olympics, and virtually anything else they want. I think the chances are very small. I think the chances are incrementally higher if Hamas is destroyed in advance and the time period is limited with the expectation of a UN monitored election which occurs after a “re-education” period where some effort is made to disabuse the citizenry of the hate that Hamas has instilled. We did this after WW2 and I think Gaza perhaps needs to be treated similarly to the defeated powers in WW2. Although as part of this Israel needs to try again with some concessions, although it cant be seen to be rewarding terrorism.

I can't believe Egypt would be crazy enough to want that job.  I see no way Israel can "destroy" Hamas.  I can understand their desire to do so, we wanted to destroy the Taliban after 9/11, what did that get us?  Same with the Viet Cong.  I think it was in 1937 that Mao Tse-tung wrote his little book on guerilla warfare.  The fish swimming in water consisting of sympathizers.
If Israel conducts ground operations in Gaza, I would suspect that Hamas would man their tunnels with enough men to make Israel pay an awful price for clearing them.  It would be a suicide assignment.  The rest dress like the rest of the Gaza Palestinians and make their way to Egypt or wherever. At some point when Gaza again has some kind of government, Hamas personnel would infiltrate back in.  There would probably be a sufficient number of the disaffected to allow them to swim through the water and do their thing and it starts all over again.

Mao's introduction to his book contains the following:

"A revolutionary war is never confined within the bounds of military action. Because its purpose is to destroy an existing society and its institutions and to replace them with a completely new state structure, any revolutionary war is a unity of which the constituent parts, in varying importance, are military, political, economic, social, and psychological. For this reason, it is endowed with a dynamic quality and a dimension in depth that orthodox wars, whatever their scale, lack. This is particularly true of revolutionary guerrilla war, which is not susceptible to the type of superficial military treatment frequently advocated by antediluvian doctrinaires."

It strikes me that it pretty much applies to the current problem. He wrote this in 1937. 

https://www.marines.mil/Portals/1/Public...arfare.pdf

[GK3]

1697547947[/url]']

1697428011[/url]']

1697420821[/url]']

There are only two solutions here.  First, Israel could build a military grade wall around Gaza and let Hamas rot in its own filth.  That would be really bad for the population who has been horribly served by Hamas.

Unfortunately that is not an option. That is somewhat the approach Israel has already tried. First, a wall does not have a roof. Missiles go up and come down just fine even if fired from behind a wall. Second, no obstacle, no matter how formidable, will not be breached unless it is overwatched and defended. Hamas has shown with their tunnels and other breaching technologies that Israel is unable (as everyone else in the world would be unable) to defend their "obstacle" absolutely. That means Israelis would still die when Hamas finagled their way through, which inevitably some would.    

The other option is to expel Hamas.  To do that you have to go in on the ground.  To do that what we need to do is get the civillians out.  Going door to door will be awful.  Get the civilians out and then lay siege.  Over time you can root Hamas out without having to pay an awful price.

So what should the US do?

We put two carrier groups there.  We tell friendly nations that this shit has to end.  Hamas has to go.  Most of the middle eastern nations hate them anyway so that is fine.  

We have them tell Iran that if they get involved the US and Israel are going to bomb the hell out of you.  Notice how Iran has now stood down.

I am virtually certain the US said no such thing. If the US had any intention of "bombing the hell" out of Iran, it would have already done so many times over in the past 30 years. IMO the possibility of congress allowing this type of action is nil. Israel is another matter, and I am sure Iran knows that. However, I would suggest the idea that Iran has "stood down" is very questionable. They certainly don't want to start a war with either Israel or the US, but they are still going to do whatever they can short of that to make this crisis operate to their ends.

We then tell Abbas that if he wants to remain in power he better come out against Hamas.  He has now done that.

We are probably also telling Hezbolah that if they get involved it is going to be really really ugly.  I don't expect them to.

Now we need to find some place to put the Gaza civillians.  That one is trickier.  But with the current siege it is going to get ugly in there so hopefully most want to leave.  We got to get someone to take them.  Probably smaller groups in lots of countries.  Probably some in the West Bank.    Egypt already has like 9M refugees so whats 2M more?

2M more than they have any intention of accepting. Nobody is going to take these refugees because the track record of Palestinian refugees in other countries is uniformly disastrous. Talk to Jordan, Tunisia and Libya (if you can figure out who in Libya to ask). If you get the refugees, you get Hamas with them. On top of that, the Palestinians don't want to go. There are already significant Palestinian refugee communities in many nations. Notice that none of those nations are rushing to accept more.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I agree with you that the wall isn't the answer.  I mostly just used that as an example of how bad the alternatives are for both sides.

I do believe that we have essentially threatened Iran.  Likely through third parties.  And potentially the strikes would be Israel but we are in full support of them.  Heck, Lindsey Graham said this on Meet The Press.  Not that he is the government but that is clearly the message.  There is a reason they have backed down although my guess is they will go back and forth.

I agree that no one wants the Palestinians.  But I also think no one wants to deal with Hamas anymore.

As the other country bordering Gaza, Egypt is going to have to be involved here.  I expect it to take time but they need to be part of the solution.

Two options:

1)  Take 2M refugees and let Israel finish the job.  You are right on all of the reasons they hate this idea, but maybe it is better than the alternatives and lots of money is likely coming their way if they agree to it.

2)  Have Egypt govern Gaza.  They controlled Gaza prior to 67.  A ton of money would flow into Gaza if Egypt was willing to govern it.  And maybe that is better than 2M Palestinians in Egypt.

I welcome better ideas....

I think the world would love Egypt to govern Gaza. Would give them tons of money, the World Cup, the Olympics, and virtually anything else they want. I think the chances are very small. I think the chances are incrementally higher if Hamas is destroyed in advance and the time period is limited with the expectation of a UN monitored election which occurs after a “re-education” period where some effort is made to disabuse the citizenry of the hate that Hamas has instilled. We did this after WW2 and I think Gaza perhaps needs to be treated similarly to the defeated powers in WW2. Although as part of this Israel needs to try again with some concessions, although it cant be seen to be rewarding terrorism.

I can't believe Egypt would be crazy enough to want that job.  I see no way Israel can "destroy" Hamas.  I can understand their desire to do so, we wanted to destroy the Taliban after 9/11, what did that get us?  Same with the Viet Cong.  I think it was in 1937 that Mao Tse-tung wrote his little book on guerilla warfare.  The fish swimming in water consisting of sympathizers.
If Israel conducts ground operations in Gaza, I would suspect that Hamas would man their tunnels with enough men to make Israel pay an awful price for clearing them.  It would be a suicide assignment.  The rest dress like the rest of the Gaza Palestinians and make their way to Egypt or wherever. At some point when Gaza again has some kind of government, Hamas personnel would infiltrate back in.  There would probably be a sufficient number of the disaffected to allow them to swim through the water and do their thing and it starts all over again.

Mao's introduction to his book contains the following:

"A revolutionary war is never confined within the bounds of military action. Because its purpose is to destroy an existing society and its institutions and to replace them with a completely new state structure, any revolutionary war is a unity of which the constituent parts, in varying importance, are military, political, economic, social, and psychological. For this reason, it is endowed with a dynamic quality and a dimension in depth that orthodox wars, whatever their scale, lack. This is particularly true of revolutionary guerrilla war, which is not susceptible to the type of superficial military treatment frequently advocated by antediluvian doctrinaires."

It strikes me that it pretty much applies to the current problem. He wrote this in 1937. 

https://www.marines.mil/Portals/1/Public...arfare.pdf

[dabigv13]

Egypt and Jordan have already said they are not taking any Palestinian refugees. Perhaps in Egypt's case they could be bought off with sweet US aid money but even that I think is a stretch. Tough situation.

[dabigv13]

Egypt and Jordan have already said they are not taking any Palestinian refugees. Perhaps in Egypt's case they could be bought off with sweet US aid money but even that I think is a stretch. Tough situation.

[Goose]

IMO the suggestion that Egypt should govern Gaza, even temporarily is a non-starter. First of all, the Palestinians have made it abundantly clear they insist on governing themselves. Jordan tried to govern them, and they started a war with Jordan! Even if one could get the Palestinians to go along, Egypt isn't going to take the responsibility for the Palestinian (and Hamas') behavior. They simply can't absolutely prevent hostile action against Israel originating from Gaza. The rockets landing in Israel will then be coming from Egyptian territory, not "Palestinian" territory. Absolutely the LAST thing both Egypt and Israel want is to risk igniting conflict between each other. I am pretty sure both sides would veto such an arrangement, and I am confident the US would feel the same way.

[Goose]

IMO the suggestion that Egypt should govern Gaza, even temporarily is a non-starter. First of all, the Palestinians have made it abundantly clear they insist on governing themselves. Jordan tried to govern them, and they started a war with Jordan! Even if one could get the Palestinians to go along, Egypt isn't going to take the responsibility for the Palestinian (and Hamas') behavior. They simply can't absolutely prevent hostile action against Israel originating from Gaza. The rockets landing in Israel will then be coming from Egyptian territory, not "Palestinian" territory. Absolutely the LAST thing both Egypt and Israel want is to risk igniting conflict between each other. I am pretty sure both sides would veto such an arrangement, and I am confident the US would feel the same way.

[dabigv13]

A hospital in Gaza was bombed, with hundreds of refugees there killed. Israel says it was a Hamas missile that landed short, other sources says Israeli air strike.

I don't think the missiles Hamas usually fires make anywhere close to as big of an explosion as this was, so that theory seems a bit dubious to me. Israel really fumbling this; with their rhetoric from early on from many sources about not discriminating civilian targets from military ones, they have pretty much burned away the benefit of the doub that the US would like to give them. And then if they bomb hospitals stuffed with Palestinians who fled their homes, US support may dry up before they even launch the ground attack they have been threatening.

Palestinian leader Abbas no longer going to meet with Biden.

[dabigv13]

A hospital in Gaza was bombed, with hundreds of refugees there killed. Israel says it was a Hamas missile that landed short, other sources says Israeli air strike.

I don't think the missiles Hamas usually fires make anywhere close to as big of an explosion as this was, so that theory seems a bit dubious to me. Israel really fumbling this; with their rhetoric from early on from many sources about not discriminating civilian targets from military ones, they have pretty much burned away the benefit of the doub that the US would like to give them. And then if they bomb hospitals stuffed with Palestinians who fled their homes, US support may dry up before they even launch the ground attack they have been threatening.

Palestinian leader Abbas no longer going to meet with Biden.

[Goose]

A hospital in Gaza was bombed, with hundreds of refugees there killed. Israel says it was a Hamas missile that landed short, other sources says Israeli air strike.

I don't think the missiles Hamas usually fires make anywhere close to as big of an explosion as this was, so that theory seems a bit dubious to me. Israel really fumbling this; with their rhetoric from early on from many sources about not discriminating civilian targets from military ones, they have pretty much burned away the benefit of the doub that the US would like to give them. And then if they bomb hospitals stuffed with Palestinians who fled their homes, US support may dry up before they even launch the ground attack they have been threatening.

This is really unfortunate. It is imperative that Israel give a full accounting of whatever happened. If they didn't do it, it should be pretty easy for all the other nations that have all kinds of collection resources in the area to confirm that is true. If that ISN'T the case, Israel needs to admit they screwed up. Aircraft bomb the wrong targets in war. It happens. However, Israel should know who was where when and can share it with the world, one way or another.

Sad to say it, but I wouldn't discount the possibility the hospital basement contained something other than bandages.

Palestinian leader Abbas no longer going to meet with Biden.

Big time suckage.

[Goose]

A hospital in Gaza was bombed, with hundreds of refugees there killed. Israel says it was a Hamas missile that landed short, other sources says Israeli air strike.

I don't think the missiles Hamas usually fires make anywhere close to as big of an explosion as this was, so that theory seems a bit dubious to me. Israel really fumbling this; with their rhetoric from early on from many sources about not discriminating civilian targets from military ones, they have pretty much burned away the benefit of the doub that the US would like to give them. And then if they bomb hospitals stuffed with Palestinians who fled their homes, US support may dry up before they even launch the ground attack they have been threatening.

This is really unfortunate. It is imperative that Israel give a full accounting of whatever happened. If they didn't do it, it should be pretty easy for all the other nations that have all kinds of collection resources in the area to confirm that is true. If that ISN'T the case, Israel needs to admit they screwed up. Aircraft bomb the wrong targets in war. It happens. However, Israel should know who was where when and can share it with the world, one way or another.

Sad to say it, but I wouldn't discount the possibility the hospital basement contained something other than bandages.

Palestinian leader Abbas no longer going to meet with Biden.

Big time suckage.

[dabigv13]

Looks like the whole meeting is off now.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/17...72963?s=20[/tweet]

Puts Biden in a tough spot as he is getting on the plane to fly over there.

And FWIW, this has been a pretty trustworthy account, and they are saying it was a Palestinian rocket that fell on the hospital, after exploding in mid air. Possibly after being intercepted.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/GeoConfirmed/status/...34049?s=20[/tweet]

Lots still unclear; Israel's twitter account earlier posted and then deleted different footage after it was noted the videos were from after time of the hospital strike. But the videos in this thread are matched to the time of the hospital strike.

[dabigv13]

Looks like the whole meeting is off now.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/17...72963?s=20[/tweet]

Puts Biden in a tough spot as he is getting on the plane to fly over there.

And FWIW, this has been a pretty trustworthy account, and they are saying it was a Palestinian rocket that fell on the hospital, after exploding in mid air. Possibly after being intercepted.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/GeoConfirmed/status/...34049?s=20[/tweet]

Lots still unclear; Israel's twitter account earlier posted and then deleted different footage after it was noted the videos were from after time of the hospital strike. But the videos in this thread are matched to the time of the hospital strike.

[GK3]

Looks like the whole meeting is off now.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/17...72963?s=20[/tweet]

Puts Biden in a tough spot as he is getting on the plane to fly over there.

And FWIW, this has been a pretty trustworthy account, and they are saying it was a Palestinian rocket that fell on the hospital, after exploding in mid air. Possibly after being intercepted.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/GeoConfirmed/status/...34049?s=20[/tweet]

Lots still unclear; Israel's twitter account earlier posted and then deleted different footage after it was noted the videos were from after time of the hospital strike. But the videos in this thread are matched to the time of the hospital strike.

Sad thing is that no matter who proves what the other side will always say it was the other sides fault.  Now, Arab countries apparently at one time willing to sit on the side lines, are now making more bellicose statements.  It is one thing for Israel to have to deal with Hamas and Hezbollah, but having to add in Jordan, Egypt and other countries puts them between a rock and a hard place.  It will be interesting to see if anyone can "prove" who did what.
The big question might come to be how far will the USA go.

[GK3]

Looks like the whole meeting is off now.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/17...72963?s=20[/tweet]

Puts Biden in a tough spot as he is getting on the plane to fly over there.

And FWIW, this has been a pretty trustworthy account, and they are saying it was a Palestinian rocket that fell on the hospital, after exploding in mid air. Possibly after being intercepted.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/GeoConfirmed/status/...34049?s=20[/tweet]

Lots still unclear; Israel's twitter account earlier posted and then deleted different footage after it was noted the videos were from after time of the hospital strike. But the videos in this thread are matched to the time of the hospital strike.

Sad thing is that no matter who proves what the other side will always say it was the other sides fault.  Now, Arab countries apparently at one time willing to sit on the side lines, are now making more bellicose statements.  It is one thing for Israel to have to deal with Hamas and Hezbollah, but having to add in Jordan, Egypt and other countries puts them between a rock and a hard place.  It will be interesting to see if anyone can "prove" who did what.
The big question might come to be how far will the USA go.

[dabigv13]

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/glcarlstrom/status/1714408566482743432?s=20[/tweet]

Think this is a good read on the situation. I think as things have developed, Netanyahu's free pass is getting withdrawn a bit. But Israeli political leadership may feel they have no choice but to proceed with a big shock and awe campaign to appease their public.

Hamas leadership has said they will return all hostages within an hour if the bombing campaign stops. The domestic political issue of the hostages is an explosive one already. How that develops will also influence things in the days to come.

Very dangerous moment in the Middle East. I am sure Biden will counsel for caution, but I just don't know much sway he will have.

[dabigv13]

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/glcarlstrom/status/1714408566482743432?s=20[/tweet]

Think this is a good read on the situation. I think as things have developed, Netanyahu's free pass is getting withdrawn a bit. But Israeli political leadership may feel they have no choice but to proceed with a big shock and awe campaign to appease their public.

Hamas leadership has said they will return all hostages within an hour if the bombing campaign stops. The domestic political issue of the hostages is an explosive one already. How that develops will also influence things in the days to come.

Very dangerous moment in the Middle East. I am sure Biden will counsel for caution, but I just don't know much sway he will have.

[Genuine Realist]

Nice insight. Thanks. Iran wouldn't like to see an accord between the Saudis and the Israelis, either. And they are Hamas' bank.

Exactly.    The experts I know believe this is most plausibly an Iranian supported operation that launched at this time for exactly that reason.  And the level of barbarism, hostage taking,  and overall scope of the attack were designed to guarantee an Israeli ground incursion into Gaza.

This is my own view - an Iranian political tactic.

[Genuine Realist]

Nice insight. Thanks. Iran wouldn't like to see an accord between the Saudis and the Israelis, either. And they are Hamas' bank.

Exactly.    The experts I know believe this is most plausibly an Iranian supported operation that launched at this time for exactly that reason.  And the level of barbarism, hostage taking,  and overall scope of the attack were designed to guarantee an Israeli ground incursion into Gaza.

This is my own view - an Iranian political tactic.

[TrumpCard]

1697385534[/url]']

1697383405[/url]']
Speaking of no-win situations...
https://nypost.com/2023/10/13/balthazar-...rael-post/

This NY Post story certainly drives home the folly of picking sides, because no matter which one you take, castigation awaits. I've stated I think both sides are terrible, so nobody can accuse me of being pro-either side of this stupidness.

But, I agree with this McNally guy and never would have deleted my post that got such a hostile reaction. When people resort to seemingly dead end acts when they have nothing, it's an indicator of how desperate they are. When people who have reached the point they don't think they have anything to lose so much that they are willing to sacrifice themselves, it's time to listen to them and find out what it will take for them to stop being so desperate, or would have prevented them.

Mary Antoinette stood in her luxurious threads while the masses had nothing, said "let them eat cake." and motivated them to take her head off. Dismissing the most important concerns of others never ends well, especially when those being dismissed have nothing to lose. Those who have something to lose need to at minimum placate those who have nothing or they will have hell visited on them from people willing to give up their own lives to express their dissatisfaction.

It's frankly just as embarrassing to me as a human that so many people don't grasp these realities and insist one side is right, as it is to see the human failure epitomized by the Israel-Palestine conflict in the first place.

Rodney King said it right: "Can we all get along?"

Marie Antoinette. Not Mary. Most likely, she never uttered the phrase you mention: from Britannica "More important, though, there is absolutely no historical evidence that Marie-Antoinette ever said “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche” or anything like it."

Turns out it was fake news (aka propaganda) put forth by the revolutionaries. Imagine, people motivated to chop of your head for something you never said.

https://www.britannica.com/story/did-mar...no%20bread.

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

[TrumpCard]

1697385534[/url]']

1697383405[/url]']
Speaking of no-win situations...
https://nypost.com/2023/10/13/balthazar-...rael-post/

This NY Post story certainly drives home the folly of picking sides, because no matter which one you take, castigation awaits. I've stated I think both sides are terrible, so nobody can accuse me of being pro-either side of this stupidness.

But, I agree with this McNally guy and never would have deleted my post that got such a hostile reaction. When people resort to seemingly dead end acts when they have nothing, it's an indicator of how desperate they are. When people who have reached the point they don't think they have anything to lose so much that they are willing to sacrifice themselves, it's time to listen to them and find out what it will take for them to stop being so desperate, or would have prevented them.

Mary Antoinette stood in her luxurious threads while the masses had nothing, said "let them eat cake." and motivated them to take her head off. Dismissing the most important concerns of others never ends well, especially when those being dismissed have nothing to lose. Those who have something to lose need to at minimum placate those who have nothing or they will have hell visited on them from people willing to give up their own lives to express their dissatisfaction.

It's frankly just as embarrassing to me as a human that so many people don't grasp these realities and insist one side is right, as it is to see the human failure epitomized by the Israel-Palestine conflict in the first place.

Rodney King said it right: "Can we all get along?"

Marie Antoinette. Not Mary. Most likely, she never uttered the phrase you mention: from Britannica "More important, though, there is absolutely no historical evidence that Marie-Antoinette ever said “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche” or anything like it."

Turns out it was fake news (aka propaganda) put forth by the revolutionaries. Imagine, people motivated to chop of your head for something you never said.

https://www.britannica.com/story/did-mar...no%20bread.

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

[Goose]

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

Hopefully Biden (and the rest of the administration) has independent confirmation of at least the "fact" Israel didn't do it. If we are going to take the position that is true, we need more than Israel's word. I am quite confident our surveillance of that airspace is very, very good. There are probably so many elint, comint, and AWACS aircraft in the area that the US has an aircraft there whose sole job is to de-conflict them. (Yes, this has happened before). That is setting aside the many other nations doing somewhat the same, as well as LEO coverage. We should "know" by now, one way or the other.

Biden was always in a "no-win" situation when he went. None of the alleged "participants" in the meeting with the Arab states really wanted to be there, and have made it totally clear they aren't accepting refugees. They bailed because it was a good excuse. If they really wanted to talk to Biden, they would have at least started a meeting and then walked out if they felt it necessary. I understand that the US needed to "do something" to de-fuse the situation, but I half believe that our diplomats believe they can actually negotiate something "soon". Not probable, and we don't want to be looking as if we have no clue.

[Goose]

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

Hopefully Biden (and the rest of the administration) has independent confirmation of at least the "fact" Israel didn't do it. If we are going to take the position that is true, we need more than Israel's word. I am quite confident our surveillance of that airspace is very, very good. There are probably so many elint, comint, and AWACS aircraft in the area that the US has an aircraft there whose sole job is to de-conflict them. (Yes, this has happened before). That is setting aside the many other nations doing somewhat the same, as well as LEO coverage. We should "know" by now, one way or the other.

Biden was always in a "no-win" situation when he went. None of the alleged "participants" in the meeting with the Arab states really wanted to be there, and have made it totally clear they aren't accepting refugees. They bailed because it was a good excuse. If they really wanted to talk to Biden, they would have at least started a meeting and then walked out if they felt it necessary. I understand that the US needed to "do something" to de-fuse the situation, but I half believe that our diplomats believe they can actually negotiate something "soon". Not probable, and we don't want to be looking as if we have no clue.

[GK3]

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

Hopefully Biden (and the rest of the administration) has independent confirmation of at least the "fact" Israel didn't do it. If we are going to take the position that is true, we need more than Israel's word. I am quite confident our surveillance of that airspace is very, very good. There are probably so many elint, comint, and AWACS aircraft in the area that the US has an aircraft there whose sole job is to de-conflict them. (Yes, this has happened before). That is setting aside the many other nations doing somewhat the same, as well as LEO coverage. We should "know" by now, one way or the other.

Biden was always in a "no-win" situation when he went. None of the alleged "participants" in the meeting with the Arab states really wanted to be there, and have made it totally clear they aren't accepting refugees. They bailed because it was a good excuse. If they really wanted to talk to Biden, they would have at least started a meeting and then walked out if they felt it necessary. I understand that the US needed to "do something" to de-fuse the situation, but I half believe that our diplomats believe they can actually negotiate something "soon". Not probable, and we don't want to be looking as if we have no clue.

Agree completely with your comments.  The hospital disaster just gave everyone a nice way to say goodbye.  Proving something like this has to be difficult at the same time as you say, the skies over that area are blanketed with so many intelligence gathering planes and satellites there probably isn't room for another one. If we had hard proof Israel was innocent I do not see why it hasn't been publicized. If the "other guy" did it and we know it, we are probably keeping silent until we can't.
How big is the war head on the rockets Hamas/Jihad are using?  How much explosive is probably required to cause the damage that was incurred?
Having no clue as to the answers to these questions, instinct tells me that it is unlikely a Hamas rocket had enough power to cause the damage that took place.  Which gets us back to maybe "what was in the basement". 
Lacking concrete proof of who did what, we now have multiple Arab countries gathering and assuming more aggressive positions against Israel. 

This then brings up the big question as to how far the USA is willing to get involved.  I do not think the answer to this question is so clear cut as it was say 20 years ago.

[GK3]

According to Biden today, Hamas taking a page from the revolutionary notebook. The hospital explosion apparently was caused by a Palestinian rocket. Nevertheless, the Arab world, at least, still seems to blame Israel.

Hopefully Biden (and the rest of the administration) has independent confirmation of at least the "fact" Israel didn't do it. If we are going to take the position that is true, we need more than Israel's word. I am quite confident our surveillance of that airspace is very, very good. There are probably so many elint, comint, and AWACS aircraft in the area that the US has an aircraft there whose sole job is to de-conflict them. (Yes, this has happened before). That is setting aside the many other nations doing somewhat the same, as well as LEO coverage. We should "know" by now, one way or the other.

Biden was always in a "no-win" situation when he went. None of the alleged "participants" in the meeting with the Arab states really wanted to be there, and have made it totally clear they aren't accepting refugees. They bailed because it was a good excuse. If they really wanted to talk to Biden, they would have at least started a meeting and then walked out if they felt it necessary. I understand that the US needed to "do something" to de-fuse the situation, but I half believe that our diplomats believe they can actually negotiate something "soon". Not probable, and we don't want to be looking as if we have no clue.

Agree completely with your comments.  The hospital disaster just gave everyone a nice way to say goodbye.  Proving something like this has to be difficult at the same time as you say, the skies over that area are blanketed with so many intelligence gathering planes and satellites there probably isn't room for another one. If we had hard proof Israel was innocent I do not see why it hasn't been publicized. If the "other guy" did it and we know it, we are probably keeping silent until we can't.
How big is the war head on the rockets Hamas/Jihad are using?  How much explosive is probably required to cause the damage that was incurred?
Having no clue as to the answers to these questions, instinct tells me that it is unlikely a Hamas rocket had enough power to cause the damage that took place.  Which gets us back to maybe "what was in the basement". 
Lacking concrete proof of who did what, we now have multiple Arab countries gathering and assuming more aggressive positions against Israel. 

This then brings up the big question as to how far the USA is willing to get involved.  I do not think the answer to this question is so clear cut as it was say 20 years ago.

[TrumpCard]

“Negotiate something” is pretty broad language. Framed that way, Biden may be able to achieve the goal. 

I don’t think Biden is so proud as to think he can negotiate an end to hostilities. 

Can he negotiate safe passage for the relatively small number of American nationals trapped in Gaza?  If so, that alone would make the trip worthwhile. 

Can he convince Israel that it’s in Israel’s own interest to allow water into Gaza?  If so, that would mitigate the humanitarian effects of the war. 

Can he convince Israel that it’s in Israel’s own interest to further delay a ground invasion?  Delay alone might save lives by creating space for the regional players to get civilians to safe® locations. 

There are other possible outcomes that would make the trip worthwhile. And what’s the downside?  The US government isn’t passing any legislation anyway right now. Biden may as well make this diplomatic mission. It’s not doing any harm.

[TrumpCard]

“Negotiate something” is pretty broad language. Framed that way, Biden may be able to achieve the goal. 

I don’t think Biden is so proud as to think he can negotiate an end to hostilities. 

Can he negotiate safe passage for the relatively small number of American nationals trapped in Gaza?  If so, that alone would make the trip worthwhile. 

Can he convince Israel that it’s in Israel’s own interest to allow water into Gaza?  If so, that would mitigate the humanitarian effects of the war. 

Can he convince Israel that it’s in Israel’s own interest to further delay a ground invasion?  Delay alone might save lives by creating space for the regional players to get civilians to safe® locations. 

There are other possible outcomes that would make the trip worthwhile. And what’s the downside?  The US government isn’t passing any legislation anyway right now. Biden may as well make this diplomatic mission. It’s not doing any harm.

[dabigv13]

Daytime images do not seem to accord with an airstrike or the multiple hundreds of deaths reported by Palestinian authorities. The hospital appears pretty much undamaged. There are some burnt cars but no significant impact crater.

http://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/171453...34678?s=20


Of course whatever the truth of the matter, the minds of many are already made up.


Hmmm I wonder if the twitter to X switch has now totally borked tweet embedding here. Bummer.

[dabigv13]

Daytime images do not seem to accord with an airstrike or the multiple hundreds of deaths reported by Palestinian authorities. The hospital appears pretty much undamaged. There are some burnt cars but no significant impact crater.

http://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/171453...34678?s=20


Of course whatever the truth of the matter, the minds of many are already made up.


Hmmm I wonder if the twitter to X switch has now totally borked tweet embedding here. Bummer.

[TrumpCard]

Ruser frequently posts pro-Palestinian content online. This is not a homer for the Israelis.

[TrumpCard]

Ruser frequently posts pro-Palestinian content online. This is not a homer for the Israelis.

[gocard14]

Daytime images do not seem to accord with an airstrike or the multiple hundreds of deaths reported by Palestinian authorities. The hospital appears pretty much undamaged. There are some burnt cars but no significant impact crater.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/17145...34678?s=20[/tweet]

Of course whatever the truth of the matter, the minds of many are already made up.

This. A combination of geolocated video showing a rocket fragment and then striking the hospital along with analysis of the damage, which looks far more along the lines of fire damage from a propellant then a big boom from a JDAM has me quite convinced. IDF also published signals intelligence of conversations supporting this, though that is less compelling. As you say, however, it will not convince those who already believe that israel is at fault, or who may not have a belief but are happy to seize the moment for political purposes.

Circling back to media concerns, it is incredible to me that major news outlets will almost uncritically report claims made by a terrorist organization.  

A lot of news organizations were saying things like "IDF bombs hospital, according to local authorities." When the local authorities are a terrorist organization that has just recently murdered over a thousand people and kidnapped others, maybe you should be a little more careful about what you report? IS that just me?

Something like "Gaza hospital destroyed, cause unclear, investigation ongoing" seems a lot more accurate to me.

[gocard14]

Daytime images do not seem to accord with an airstrike or the multiple hundreds of deaths reported by Palestinian authorities. The hospital appears pretty much undamaged. There are some burnt cars but no significant impact crater.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/17145...34678?s=20[/tweet]

Of course whatever the truth of the matter, the minds of many are already made up.

This. A combination of geolocated video showing a rocket fragment and then striking the hospital along with analysis of the damage, which looks far more along the lines of fire damage from a propellant then a big boom from a JDAM has me quite convinced. IDF also published signals intelligence of conversations supporting this, though that is less compelling. As you say, however, it will not convince those who already believe that israel is at fault, or who may not have a belief but are happy to seize the moment for political purposes.

Circling back to media concerns, it is incredible to me that major news outlets will almost uncritically report claims made by a terrorist organization.  

A lot of news organizations were saying things like "IDF bombs hospital, according to local authorities." When the local authorities are a terrorist organization that has just recently murdered over a thousand people and kidnapped others, maybe you should be a little more careful about what you report? IS that just me?

Something like "Gaza hospital destroyed, cause unclear, investigation ongoing" seems a lot more accurate to me.