Skip to main content

View Diary: Israeli newspaper: Israel attacked Gaza knowing truce was in the works (238 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yeah... Really! (5+ / 0-)

    One rocket is too many.

    This is not some schoolyard where you throw some punches and then hope that people come and break it up before you get too badly hurt.

    One rocket, is simply too much. The sooner people realize it the better for everyone.

    You know, Hamas can simply accept the fact that Israel exists and will exist far into the future. They could simply make a peace deal. They don't want too.... too fuckin' bad for them.

    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

    by volleyboy1 on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 10:50:08 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Too bad for everyone, actually . . . (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      volleyboy1, Hey338Too, splintersawry
    •  So could Israeli governments recognize that the (4+ / 0-)

      Palestinians are a people as well and aren't going anywhere either. Israel made this attack looking at the proposal of direct talks right after the UN Vote, after all.

      •  They should recognize that the Palestinians need (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        a viable state. I am all in favor of that. But the Palestinian leadership needs to understand that Israel simply isn't going anywhere and nothing short of a permanent peace treaty is acceptable. But that is only my opinion, and I can't speak for the Israelis or the Palestinians.

        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

        by volleyboy1 on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 12:48:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think we've all seen enough evidence by now (4+ / 0-)

          that the current Israeli leadership is uninterested in such a "viable Palestinian state" no matter what the Palestinians do or won't do.  

          They won't even stop stealing Palestinian land.

        •  I understand the point about the preferability of (0+ / 0-)

          a permanent peace treaty, but the problem as presented in this round is this is Exhibit B of Israel agreeing a ceasefire and attacking immediately thereafter. This gives at least the current government of Israel a whomping credibility problem, since if they can't or won't keep a brand new deal, and use the occasion to kill off the head negotiator of that deal for the Non Israeli side, twice now, at least, AND have started a war against Gaza twice just after the election of their supposed rabbis, the US presidents, why should a permanent deal be believed to be any more permanent than this round. And what exactly has prohibited Israeli government from proceeding with the negotiations for such a treaty until now. It's nice to have the goal of what you call a permanent treaty, but on the record of Bibi, highly unrealistic to think there will ever be one while he or his are in office.

          And, um, isn't your notion that an essential precondition is the permanence of a particular treaty itself a precondition which BIbi claims he will not negotiate under the weight of. Or is it just Palestinian preconditions that are unacceptable, with whatever Israel requires OK? And how permanent is permanent? One week, one year, ten years, until the next Israeli election?  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site