NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1319520,00.html?f=rss

both sides are cautious and think it won't stand for long, but for now there is truce.
if it will continue, israel will start to remove the blockade from the strip. meanwhile, the negotiation for the realesment of the soldier Gilad Shalit will renew.
Egypt promised to help with the truce keeping, and stop the gunrunning.


what do you think? will it work or explode before another week will pass?

I always hope they will last.

I do as well. I certainly hope that the government won't follow the advice of the more militant parties.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1319520,00.html?f=rss

both sides are cautious and think it won't stand for long, but for now there is truce.
if it will continue, israel will start to remove the blockade from the strip. meanwhile, the negotiation for the realesment of the soldier Gilad Shalit will renew.
Egypt promised to help with the truce keeping, and stop the gunrunning.


what do you think? will it work or explode before another week will pass?

That

Don't hold your breath.

The Palestinians in Gaza will fire a few rockets, and the Israeli Army will move in and monkeystomp them.

what do you think? will it work or explode before another week will pass?

The latter, two weeks at most.

I'm going to knock on wood and hope it lasts for a while. Both sides are fairly exhausted.

I'll try any option that keeps them talking. Hope springs eternal.

It will never last.

It'll last until the pen they're signing it with mysteriously runs out of ink.

I don't know - the last one held for a LONG time. It all depends on both sides being faithful. And I think both sides have motives for keeping the ceasefire.

If Hamas has learned anything, it's that not shooting rockets buys them time, while shooting rockets gets the IDF on them. Given how Hamas proposed this particular ceasefire, I think that they'll keep their end of the bargain. They probably want to rearm and maybe do some housecleaning.

Olmert, meanwhile, has his reasons. His approval ratings are worse than Bush's, and there's a lot of pressure for him to resign. If he can hold the ceasefire, and use the lull in violence to make some actual progress with Abbas, then he can probably bring his own party in line. The Israeli people are fairly desperate for peace right now, and if he can provide evidence that they are moving towards a peace treaty with the Palestinians, they'll give him all the time he needs.

There's also the prisoner thing. I have third-hand information from Tzpi Livni (that is, I heard this from a guy who heard this from a guy who heard this from Tzpi Livni) that they had concluded a deal to trade 3000 prisoners for the one Israeli soldier, when Hizbollah took two prisoners and screwed everything up. Hamas might up the ante, but the Israelis will probably give in. If they can conclude a deal, both sides get a propaganda victory. Israel can bring its soldier home, and Olmert gets the credit (admittedly, so does Livni, who would take power if Olmert resigns). Hamas gets to brag about how many prisoners it freed.

Now, if something happens in Israeli politics, and Netanyahu gains power, all bets are off. Israel CANNOT afford to have a hardliner in power. It would set back the peace process by years. If this corruption thing gets out of hand, Olmert should resign rather than give Netanyahu and Likud a chance to take power. As far as I can tell, Livni hasn't been linked to any corruption, so she should be tougher. Also, she's escaped any blame for the Lebanon fiasco.

I don't know - the last one held for a LONG time. It all depends on both sides being faithful. And I think both sides have motives for keeping the ceasefire.

If Hamas has learned anything, it's that not shooting rockets buys them time, while shooting rockets gets the IDF on them. Given how Hamas proposed this particular ceasefire, I think that they'll keep their end of the bargain. They probably want to rearm and maybe do some housecleaning.

Olmert, meanwhile, has his reasons. His approval ratings are worse than Bush's, and there's a lot of pressure for him to resign. If he can hold the ceasefire, and use the lull in violence to make some actual progress with Abbas, then he can probably bring his own party in line. The Israeli people are fairly desperate for peace right now, and if he can provide evidence that they are moving towards a peace treaty with the Palestinians, they'll give him all the time he needs.

There's also the prisoner thing. I have third-hand information from Tzpi Livni (that is, I heard this from a guy who heard this from a guy who heard this from Tzpi Livni) that they had concluded a deal to trade 3000 prisoners for the one Israeli soldier, when Hizbollah took two prisoners and screwed everything up. Hamas might up the ante, but the Israelis will probably give in. If they can conclude a deal, both sides get a propaganda victory. Israel can bring its soldier home, and Olmert gets the credit (admittedly, so does Livni, who would take power if Olmert resigns). Hamas gets to brag about how many prisoners it freed.

Now, if something happens in Israeli politics, and Netanyahu gains power, all bets are off. Israel CANNOT afford to have a hardliner in power. It would set back the peace process by years. If this corruption thing gets out of hand, Olmert should resign rather than give Netanyahu and Likud a chance to take power. As far as I can tell, Livni hasn't been linked to any corruption, so she should be tougher. Also, she's escaped any blame for the Lebanon fiasco.

If Netanyahu gets in power, there won't be any Gaza shortly thereafter.

He'll also have his hands full with Hezbollah, which has taken full advantage of the lame UN "peacekeepers" who were charged with preventing Hezbollah from rearming.

Hezbollah has fully rearmed, by the truckload, direct from Syria, under the blind eyes and testicle-free UN "peacekeepers".

This time around, I believe that Iran will join in on firing rockets at Israel.

Don't hold your breath.

The Palestinians in Gaza will fire a few rockets, and the Israeli Army will move in and monkeystomp them.

More like Israel will go try to find a "terrorist mastermind" while killing about 30 Palestinian children, and Palestinians will retaliate.

More like Israel will go try to find a "mastermind" kill about 30 Palestinian children, and Palestinians will retaliate.

Maybe if Palestinian leaders didn't live in the same room with 30 children...

Maybe if Palestinian leaders didn't live in the same room with 30 children...

Maybe if Israel would quit destroying everything in Palestine, then people would be able to live where ever.

Maybe if Israel would quit destroying everything in Palestine, then people would be able to live where ever.

It's well within the means of Israel to "destroy everything in Palestine".

They obviously haven't done it by military means.

The latest moves by Israel are to completely separate themselves from areas where Palestinians live. Put up walls, etc., to foil attacks.

Palestinians have therefore built rockets, and planned attacks into Israel. Israel has reacted by incursions and shelling in response to rockets, and pre-emptive killing of Palestinian leaders and rocket makers in response to rockets.

Israel also continues to piss the Palestinians off by building more settlements in and around Jerusalem.

If the Palestinians fired no more rockets, and did no more cross-border operations, and never met again to plan those actions, the Israelis wouldn't have much to shoot at. If the Israelis stopped building settlements and stopped pre-emptive killings, the Palestinians might cool down.

I think, however, that it's useless to negotiate with Hamas. Their top demands are the elimination (preferably by death) of every Jew in Israel, and the restoration of all of Israel's land to their control. Israel, on the other hand, will never accede to a unitary parcel of land under complete Palestinian rule. Neither side will give up their sole claim to Jerusalem, each citing that God is on their side.

It's well within the means of Israel to "destroy everything in Palestine".

They obviously haven't done it by military means.

The latest moves by Israel are to completely separate themselves from areas where Palestinians live. Put up walls, etc., to foil attacks.

Palestinians have therefore built rockets, and planned attacks into Israel. Israel has reacted by incursions and shelling in response to rockets, and pre-emptive killing of Palestinian leaders and rocket makers in response to rockets.

Israel also continues to piss the Palestinians off by building more settlements in and around Jerusalem.

If the Palestinians fired no more rockets, and did no more cross-border operations, and never met again to plan those actions, the Israelis wouldn't have much to shoot at. If the Israelis stopped building settlements and stopped pre-emptive killings, the Palestinians might cool down.

I think, however, that it's useless to negotiate with Hamas. Their top demands are the elimination (preferably by death) of every Jew in Israel, and the restoration of all of Israel's land to their control. Israel, on the other hand, will never accede to a unitary parcel of land under complete Palestinian rule. Neither side will give up their sole claim to Jerusalem, each citing that God is on their side.

Well once Israel stops breaking UN resolution after UN resolution, and pays for the complete re-construction of Palestine, AND allows it to be a free nation, then perhaps rockets will be stopped from being made.

Well once Israel stops breaking UN resolution after UN resolution, and pays for the complete re-construction of Palestine, AND allows it to be a free nation, then perhaps rockets will be stopped from being made.

Sorry, the UN is meaningless to me. It's not world government, and holds no water.

"Palestine" as defined by the Palestinians, is all of Israel. So that's a non-starter.

I think I just covered all of this.

Sorry, the UN is meaningless to me. It's not world government, and holds no water.

"Palestine" as defined by the Palestinians, is all of Israel. So that's a non-starter.

I think I just covered all of this.

And even if you think the UN matters, the "Palestinians" wouldn't agree to the original 1947 "two-state" partition proposed by the UN in the first place.

I hope it lasts. I won't speculate, though.

I have hope, but not much realistic belief, that this will last.

I think The Isrealis may actually stick to this one, for all the reasons stated earlier, and I think the Palestinians will too, because they are getting fucked over so hard. But then some nutjob with an rpg will break it inside of a week in his futile attempt to create the holy land, and Isreal will overreact with extreme prejudice.

Insert status quo here.

If any other country was continually attacking your home land with rocket attacks would you insist the army did something?

Lets not forget the biggest difference between Israel and its surrounding nations.

Israel is democratic. The others are somewhere between anarchy and dictatorship

The other countries opinions wont change when there is an intent to wipe israel from the face of the earth. This is a religous war where the Muslim nations intend to remove every Jew (and christian) from the holy land. If you look at Palestine you will not be able to see a jewish temple or a Christian church. However if you look in Israel there are such places despite the obvious prejudice that would develope if you see a muslim kill themselves to kill you in your nation on a monthly basis.

Imagine september 11 every month

Aside from betting on how long this will last, anyone want to bet on which side breaks it? I put all my money on the Palestinians.

Well once Israel stops breaking UN resolution after UN resolution, and pays for the complete re-construction of Palestine, AND allows it to be a free nation, then perhaps rockets will be stopped from being made.

Breaking UN resolutions? What about the first resolution to Israel to exist. That is being ignored

What about clauses to a cease fire that always continue when Palestine claims they are not attacking?

What about the west bank withdrawel which was claimed by the terrorists as a victory for violence? Israel didnt even need to do that

What about the fact that one country is a democracy and the other is anarchy mainly in control of terrorist factions?

What about the fact that you never do see a Jew in Palestine but you do see the some Muslims in Israel?

Then howabout the fact that Israel has been the only country critized by the UN for breaching womens rights despite the fact that other countries do not allow women to vote and allow female genital mutalation?

Or the fact that the disarmament coucil by the UN is run by Iran who wants Israel wiped of the face of the earth, denies the holocaust and funds terrorist organizations

Israel breaching repetive UN

Israel rightly gives the UN resolutions? Prehaps from a warped view but the other side dosnt even comply. They just want a temporary peace fire to rearm.

these tend to last about 6 months.

about a 50% chance of the solider getting released provided he is really still alive.

What about the west bank withdrawel which was claimed by the terrorists as a victory for violence?

What West Bank withdrawal?

. If you look at Palestine you will not be able to see a jewish temple or a Christian church.

No christian churches in the OT? Would you care to wager on that?

Aside from betting on how long this will last, anyone want to bet on which side breaks it? I put all my money on the Palestinians.

An israeli fired a home-made rocket (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7465323.stm) into the west bank today. Does that count?

It doesn't.

An israeli fired a home-made rocket (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7465323.stm) into the west bank today. Does that count?

It doesn't.

Why not? Homemade rockets should count, no matter who fires them.

An israeli fired a home-made rocket (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7465323.stm) into the west bank today.
Two weeks ago, actually.
Does that count?

It doesn't.
If it had been into Gaza, and if it had been today, I would certainly count it.

Why not? Homemade rockets should count, no matter who fires them.
Because it was in the West Bank. The thee Israelis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7466345.stm) hirt in the West Bank today wouldn't count either.

Two weeks ago, actually.
Yup. My bad, hence it wouldn't have counted anyway.

If it had been into Gaza, and if it had been today, I would certainly count it.
But there are unresolved questions:

If a settler goes berserk, would that count? (Not Israeli official).
And if a soldier attacks, but not on orders?

And on the other side: Would you count all of the militas and organisations? Or just Hamas?

If a settler goes berserk, would that count? (Not Israeli official).
And if a soldier attacks, but not on orders?

And on the other side: Would you count all of the militas and organisations? Or just Hamas?
Yes, on all counts. I expect that the breakdown of the cease-fire will start precisely with such "unofficial" violations. Then the other side will respond "officially", and be blamed by the first side for having started it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7466345.stm

Israeli settlers shot by Palestinians, but not in an area covered by the truce.

Yes, on all counts. I expect that the breakdown of the cease-fire will start precisely with such "unofficial" violations. Then the other side will respond "officially", and be blamed by the first side for having started it.

OK. Then I wouldn't dare place a bet, and I will be expecting it to be broken by either side any minute now.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7466345.stm

Israeli settlers shot by Palestinians, but not in an area covered by the truce.
8 minutes and two posts too late there ;)

OK. Then I wouldn't dare place a bet, and I will be expecting it to be broken by either side any minute now.


8 minutes and two posts too late there ;)

Shows you how optimistic we all are...

Some assmunch will shoot some innocent person and the whole thing will flare up again like like herpes.

OK. Then I wouldn't dare place a bet, and I will be expecting it to be broken by either side any minute now.
I expect it will take weeks, but I am quite certain the breach will be from the Palestinian side.

I expect it will take weeks, but I am quite certain the breach will be from the Palestinian side.

I am not surprised.

It's about as likely that some of those stupid settlers will do something that'll provoke the Palestinians. They're a bunch of hicks that think that all of the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews, that we're the "chosen people" and that the Palestinians are less than human. I really wish the government could just stop having the IDF protect them.

I am not surprised.

As though it would matter who broke the truce - you wouldn't believe it if the Palestinians did.

Broken truce = broken truce

no matter who breaks it

I just hope the Palestinians have their stuff packed for when the IDF steamrolls Gaza.

It's about as likely that some of those stupid settlers will do something that'll provoke the Palestinians. They're a bunch of hicks that think that all of the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews, that we're the "chosen people" and that the Palestinians are less than human. I really wish the government could just stop having the IDF protect them.

Look, you can't just come into threads and approach these situations in a realistic way that includes multiple actors vying for their own ends within the framework of a larger national actor! Israeli politics is hivemind politics and Palestinian politics is the same, otherwise our lovely NSG Middle Eastern expert-pundits would have to approach such topics in a more analytic manner and that would require a head-out-of-ass-removal procedure that is costly and unpleasant.

Look, you can't just come into threads and approach these situations in a realistic way that includes multiple actors vying for their own ends within the framework of a larger national actor! Israeli politics is hivemind politics and Palestinian politics is the same, otherwise our lovely NSG Middle Eastern expert-pundits would have to approach such topics in a more analytic manner and that would require a head-out-of-ass-removal procedure that is costly and unpleasant.

I think you're overcomplicating a scenario where people can't wait to get back to shooting at each other.

As though it would matter who broke the truce
Yes.

you wouldn't believe it if the Palestinians did.
You're lying again.

I just hope the Palestinians have their stuff packed for when the IDF steamrolls Gaza.

And... then what?

It's about as likely that some of those stupid settlers will do something that'll provoke the Palestinians. They're a bunch of hicks that think that all of the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews, that we're the "chosen people" and that the Palestinians are less than human. I really wish the government could just stop having the IDF protect them.
All of this I agree with, and if there were an analogous truce in the West Bank, I would not be ready to bet on which side broke it first. But the settlers are gone from Gaza, while the lunatic end of the Palestinian spectrum is in control.