I have to disagree, Israel will only have lost this war if Hamas survives with a military and governing capacity intact in Gaza. If, as I have read, there are four or so Hamas battalions in Rafah the IDF has no choice but to go in and destroy them. There can be no strategic plan for Gaza with an intact Hamas as no alternative for governing Gaza as long as Gaza retains a military and governing capacity. While I understand the desire to free the hostages, Hamas will only agree to do so if it feels threatened. Until the IDF is once again operating in a manner that threatens the survival of Hamas, Hamas holds all the cards. Israel needs to begin a process of evacuating civilians from Rafa, preferably one section at a time so as to begin combat operations as soon as possible.
Reading your analysis, I marvel at how the events in Israel become distorted—like a child’s game of telephone, the original message is unintelligible by the time it reaches the rest of the world. We have no idea what’s really happening.
I would agree if I thought it would really accomplish anything strategically. We heard how Khan Younis was the key and...... What would be useful is we get the Egyptian to agree in return for us not going there they let us help them build a wall that goes 60 meters into the ground along there border.
I read your reports for the updates on the war, which seem balanced and well thought out. As for your reporting on Israelis position on the world it reflects the usual inability of Israelis to face the reality that Israel was born out of a deal between the Zionist movement and the British empire over the heads of the indigenous population. That is what is essentially driving the protests. Calling this antisemitism is disingeuous and really one sided - propaganda. Israelis are incapable of accepting the historical truth for a number of reasons, chiefly because it would undermine our sense of legitimacy and, importantly, it is a reflection of our fears. Unfortunately, this mindset is only going to get us another 100 years of war.
Protesting Israel is fine. Even if it’s violent, that’s the university‘s problem. But the minute the protesters tell Jews to go back to Poland,tell Jews they are the product of white privilege, tell Jews not welcome here, that is antisemitism. I don’t agree with your historical narrative, but that can be debated between two civil people.
My problem with your coverage is that you characterized the protests as antisemitism, while the great majority of the protests are against Israel's actions in Gaza. That is not cricket. It paints you as being unwilling to consider Israel's actions have been punitive and way overdone.
I think Israel made a number of mistakes many mistakes, both tactically and strategically and I’m sure there were some needless deaths. I would have no problem with people calling out Israel for that even saying Israel is committing war crimes although I don’t think it has. However, you’re chanting From the river to the sea when you’re chanting there’s no place for Jews there, when you’re accosting your students then that is not protesting about excess in Israel’s action and Gaza. When chanting and support of Hamas, who has been carrying out suicide bombings since the accords you are not looking for peace. The moment you connect all Jews to Israel‘s actions or any individual Jew Israel’s actions unless she is a soldier Is antisemitism. Israel is very far from perfect, but these demonstrations are over the line and many cases include anti-Semitic statements, Antisemites and people who think revolution is more important than peace
You aren't getting it are you. You are incapable of seeing the historical picture - that the zionist movement and later Israel wrested control of Palestine from an indigenous population too poor, too primitive, too fragmented, too ignorant to resist. Reminds a great deal of Sparta - the Spartans invaded the Peloponnesus, put down the local tribes and kept them down by constant punitive raids. Does this ring a bell? The Spartans were very good at this and kept it up for centuries but, at what cost? Who would want to live in a culture defined by the saying "come home with your shield or on it".
I have to disagree, Israel will only have lost this war if Hamas survives with a military and governing capacity intact in Gaza. If, as I have read, there are four or so Hamas battalions in Rafah the IDF has no choice but to go in and destroy them. There can be no strategic plan for Gaza with an intact Hamas as no alternative for governing Gaza as long as Gaza retains a military and governing capacity. While I understand the desire to free the hostages, Hamas will only agree to do so if it feels threatened. Until the IDF is once again operating in a manner that threatens the survival of Hamas, Hamas holds all the cards. Israel needs to begin a process of evacuating civilians from Rafa, preferably one section at a time so as to begin combat operations as soon as possible.
Wow. So depressing. You may be right, but I hope you’re wrong.
Reading your analysis, I marvel at how the events in Israel become distorted—like a child’s game of telephone, the original message is unintelligible by the time it reaches the rest of the world. We have no idea what’s really happening.
Great analysis but Israel has and must do the right thing; Rafah ground operation! Ignore the world whose majority sides with Hamas.
I would agree if I thought it would really accomplish anything strategically. We heard how Khan Younis was the key and...... What would be useful is we get the Egyptian to agree in return for us not going there they let us help them build a wall that goes 60 meters into the ground along there border.
I read your reports for the updates on the war, which seem balanced and well thought out. As for your reporting on Israelis position on the world it reflects the usual inability of Israelis to face the reality that Israel was born out of a deal between the Zionist movement and the British empire over the heads of the indigenous population. That is what is essentially driving the protests. Calling this antisemitism is disingeuous and really one sided - propaganda. Israelis are incapable of accepting the historical truth for a number of reasons, chiefly because it would undermine our sense of legitimacy and, importantly, it is a reflection of our fears. Unfortunately, this mindset is only going to get us another 100 years of war.
Protesting Israel is fine. Even if it’s violent, that’s the university‘s problem. But the minute the protesters tell Jews to go back to Poland,tell Jews they are the product of white privilege, tell Jews not welcome here, that is antisemitism. I don’t agree with your historical narrative, but that can be debated between two civil people.
My problem with your coverage is that you characterized the protests as antisemitism, while the great majority of the protests are against Israel's actions in Gaza. That is not cricket. It paints you as being unwilling to consider Israel's actions have been punitive and way overdone.
I think Israel made a number of mistakes many mistakes, both tactically and strategically and I’m sure there were some needless deaths. I would have no problem with people calling out Israel for that even saying Israel is committing war crimes although I don’t think it has. However, you’re chanting From the river to the sea when you’re chanting there’s no place for Jews there, when you’re accosting your students then that is not protesting about excess in Israel’s action and Gaza. When chanting and support of Hamas, who has been carrying out suicide bombings since the accords you are not looking for peace. The moment you connect all Jews to Israel‘s actions or any individual Jew Israel’s actions unless she is a soldier Is antisemitism. Israel is very far from perfect, but these demonstrations are over the line and many cases include anti-Semitic statements, Antisemites and people who think revolution is more important than peace
You aren't getting it are you. You are incapable of seeing the historical picture - that the zionist movement and later Israel wrested control of Palestine from an indigenous population too poor, too primitive, too fragmented, too ignorant to resist. Reminds a great deal of Sparta - the Spartans invaded the Peloponnesus, put down the local tribes and kept them down by constant punitive raids. Does this ring a bell? The Spartans were very good at this and kept it up for centuries but, at what cost? Who would want to live in a culture defined by the saying "come home with your shield or on it".