The White House said Sunday that “it’s the right time” for Israel to scale back its military offensive in the Gaza Strip, as Israeli leaders again vowed to press ahead with their operation against the territory’s ruling Hamas militant group.
The comments exposed the growing differences between the close allies on the 100th day of the war.
The UN and EU considered it to still be occupied for a reason: “it [Israel] controls Gaza’s air and maritime space, as well as six of Gaza’s seven land crossings. It reserves the right to enter Gaza at will with its military and maintains a no-go buffer zone within the Gaza territory. Gaza is dependent on Israel for water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities. The extensive Israeli buffer zone within the Strip renders much land off-limits to Gaza’s inhabitants. The system of control imposed by Israel was described in the fall 2012 edition of International Security as an “indirect occupation”. The European Union (EU) considers Gaza to be occupied.”
Hamas shouldn’t have governed Gaza, but the other option had to be Fatah and “Israel” had to be a blood thirsty nation for all of it’s existence. Hamas was acting as a charity; making the situation better for Gazans by building hospitals, schools, and mosques. While Fatah was showing off its corruption, and Hamas didn’t even win by that much: Hamas: 44.45% | Fatah: 41.43 %
First of all: ‘Hamas and the “innocent people of Gaza”’ -you. Second: “Israel” shouldn’t have existed, and should cease to exist.
“Estimates of the size of the Palestinian population in Egypt range from 50,245 to 110,000”, but Egypt would not want an influx of migrants into it’s land, of course. They also would rather Palestine not vanish, and Egypt had it’s problems with the Muslim brotherhood, so they’re a bit cynical.
All-Palestine. Looks like a call to me.
Israel left Gaza in 2005, one year later Hamas took over and killed its political opponents, this was followed by an unprovoked daily barrages of missiles towards civilian towns. I don’t know where your claim of Hamas was acting out of charity comes from, and obviously the schools mosques and other charitable activity was all a front for their terrorist activities.
What do you think should have been the answer to that problem? I think cutting off weapons supply routes is a reasonable course of action. Regarding water, communication and electricity independence - those problems could have been at least partially solved with the billions in aid money that were instead used for terror infrastructure under civilian homes.
Gaza was supposed to be an example of how a Palestinian state could eventually look like, but they f***ed up, badly.
“From the river to the sea” style? Your true colors are showing
You didn’t actually read the link you sent, did you? this initiative was a failure, with no real takers from the Arab states. Jordan basically ignored it by annexing the West bank immediately, and Egypt would rather use Gaza to generate more problems for the new Israeli state than confront it directly after the defeat of 1948 (it annexed it later stating its incompetence).