War between Hamas and Israel

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The U.S. vetoed a resolution proposed by Algeria that called for an immediate cease-fire without any conditions from Hamas. The alternative resolution that they are proposing for a temporary cease-fire would require the release of the remaining estimated 130 hostages as well as a condemnation of the October 7 attack, in addition to banning any forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza with an attack on Rafah. That, of course, will be a non-starter for both sides.

[Frelga]

And yet it's the only option that makes sense.

There have been reports of fighting on the border between Gaza and Egypt as Egypt is determined to keep the refugees behind the very tall wall they built at the border.

[N.E. Brigand]

CNN: "Biden temporarily protects Palestinians in the US from deportation amid conflict abroad."

[N.E. Brigand]

President Biden appeared on Late Night With Seth Myers last night. That show was celebrating its tenth anniversary, and Biden, then Vice President, has been a guest on the first show in 2014. He talked about the situation in Gaza, negotiations for another cease fire, and the long-term risk that Israel faces:

[N.E. Brigand]

U.S. President Biden and Egypt's President Sisi both have tentatively suggested that a ceasefire may be in place before next week, although neither Israel nor Hamas has said anything publicly. Hamas is demanding a "permanent ceasefire." Suppose Israel agrees to that and then a year from now Hamas attempts another Oct. 7th attack. What does Israel get as a guarantee in that case? Contrarily, what if it were Israel who violates it next year: what does Hamas get in that case? Would it be something like "If Israel violates the ceasefire, Benjamin Netanyahu will be delivered to Hamas to do with him as they will"? And who enforces that? Will Dark Brandon and The Mexican send troops into Israel to collect Netanyahu?

[N.E. Brigand]

The U.S. servicemember who burned himself to death in front of the Israeli embassy in D.C. to protest Israel's treatment of Palestinians apparently wrote four months ago on social media that the murders on Oct. 7th could be justified ("I am not Palestinian and am in no position to endorse or condemn Hamas' actions") because there "are no Israeli 'civilians' or tourists who have no part in the oppression of Palestine." I note this because some supporters of Palestinian human rights are pointing to him as a martyr who died for a noble cause. I think he was just a troubled young man. (I will be kind and not take his social media post as a reasoned analysis of the situation.) The fact is that Hamas wanted many thousands of Palestinians to do. Certainly Israel had a responsibility not to take the bait and to respond proportionately! But the ultimate responsibility lies with the terrorists.

[N.E. Brigand]

Speaking in Selma, Alabama, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris called for an immediate cease fire in Gaza.

Next week Harris is meeting with Israeli cabinet member Benny Gantz next week.

Needless to say, these things would not be happening without President Biden's approval.

A new poll finds 53% of Israelis believe that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's aims in the war are to remain in power rather than to protect Israelis.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak (1999-2001) wrote yesterday that "Six times in the past twelve years," Netanyahu "has rejected plans proposed by the heads of Israel's secret security agency, known as Shabak, to eliminate the Hamas leadership."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Speaking in Selma, Alabama, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris called for an immediate cease fire in Gaza.

Next week Harris is meeting with Israeli cabinet member Benny Gantz next week.

Needless to say, these things would not be happening without President Biden's approval.

I don't know. Remember when Biden was VP and went rogue by coming out for same six marriage before Obama did, basically forcing Obama's hand? Could this was a similar thing?

[N.E. Brigand]

Speaking in Selma, Alabama, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris called for an immediate cease fire in Gaza. Next week Harris is meeting with Israeli cabinet member Benny Gantz next week. Needless to say, these things would not be happening without President Biden's approval.

I don't know. Remember when Biden was VP and went rogue by coming out for same six marriage before Obama did, basically forcing Obama's hand? Could this was a similar thing?

Joe Biden was reluctant as a candidate to speak ill even of Donald Trump's foreign policy decisions, bad as some of them were. Biden is a huge believer in the idea that the U.S. should speak with one voice on foreign policy matters. I think he'd throw a fit if Harris undermined his position. Apparently Harris is calling for Hamas to accept the six-week ceasefire deal that's currently on the table. Israel already agreed to it.

(I appreciate the comment there, with citation to the Oxford English Dictionary, that "all ceasefires are by definition temporary.")

[N.E. Brigand]

Also the U.S. began airdrops of food into Gaza yesterday.

[N.E. Brigand]

A new Gallup poll finds that Americans sympathize with Israelis more than Palestinians as pertains to the current conflict by nearly a two-to-one margin (51% - 27%) with about one-fourth of respondents undecided.

However, Democrats' sympathies are (somewhat narrowly) with Palestinians 43%-35% and younger adults likewise at 45%-37%.

Republicans overwhelmingly support Israelis (80%-7%), Independents do by a narrower margin (43%-30%), as do middle-age (46%-24%) and older (64%-27%) voters.

- - - - - - - - - -
Meanwhile the New York Times has taken heat (that's reporting from Semafor, which is run by the Times' former media columnist Ben Smith, the author of the linked piece) because it "turned crucial elements of its reporting on one of the most difficult and sensitive stories it has ever published to amateurs, one of whose social media posts would make reasonable people question her ability to be fair. That sounds insane when you say it out loud. Why would you do that?"

The story in question was about mass rape of Israeli victims by Hamas terrorists. The Times stands by the story. Smith writes:

The arguments over the Times coverage of both Israel and Gaza can seem hair-splitting and cruel. Few deny women were horribly assaulted amid the slaughter on Oct. 7, and the Times continues to defend the Dec. 28 story. While critics have raised reasonable questions about, in particular, the timeline of one witness account, they’ve also delivered their own flattening narrative of Times bias. ... But inside the building, even some defenders of the underlying reporting wince at the Dec. 28 story’s headline. The phrase “weaponized sexual violence” is resonant and memorable — but it’s not entirely clear what it means in a literal sense. The Times story below the headline doesn’t show that Hamas leaders or field commanders planned or ordered sexual attacks — as has been documented in, for instance, the former Yugoslavia — though it doesn’t rule that out. The story’s most conclusive details, taken from photographs of sexually mutilated bodies, can’t answer that question.

But how did this story get written in the manner Smith describes above?

This is, in fact, how great American newspapers have always worked, particularly in moments of crisis. Many of their biggest names are able reporters, but the very top tier is often occupied by journalists who are also brilliant storytellers who synthesize large quantities of information into sparkling narratives. And they rely on teams — at best, trusted and experienced local reporters, at worst, whoever they can grab in a hurry — to do more of the original reporting than they used to admit.

This practice renders the journalism vulnerable in both directions: Correspondents might be republishing the sloppy work of incompetent helpers, or might burnish their reputations at the expense of talented locals. Or they might be manipulated by stringers and fixers who are agents of the local government or political factions. The Times and other outlets manage this practice with increasing care. But this uneven teamwork is a fading tradition among both foreign correspondents and domestic reporters covering parts of the United States that might as well be another country.

Worth reading in full.

[N.E. Brigand]

Errors in the New York Times aside, a new U.N. report concludes: "There are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 Oct attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations."

[N.E. Brigand]

Also the U.S. began airdrops of food into Gaza yesterday.

The American left complains, reasonably, that this effort is insufficient to feed starving Gazans.

The American right (a sitting Republican senator) says: "President Biden is resupplying Hamas and prolonging the war—all to help his polls in Michigan. Disgraceful."

[Frelga]

Visegrad posted videos described as Gazans assaulting Egyptian trucks that were bringing aid. One driver is said to have been dragged out of the truck and beaten, possibly killed.

In case people are wondering why airdropping aid may be the only way to get it in. This does not solve the problem of Hamas reportedly seizing the aid for its fighters. I don't know how that problem can be solved.

[N.E. Brigand]

Visegrad posted videos described as Gazans assaulting Egyptian trucks that were bringing aid. One driver is said to have been dragged out of the truck and beaten, possibly killed.

In case people are wondering why airdropping aid may be the only way to get it in. This does not solve the problem of Hamas reportedly seizing the aid for its fighters. I don't know how that problem can be solved.

However, this also happened six days ago:

RAFAH, Gaza Strip (AP) — Israeli troops fired on a crowd of Palestinians racing to pull food off an aid convoy in Gaza City on Thursday, witnesses said. More than 100 people were killed in the chaos, bringing the death toll since the start of the Israel-Hamas war to more than 30,000, according to health officials.

Israel said many of the dead were trampled in a chaotic stampede for the food aid and that its troops only fired when they felt endangered by the crowd.

The violence was quickly condemned by Arab countries, and U.S. President Joe Biden expressed concern it would add to the difficulty of negotiating a cease-fire in the nearly five-month conflict.

From what I've read, no one seems to have been killed by the Israeli gunfire in this incident (the deaths were from being trampled in a crowd), although a number were injured.

[Sunsilver]

From what I've read, no one seems to have been killed by the Israeli gunfire in this incident (the deaths were from being trampled in a crowd), although a number were injured.

And I have a hard time believing that statement. If the stampede was caused by Israeli gunfire, they are culpable for the deaths anyway.

[N.E. Brigand]

Donald Trump called into Fox News this morning. The host, Brian Kilmeade, said that Joe Biden was "turning on" Israel. He then said to Trump that those people who voted "uncommitted" to protest President Biden's Middle East policies in last's week's Democratic primary in Michigan "are not going to like you either because you are firmly in Israel's camp, correct?" And Trump responded affirmatively.

Then Kilmeade asked Trump, "Are you on board with the way the IDF is taking the fight to-- in Gaza?" Trump's response:

You gotta finish the problem. You had a horrible invasion that took place. It wouldda never happened if I was President, by the way. As you know, Iran was broke, Brian. They were broke. They had no money for Hamas, for Hezbollah. They were broke. This would've never happened. And for another reason: they wouldn't have done it to me. I guarantee you that. They did this because they have no respect for Biden. And frankly, they [Israel?] got soft, and what happened here is incredible. That should never have happened. Likewise, Russia would never have attacked Ukraine. Never. You know it. Everybody knows it, and that wouldn't have happened, so this is all on Biden.

Kilmeade then asked Trump: "Do you think the President is in the process of abandoning Israel?" Trump replied:

I do believe that, but I don't believe he knows where he is, actually. I think you could ask him a question, right now, ask him the same question: I don't think he knows what to say. About many subjects, actually. It's really the people that surround him, the fascists and the communists that surround him. They're making the calls. They're calling the shots. He's not calling the shots.

Then Kilmeade's co-host, Lawrence Jones, asked, "What did you feel about Kamala Harris calling for a ceasefire in Gaza? Is that something you support, or is that something that is totally off the table right now for you?" To which Trump said:

Look, I hate seeing what's happening. Again, it would never happen. This attack on Israel and likewise Israel's counter-attack, which is what it is, would never have happened while I was president. And you know that, Lawrence. This would've never happened, and it's so horrible to watch it, becuase, you know, if things went right, uh, in 2020, which they should have, but they didn't, for some very bad and sinister reasons, this would-- all these people that are dead in Ukraine and Russia and Israel and-- all these people that are dead, all these areas that are destroyed--

The linked clip cuts out there. What can we make of this? Trump wants to push a consistent message: things were better when he was President. What would he do about the wars in Gaza and Ukraine now? He doesn't say. Why wouldn't these conflicts have started during his presidency? He says because other world leaders -- apparently meaning Vladimir Putin and Ismail Haniyeh (Hamas's chairman, who lives in Qatar) -- "respected" him. Never mind the fact that Russian troops were already in eastern Ukraine and Trump did nothing to end that conflict. But as regards the Israeli-Hamas conflict, Trump also says that it happened because (1) Biden let Iran have their own money which had been frozen and Iran then gave it to Hamas; and (2) Israel was too "soft" with Hamas.

He seems to endorse Israel's current approach in Gaza and wants them to "finish the problem." He doesn't address the question of a ceasefire directly, but he believes that the Biden administration is "abandoning" Israel.

As far as I can tell, he never mentioned the words "Gaza" or "Palestine." He laments the deaths in "Ukraine and Russia and Israel" but not in Gaza.

(And in general, he uses very few words. Although President Biden's speaking is more halting than Trump's, his vocabulary is much richer. Is that because of Trump's diminishing cognition, or is he holding to a narrow message, or is it a deliberate attempt at showing a common touch?)

[Frelga]

I seriously can't believe any rational person would vote against Biden based on his Middle East policy if the alternative is the president who started his previous term with the Muslim ban.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I doubt that many will vote for Trump because of Biden's Middle East (my fingers wanted to type Middle-earth) policy. They just won't vote, or will vote for a third-party candidate. I hope in the end that won't happen (as we all know, that's almost as good for Trump as a vote for him), but I fear that it will.

[N.E. Brigand]

From what I've read, no one seems to have been killed by the Israeli gunfire in this incident (the deaths were from being trampled in a crowd), although a number were injured.

And I have a hard time believing that statement. If the stampede was caused by Israeli gunfire, they are culpable for the deaths anyway.

Fair enough. I also think an argument can be made that Hamas is culpable for all deaths in Gaza since Oct. 7th. (Certainly Hamas's primary goal on Oct. 7th was to provoke Israel into killing thousands of Palestinians. But why should Israel make Hamas's wishes come true?) This would be akin to arguing, I think quite reasonably, that Japan was responsible for any deaths caused by the U.S. bombings in Japan (excepting perhaps the two nuclear bombs dropped in 1945): if you start a war, you should be prepared for your adversary to finish it. That said, it's also true that the policies of Egypt and Israel caused immiseration in Gaza that motivated Hamas's attack. More directly, Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, deliberately worked to empower Hamas in order to undermine Hamas's rival as a governing body, the Palestinian Authority.