What exactly is it in the stated Hamas terms for a ceasefire - opening borders to food, fuel, etc. and end of military assaults, in exchange for complete halt of rockets - that is so objectionable to Israelis? I cannot help but think as I read through the Israeli press and blogosphere that they are so caught up in the belief that 'there is no logic over there, it's all random irrational thugs who you can only shoot' that they're missing the obvious fact that there's an easy way to stop this all.

Israel obviously feels like it has a limited window (press quieter during Christmas/New Years, Obama not yet president while Bush is a lame-duck) to achieve a political aim of crushing Hamas, but I think this will end up much like Lebanon 2006 - an initial air assault ends up in a horrible ground invasion.

worth recalling, about America's role in this, through Dahlan (who incidentally, despite being a ploy of Abbas and an American puppet, also has family members runnning an al-Qaeda-linked cell, that was responsible for capturing that BBC journalist) http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?printable=true¤tPage=all

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-leaders-lie-civilians-die-and-lessons-of-history-are-ignored-1215045.html

We've got so used to the carnage of the Middle East that we don't care any more – providing we don't offend the Israelis. It's not clear how many of the Gaza dead are civilians, but the response of the Bush administration, not to mention the pusillanimous reaction of Gordon Brown, reaffirm for Arabs what they have known for decades: however they struggle against their antagonists, the West will take Israel's side. As usual, the bloodbath was the fault of the Arabs – who, as we all know, only understand force.

Ever since 1948, we've been hearing this balderdash from the Israelis – just as Arab nationalists and then Arab Islamists have been peddling their own lies: that the Zionist "death wagon" will be overthrown, that all Jerusalem will be "liberated". And always Mr Bush Snr or Mr Clinton or Mr Bush Jnr or Mr Blair or Mr Brown have called upon both sides to exercise "restraint" – as if the Palestinians and the Israelis both have F-18s and Merkava tanks and field artillery. Hamas's home-made rockets have killed just 20 Israelis in eight years, but a day-long blitz by Israeli aircraft that kills almost 300 Palestinians is just par for the course.

The blood-splattering has its own routine. Yes, Hamas provoked Israel's anger, just as Israel provoked Hamas's anger, which was provoked by Israel, which was provoked by Hamas, which ... See what I mean? Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel bombs Hamas, Hamas fires more rockets and Israel bombs again and ... Got it? And we demand security for Israel – rightly – but overlook this massive and utterly disproportionate slaughter by Israel. It was Madeleine Albright who once said that Israel was "under siege" – as if Palestinian tanks were in the streets of Tel Aviv.

By last night, the exchange rate stood at 296 Palestinians dead for one dead Israeli. Back in 2006, it was 10 Lebanese dead for one Israeli dead. This weekend was the most inflationary exchange rate in a single day since – the 1973 Middle East War? The 1967 Six Day War? The 1956 Suez War? The 1948 Independence/Nakba War? It's obscene, a gruesome game – which Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, unconsciously admitted when he spoke this weekend to Fox TV. "Our intention is to totally change the rules of the game," Barak said.

Exactly. Only the "rules" of the game don't change. This is a further slippage on the Arab-Israeli exchanges, a percentage slide more awesome than Wall Street's crashing shares, though of not much interest in the US which – let us remember – made the F-18s and the Hellfire missiles which the Bush administration pleads with Israel to use sparingly.

Quite a lot of the dead this weekend appear to have been Hamas members, but what is it supposed to solve? Is Hamas going to say: "Wow, this blitz is awesome – we'd better recognise the state of Israel, fall in line with the Palestinian Authority, lay down our weapons and pray we are taken prisoner and locked up indefinitely and support a new American 'peace process' in the Middle East!" Is that what the Israelis and the Americans and Gordon Brown think Hamas is going to do?

Yes, let's remember Hamas's cynicism, the cynicism of all armed Islamist groups. Their need for Muslim martyrs is as crucial to them as Israel's need to create them. The lesson Israel thinks it is teaching – come to heel or we will crush you – is not the lesson Hamas is learning. Hamas needs violence to emphasise the oppression of the Palestinians – and relies on Israel to provide it. A few rockets into Israel and Israel obliges.

Not a whimper from Tony Blair, the peace envoy to the Middle East who's never been to Gaza in his current incarnation. Not a bloody word.

We hear the usual Israeli line. General Yaakov Amidror, the former head of the Israeli army's "research and assessment division" announced that "no country in the world would allow its citizens to be made the target of rocket attacks without taking vigorous steps to defend them". Quite so. But when the IRA were firing mortars over the border into Northern Ireland, when their guerrillas were crossing from the Republic to attack police stations and Protestants, did Britain unleash the RAF on the Irish Republic? Did the RAF bomb churches and tankers and police stations and zap 300 civilians to teach the Irish a lesson? No, it did not. Because the world would have seen it as criminal behaviour. We didn't want to lower ourselves to the IRA's level.

Yes, Israel deserves security. But these bloodbaths will not bring it. Not since 1948 have air raids protected Israel. Israel has bombed Lebanon thousands of times since 1975 and not one has eliminated "terrorism". So what was the reaction last night? The Israelis threaten ground attacks. Hamas waits for another battle. Our Western politicians crouch in their funk holes. And somewhere to the east – in a cave? a basement? on a mountainside? – a well-known man in a turban smiles.

Gaza strip - such an ideal place for target practice! Quite isolated (unlike Lebanon) and nobody gives a damn (thanks to Hamas)
Happy New Year!

Eh, as usual neither side has the moral high ground. Short-term "gains" which totally undermine any long-term progress.

To get emotional about it is to succumb to the demagoguery perpetrated on both sides.

It's like Israelis and Palestinians are stuck in a Groundhog Day movie without even realizing it.

My only comment (from a strictly USA-centric POV) is that in a couple of weeks we'll have Hillary trying to figure a way outta this.
May Allah/God/Jehovah have mercy on their souls. 'Cause in that case, they're ain't gonna be no way outta this.
Rivers of blood and years of darkness (to quote Robert F. Kennedy) will continue to divide the ME. You can bet the house on it.

Ah, great movie. Bill Murray's return to stardom stands out as the most hopeful moment of the 21st century.

Jon Stewart had some apt, funny and passionate comments to make about the crisis in Gaza on Monday's Daily Show.

http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/shows/videolist.aspx?sid=3350

after listening to mayor Bloomberg compare Israel's extreme reaction to the rockets being fired to having a crazy guy in your hallways shouting "I'm going to kill you now"; Jon quipped: "That depends on whether I forced the guy to live in my hallway, and he has to cross a checkpoint every time he wants to take a shit. ... And, yeah, like getting rid of a crazy guy would mean there's no more crazy people left in New York... uh-huh."

I don't like framing analyses in terms of "morality", but if we're to do it, I really don't see how Palestinians are losing this one. I mean, unless one takes the absolutely one sided narrative prevalent in the US.

Framing it in terms of stupidity though, is another matter, and here, Palestinians/Arabs are definitely losing (or winning the most stupid contest). I mean, Israelis are just Israelis, they have elections, they can kill Arabs, get away with it and score points, so they do it.

But Palestinians, and those Arabs who care? Weak, and stupid. I mean, let's say that whatever they do, they're fucked on the short term anyway. You would expect at least some action or strategy which might yield results on the long term. But no. Just more stupidy and weakness.

Trying to get thru the filter again:

Things aren't going to get any better, sports fans. Hillary is the new Sec'y of State. 'Nuf said.

Agreed, pantom. Am not confident at all in Hillary's ability to finesse anything.

However, what do you make of the US abstaining from the Security Council vote, instead of the usual veto?

Assalamu Alaikum,
Muslims around the world are fasting in solidarity with the people of Gaza until the offensive ends.
It is expected that the offensive is going to continue for another two or three weeks.
As Muslims, we are responsible and will be accountable for what is happening to Muslims (Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, etc.) around the globe today.
The least we can do is fast in solidarity.
GAZA SONG: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=dlfhoU66s4Y
Please forward to all Muslims you know, even if you do not agree.

Assalamu Alaikum,
Muslims around the world are fasting in solidarity with the people of Gaza until the offensive ends.
It is expected that the offensive is going to continue for another two or three weeks.
As Muslims, we are responsible and will be accountable for what is happening to Muslims (Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, etc.) around the globe today.
The least we can do is fast in solidarity.
GAZA SONG: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=dlfhoU66s4Y
Please forward to all Muslims you know, even if you do not agree.

Assalamu Alaikum,
Muslims around the world are fasting in solidarity with the people of Gaza until the offensive ends.
It is expected that the offensive is going to continue for another two or three weeks.
As Muslims, we are responsible and will be accountable for what is happening to Muslims (Palestine, Chechnya, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, etc.) around the globe today.
The least we can do is fast in solidarity.
GAZA SONG: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=dlfhoU66s4Y
Please forward to all Muslims you know, even if you do not agree.

As I don't have a bloody magic wand, I am not in the least accountable and as I like eating, I ate. Bloody worthless symbolic whanking. Part of the goddamned problem, symbolic whanking without figuring out what symbolism is actually effective in achieving goals.

Last week, as global leaders felt compelled to respond to a popular outcry of rage provoked by Israel’s barbaric assault of Gaza, the UN Security Council became the focal point of unavoidable pressure to act — even if its action was utterly symbolic and totally ineffectual. But what was unprecedented was that for once, the United States was prepared to stand in solidarity with other nations calling for an immediate ceasefire.

Israel’s prime minister saw the danger of an awkward precedent being set and thus made it clear that Israel would not tolerate what it seemed to regard as a diplomatic act of insubordination.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gD-QcI_C-CrcqfSZBh6A5_e514Zw

“In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favor,” Olmert said.

“I said ‘get me President Bush on the phone’. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn’t care. ‘I need to talk to him now’. He got off the podium and spoke to me.

“I told him the United States could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in favor of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favor.”

As Olmert recounted this course of events while giving a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon, it seemed apparent that he took a certain pride in the fact that Condoleezza Rice had been “shamed” by the about-face that the US, under her leadership at the UN, was forced by Israel to take.

A State Department official felt compelled to assert that, “The government of Israel does not make US policy.”

dawud,
This is assuming that Olmert is telling the truth about this phone call. Does he strike you as incapable of a gross exaggeration, or even a bald-faced lie, in order to show voters his influence with the American government?

I don't think I - or the Israeli voters - would buy a used car at this moment from Olmert.

But even if he's lying - although there is the fact that Rice cancelled her planned press conference before the vote on the resolution to take a phone call from Bush - it's still a damn stupid thing to say, and will sabotage Israel's relationship to the US:

basically saying "You can do whatever you want to be our friend, but when you're on your way out, we'll still kick you in the face."

Is there another way to read this?

would you believe that the most popular commentary on the Israel-Palestine situation at the NYT, and most highly recommended piece on resolving the conflict - through a one-state solution - currently being emailed around the intertubes...

is written by Col. Muammar Ghaddafi?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/opinion/22qaddafi.html?_r=1&hp

I really don't know what to say. Uh?