Macron says France will recognize a Palestinian state at UN General Assembly this fall

[multivita-man]

Yep, and there's the demographic aspect of this as well, which has been a major aspect of why Israel has not annexed the territories since the people in them are the problem.

But that's also why they support their settlers violently displacing people in the West Bank -- again, the regime that plays the role of deferential (also corrupt) American-Zionist sock puppet.

So now Israel wants to occupy Gaza. For what purpose? To drive all of what is left of Gaza's population into concentrated areas, where they will be malnourished and diseased and too weak to put up resistance while they slug it out with Hamas fighters. The goal is most certainly not to retrieve the 100 or so hostages. No commanders would risk such losses for such an unrealistic outcome. It's about inflicting misery upon the Palestinians - what's left of them.

Worth noting that Israel is probably the only country on the planet that doesn't have internationally-recognized borders.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The most important difference being the US didn't occupy Japan to ethnically cleanse it.

Israel would prefer to avoid ethnically cleansing the Palestinians. Their first choice is peace with a two-state solution. But the Palestinians have made that impossible.

If ethnic cleansing happens, it will be because Israel was truly left with no other option.

So now Israel wants to occupy Gaza. For what purpose? To drive all of what is left of Gaza's population into concentrated areas, where they will be malnourished and diseased and too weak to put up resistance while they slug it out with Hamas fighters. The goal is most certainly not to retrieve the 100 or so hostages. No commanders would risk such losses for such an unrealistic outcome. It's about inflicting misery upon the Palestinians - what's left of them.

Of course Israel wants to rescue the hostages.

They are pursuing greater conflict because that is the only option they have for trying to rescue those hostages.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

IF it is the case that the Palestinian people refuse to give up that position..... then yeah, we are back to the uglier futures we discussed, earlier.

I see no sign that the Palestinians have any intention of ever giving up their endless war of annihilation against Israel.

 

[ElChupacabra]

But that's also why they support their settlers violently displacing people in the West Bank -- again, the regime that plays the role of deferential (also corrupt) American-Zionist sock puppet.

So now Israel wants to occupy Gaza. For what purpose? To drive all of what is left of Gaza's population into concentrated areas, where they will be malnourished and diseased and too weak to put up resistance while they slug it out with Hamas fighters. The goal is most certainly not to retrieve the 100 or so hostages. No commanders would risk such losses for such an unrealistic outcome. It's about inflicting misery upon the Palestinians - what's left of them.

Worth noting that Israel is probably the only country on the planet that doesn't have internationally-recognized borders.

The opportunity it has now is the one some in the government have said out loud, and that is to create an environment so harsh that it will promote the idea of self deportation. Many of the cities in Gaza are largely rubble now, and with no plan to rebuild, they're going to remain hellscapes until that happens. Though you do hear Gazans say they're not leaving, I'm sure some will as things continue to deteriorate. The question is when the conflict will end and what comes after.

 

[Allan]

The event I was describing was the UK, France, and Canada's decision to come forward in favor of Palestinian statehood without attaching any kinds of actual conditions regarding the destruction and exile of HAMAS and release of the hostages to it.

This isn't true and you know it's not true.

I've posted OPs with two statements by Carney.

The first was Canada's decision to recognize a Palestinian State. Carney attached a number of conditions: immediate release of hostages, Hamas must disarm, free and fair elections, Hamas can play no future governance role. I even posted a video of Carney's statement to the media for people too lazy to read.

That thread is here.

The second is a thread I posted yesterday where Canada condemns Israel's planned military escalation. Carney again emphasized the immediate release of the hostages and that Hamas must disarm.

That thread is here

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The question is when the conflict will end and what comes after.

It will end when the hostages are released.

For what comes after, Israel would like Arab nations to come in and provide a governing structure for the Gazans after the war. But it seems likely that the Arab nations will refuse to do that.

So as soon as Israel gets the hostages back, they will probably just go home and leave the Palestinians to huddle in tent encampments forever.

 

[MAGAnificent]

The first was Canada's decision to recognize a Palestinian State. Carney attached a number of conditions: immediate release of hostages, Hamas must disarm, free and fair elections, Hamas can play no future governance role. I even posted a video of Carney's statement to the media for people too lazy to read.

Why not wait until Hamas is dismantled before stupidly recognizing what is at this point in time a terrorist entity?

 

[Allan]

So as soon as Israel gets the hostages back, they will probably just go home and leave the Palestinians to huddle in tent encampments forever

Nope.

The stated plan is emigration of all Palestinians to enable the 'Gazan Riviera'. "We'll just take it" Trump said, with a plan for US investment in the creation of resorts.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

This isn't true and you know it's not true.

It is true. Canada's empty words about Hamas not being allowed to have power are meaningless.

The second is a thread I posted yesterday where Canada condemns Israel's planned military escalation. Carney again emphasized the immediate release of the hostages and that Hamas must disarm.

Cool. I'll address the thread sometime this morning when I get time. Just have time for a few quick posts right now.

Note that Canada directly caused this coming military escalation by expressing support for Hamas. So everything that is about to happen in Gaza, it is all 100% Canada's fault.

The stated plan is emigration of all Palestinians to enable the 'Gazan Riviera'. "We'll just take it" Trump said, with a plan for US investment in the creation of resorts.

That's Donald Trump's plan.

I'm sure Israel would be happy if things worked out that way, but in reality the war will be over when the hostages are released.

 

[Allan]

Why not wait until Hamas is dismantled before stupidly recognizing what is at this point in time a terrorist entity?

Strawman. Your posts are hilariously lazy.

 

[MAGAnificent]

So as soon as Israel gets the hostages back, they will probably just go home and leave the Palestinians to huddle in tent encampments forever.

Doubtful. Israel has no intention of allowing Hama's or any other Iranian proxy to regroup, rearm and set up shop again. If peaceful Arab leadership cannot be set up, Israel will occupy and administer Gaza permanently.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It will end when the hostages are released.

No, it won't based on Israel's stated goal of eradicating HAMAS.

For what comes after, Israel would like Arab nations to come in and provide a governing structure for the Gazans after the war. But it seems likely that the Arab nations will refuse to do that.

So as soon as Israel gets the hostages back, they will probably just go home and leave the Palestinians to huddle in tent encampments forever.

That remains to be seen. The big shift now compared to the past is Israel has growing relations with its Arab neighbors, though the problem is the governments want to align themselves closer to the Israeli government while the people less so, and mainly because of the Palestinian issue.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Strawman. Your posts are hilariously lazy.

Nothing strawman about my post. Your idiot prime minister acted stupidly.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Doubtful. Israel has no intention of allowing Hama's or any other Iranian proxy to regroup, rearm and set up shop again. If peaceful Arab leadership cannot be set up, Israel will occupy and administer Gaza permanently.

That would result in a lot of Israeli soldiers being killed. More likely Israel will just keep the Palestinians huddling in tents forever with no rebuilding of Gaza.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

No, it won't based on Israel's stated goal of eradicating HAMAS.

Israel will do that as much as possible of course. Thus the coming invasion of Gaza city. But there will come a point when they have done all that they can militarily achieve.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Israel will do that as much as possible of course. Thus the coming invasion of Gaza city. But there will come a point when they have done all that they can militarily achieve.

Yep. The one thing we've learned from the "war on terror" is we can't kill our way out of it. Military action aids in downgrading the capabilities of terrorist organizations, but the main objective is removing the motivations people have in supporting it.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Conditions are going to be dire for a while - war does that, and Israel's ability to trust that Palestinians will not turn any increased autonomy into violence in Gaza is pretty much at "nil", and for good reason. I concur that puts a headwind on the deradicalization project, but, it's one that is going to exist, regardless.

However, I reject the notion that THAT is why it would be doomed to having no impact. Stateless people's the world over - including ones not treated as full citizens by the states governing them - have managed to avoid deciding The Only Solution Is Genocide.

IF it is the case that the Palestinian people refuse to give up that position..... then yeah, we are back to the uglier futures we discussed, earlier.

The thing is the point you keep bringing up about Palestinians taking up "The Only Solution is Genocide" has only surfaced as a result of the Nakba, and not because there was some existing mindset to rid themselves of Jews in the area. There were Jews and Arabs living in the region before the foundation of Israel and Arabs in the region were not holding that position. I don't think Palestinians who hold this view do so out of sheet hatred for Jews and Judaism, but because those are who they feel are responsible for their plight. This view might change if there's a viable solution for the Palestinian where Israel isn't controlling their ability to be fully independent.

True, and we also had cooperative local governance and structures to aid us with that. Israel almost certainly will not.

It's going to take a while for people not hating those who killed their family members; that usually leaves a mark. However, what kind of governance is set up may or may not help in restoring some kind of normalcy.

And Egypt, IIRC, but you are using an inapt description. The 700,000 Arabs who left their lands during the 1948 war did so because they were urged to do so by Arab states, because they wished to avoid the fighting, because they were afraid of Jewish reprisals if they remained, because they were pushed out, and because one of the messages spread in the Arab populace prior to the attempted invasion was that any who remained would be considered a collaborator (also fairly rational reason to get out of town, given that it didn't look like Israel was gonna make it). There is not a single story why everyone who left, left (and, we should generally be suspicious of monocausalism for complex phenomena)

There was not a universal order by Arab states to do so, it was a mixed bag of recommendations. Like most conflicts, people leave or stay for a wide variety of reasons, as you also point out.

 

[ElChupacabra]

In contrast, the 900,000 Jews who were kicked out of Arab and North African countries at the same time were generally all in the "forced out" and "not-forced-but-coerced-out" buckets.

That 900,000 number includes people who migrated form Arab nations as well and not the number who were forced out. Of course the conditions in Arab nations following the foundation of Israel created a hostile environment for Jews in these countries, but they were not all forced out. You have to factor in the Zionist organizations which were also working to get Jews from the region to Israel. For example, Tunisia and Algeria did not expel anyone versus the pogroms in Libya.

What's interesting about migration of Jews during the 1948 period is you had policies like the one in Iraq, where their Jews were forbidden from leaving to Israel because Iraq did not want their Jewish population to help bolster Israel's numbers. There was a lot of nuance to the migration of Jews from the ME and NA, and not quite the generalized view you presented. There are still some Jews in Tunisia and other parts of North Africa, just as there are still Jews in Iran and other countries.

So you had a massive population swap, similar to the roughly-concurrent division of India and Pakistan.

Israel then absorbed these incoming Jews, and the Arab states refused to absorb the incoming Arabs. Somehow, Jews in Israel managed not to come up with "the only possible response to getting kicked out of Egypt is that we have to kill every Egyptian Arab and take back the Occupied Lands".

Except many left due to conditions there versus being directly forced out as a a matter of government policy.

True. They tried, but, never had a partner willing to do so.

This isn't accurate given agreements that were made. Had they not had partners, none of the agreements that have been made over the years would have happened. The problem is despite agreements, conditions haven't changed all that much. We go back to the example of the West Bank and even Gaza pre-HAMAS election.

 

[cpwill]

This isn't true and you know it's not true.

We literally just watched it happen.

I recognize that is terribly inconvenient, because someone pursued a goal you found worthy in a way that was destructive, but that is what actually happened. Right in front of us. HAMAS left the negotiations because of it. Reality matters.

I've posted OPs with two statements by Carney.

The first was Canada's decision to recognize a Palestinian State. Carney attached a number of conditions: immediate release of hostages, Hamas must disarm, free and fair elections, Hamas can play no future governance role. I even posted a video of Carney's statement to the media for people too lazy to read.

That thread is here.

Here is the key set of phrases that I believe you are referencing:

For these reasons, Canada intends to recognize the State of Palestine at the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2025.​

​

This intention is predicated on the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to much-needed reforms, including the commitments by Palestinian Authority President Abbas to fundamentally reform its governance, to hold general elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part, and to demilitarize the Palestinian state. Canada will increase its efforts in supporting strong, democratic governance in Palestine and the contributions of its people to a more peaceful and hopeful future.​

​

We reiterate that Hamas must immediately release all hostages taken in the horrific terrorist attack of October 7; that Hamas must disarm; and that Hamas must play no role in the future governance of Palestine. Canada will always steadfastly support Israel’s existence as an independent state in the Middle East living in peace and security. Any path to lasting peace for Israel also requires a viable and stable Palestinian state, and one that recognizes Israel’s inalienable right to security and peace.​

Can you please point me to the part where it says "And therefore, if HAMAS does not disarm and disavow any role in the future governance of Palestine, we will not recognize the State of Palestine this September"?

You accused this:

The event I was describing was the UK, France, and Canada's decision to come forward in favor of Palestinian statehood without attaching any kinds of actual conditions regarding the destruction and exile of HAMAS and release of the hostages to it

of being a deliberate falsehood. Please. Show me in the above the actual conditions regarding the destruction and exile of HAMAS and release of the hostages that Canada attached to their announcement in support of Palestinian statehood. Show me where they said "But of course we won't do this if HAMAS continues to govern, fight, and hold hostages".

Because, as near as I can read (and, to be fair, I got a public education) it doesn't. Like the UK, Canada attached a toothless "but of course HAMAS is bad" statement to a diplomatic decision that de facto rewarded HAMAS, convinced them they were winning, and got them to walk away from negotiations.



60% of Netanyahu coalition voters were polling in favor of a deal that would exchange all the hostages for IDF withdrawal from Gaza, which overlapped pretty heavily with HAMAS' previous positions. You want a ceasefire? That's how you get one.

But now that is off the table for the forseeable future, because the UK, Canada, and French announcements convinced HAMAS they were actually winning, and they abandoned negotiations.

Netanyahu can now - completely reasonably, and accurately - say that because HAMAS refuses to negotiate, he has no real choice but to continue pursuing hostage rescue through military operations, the next step of which is seizing control of Gaza.

 

[cpwill]

The second is a thread I posted yesterday where Canada condemns Israel's planned military escalation. Carney again emphasized the immediate release of the hostages and that Hamas must disarm.

That thread is here

Yeah, so, again,

without attaching any kinds of actual conditions regarding the destruction and exile of HAMAS and release of the hostages to it

What we get is a kind of toothless "Oh Gosh Violence Is Bad" in response to a situation he helped create.

This part pops out as particularly fantastic:

Canada calls for an immediate ceasefire.

LOL Yeah? How ya gonna get that one negotiated, there, Canada? You helped convince one of the belligerents to walk away from the table, so there are no negotiations.

Yeesh. I'd gotten used to only my country's leader being an utterly inept self-destructive moron.


"The United States thinks Putin is a Very Bad Man, and that he should not be in charge of Russia in the future, no he shouldn't. And that is why, if Zelensky cannot get a ceasefire with Russia negotiated by September, we are going to recognize Russia's right to Crimea and the Donbass".

 

[Allan]

You helped convince one of the belligerents to walk away from the table, so there are no negotiations.

We did?

 

[cpwill]

This is incorrect, since they specifically leave HAMAS out of future governance in Gaza:

Same question as above - please point to me the actual conditions that they attached to their upcoming recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Show me anywhere in those statements where they said "And we will only do this if HAMAS [releases the hostages / agrees to disarm / agrees they will not govern Gaza in the future / etc.]"

Show me where the UK, Canada, or France actually attached a condition to their recognition that involved HAMAS releasing the hostages or disarming.

Because - and again, I'm a public school kid - as near as I can tell, nowhere did they do that. Instead, they released a statement that also said that they didn't think HAMAS should be in charge of Gaza, but did not attach that in any way whatsoever to their decision to recognize Palestinian statehood.

It's "The United States thinks Putin is a Very Bad Man, and that he should not be in charge of Russia in the future, and that is why, if Zelensky cannot get a ceasefire with Russia negotiated by September, we are going to recognize Russia's right to Crimea and the Donbass."

All of you would instantly recognize how stupid and destructive that combination is if it was any other conflict.

 

[cpwill]

We did?

Not you specifically, but your government, yeah

HAMAS closely monitors foreign media, as the information domain is where they are seeking to achieve strategic victory and mitigate Israel's superior conventional power. As more bubbled up about those countries making such a statement, HAMAS became initially more recalcitrant in negotiations, playing for time by changing their conditions to requirements so outlandish even their Arab interlocutors rejected them as ridiculous. Then when those countries came out with their announcements, HAMAS walked away from negotiations entirely. They went on Arab television to celebrate support for Palestinian statehood as a "Fruit of Oct 7th", and declared that victory was - apparently - closer than they had thought.


And that was an utterly predictable - and predicted - result of the way those announcements were formulated.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

We did?

Yes. Canada is the direct cause of all the violence that is about to happen in Gaza.

And multiple people have clearly explained to you in plain English how it is that Canada managed to achieve that. Your refusal to accept those explanations does not change that they are true.

 

[cpwill]

Yes. Canada is the direct cause of all the violence that is about to happen in Gaza.

Eh...... HAMAS is still the direct cause. Canada, the UK, and France are the indirect cause for that violence now having no other real option but to shift to attempted occupation by Israel.

I mean - I get where you are aimed at, here, I just want to make sure I maintain specificity and nuance.

And multiple people have clearly explained to you in plain English how it is that Canada managed to achieve that. Your refusal to accept those explanations does not change that they are true.

I think it is very hard, sometimes, to accept that a means of pursuing a policy goal you support can have unintended consequences you find horrific :-/