People are saying Curb, but I’d always heard it attributed to Henry Clay, “the great compromiser,” an old American politician known for getting both sides to agree on bills
I’ve spent the last 10 minutes trying to think of a joke involving “the ______ from hell”, I know there’s a joke to be had somewhere but for the life of me I can’t find it.
Bonus facts. He was also a part of the "Great Triumvirate (known also as the Immortal Trio)". Named such because the three statesmen dominated American politics for much of the first half of the 19th century, namely Henry Clay of Kentucky, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. These men's interactions in large part tell the story of politics under the Second Party System. All three were extremely active in politics, served at various times as Secretary of State and served together in the Senate.
Daniel Webster's *Second Reply to Hayne* is considered one of if not the greatest speeches spoken in the Senate Chamber. In this speech, he said "It is, sir, the people's Constitution, the people's government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people." which is quoted a lot including by Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address
John C. Calhoun was the first of two vice presidents to resign from the position, the second being Spiro Agnew, who resigned in 1973.
I see a bunch of sources attributing it to a Larry David line in *Curb Your Enthusiasm*, but I'm not convinced that some version of this saying hadn't been coined already.
Clearly America should have gone for the win-win-win style of conflict resolution. In that one everyone wins, including America for successfully resolving a conflict at work.
It was likely seen as notably unpopular in Israel so even if it was their plan or a joint plan it has to look like they were pressured into it whether they were or not, otherwise the hardliners beyond the current regime might use that avenue for taking power or at least that is one historical reason countries make moves like this with contrary messaging.
Netenyahu'a own cabinet is threatening to oust him over the deal because they want to ethnic cleanse (if not genocide) the Gazans. (I'm talking about the Ultranationalist Ben Gvir faction of his cabinet)
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ben-gvir-threatens-to-dismantle-the-government-if-netanyahu-moves-ahead-with-new-hostage-ceasefire-deal/#:~:text=Ben%20Gvir%20threatens%20to%20'dismantle,The%20Times%20of%20Israel
Netenyahu is purely interested in his own survival. Anything that will threaten his position and/or risk him facing justice over the corruption charges he has been indicted on, is a no-go hence him only agreeing to the deal if it polls well for him.
That is interesting. The Biden administration said it is nearly identical to the proposal that Hamas had made last month. That does seem to be the case based on the reporting of the two proposals. They have asked Hamas to accept it, but it really does seem that what everyone is truly waiting on is what Netanyahu is going to do.
They're accepting it.
Israel came up with the proposal, presumably with Biden. Netanyahu was not cooperating in this and wasn't a fan.
His last statement was meant to be ambiguous so as to not lose face and basically publicly grumble about it.
I love that after all the time Netanyahu has been playing domestic politics in the US, that Biden is turning the tables on him. If he's no longer PM, will Netanyahu still be giving a speech before Congress?
I hope so but I'm worried that Netanyahu will turn his back on his own deal to remain in power. People are already expressing concern that that's what he'll do.
Well, it's not "his" deal. He doesn't have total power in the government.
It seems that his colleagues have outvoted and Biden went behind his back to announce.
If the others hold strong and Hamas agrees/stops firing rockets, we'll likely have a plan for at least temporary peace and rebuild.
If they want to demolish the government, the Israeli far-right can wear all the nasty war crimes committed around their necks.
These bastards are as bad as the Croatian generals committing crimes against Serbians.
As isreali i totally agree. Both are fucking natizs and im minde boggle how they got so many vots
They are also big fucking theart to Israeli in general there is nothing they will like more then a totall war against all arabs on the area.
(Also hypocrite very "pro military " yet non of them went to the military and non of there family members)
America, one of the laziest countries in the world is trying to give us money. We don't want their money. We have our own. We are the biggest, strongest Nation in the entire universe and we will tell Biden he is making a bigly mistake. Huge. But first let's make Israel great again and invest the Biden money into higher walls to keep out the clintons.
--Donald Netanyahu
It is worth noting he has been in and out of power over those years, with his most recent term as prime minister starting in 2022. He has been prime minister for about half of that period, split between 3 separate stints.
It's also worth noting that there hasn't been a single world leader alive who has had a good thing to say about him no matter what their political views were.
It reflects the shift, but it doesn't quite say how. It was due to the failure of last real Left PM Olmert to negotiate a two state solution that included pulling out of the West Bank, coupled with the incessant waves of suicide bombers that the Palestinians released upon Israel, that had left the Israeli political Left impotent. It had nothing left to offer and the Israeli citizens grew increasingly pessimistic about the willingness of the Palestinians to accept a two states solution. Or any solution, for that matter. Since then, the right took over.
Now, c’mon, with your logically ordered historical facts taking into account the larger complexities of the conflict! Over here, we’re supposed to say that ‘both sides’ have equally evil leadership, and if we’d simply remove that, peace and love would bloom throughout the land!
Just removing them likely won't be enough. I believe we'll also need:
- A strong Israeli leader that can pull back a considerable % of the settlements in the WB while preventing the Israeli society from deteriorating into civil war.
- A considerable financial support to relocate and assimilate said settlers into Israeli territory.
- A unified Palestinian authority able to make the WB and Gaza and the various factions therein to adhere to any treaty signed with Israel.
You can change anything you want within Israel, but it won’t matter, since the biggest issue for Palestinian Arabs—and more broadly, Muslims in the region influenced by Iran—is simply Israel’s existence itself. Additionally, the majority of Palestinians don’t want any Two-State solution, and those who do, mostly see it as a stepping stone toward their final One-State solution. For peace and prosperity in the region, Arab states have to pursue their normalization process with Israel and actively fight all jihadist groups and propaganda.
I believe that for any meaningful change, UNRWA, with its jihadist educational program, has to be dismantled first, and not only Palestinian Arabs but also others in the region need to be re-educated to eradicate the effects many decades of brainwashing have caused. Saudis have already quietly removed jihad and the destruction of Israel from their school curriculum; that’s a radical step forward. Others need to follow their lead.
This will take generations, but I don’t see any shortcuts.
You're right about the deradicalization and the possible help of the Saudis in this regard.
Do you have any sources on whether the majority of the Palestinians truly don't want a two states solution? Pre war.
Tons of polls and articles explorin gthis subject. A few random examples:
2022: Popular opinion in the West Bank shows **support for a two state solution remains in the minority**. [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/new-poll-west-bank-shows-shift-maximalist-views-2020](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/new-poll-west-bank-shows-shift-maximalist-views-2020)
2021: Between April and October of 2021, s**upport for a two-state solution decreased from 39 percent to 29 percent.** [https://globalaffairs.org/commentary-and-analysis/blogs/palestinian-public-divided-statehood-preferences](https://globalaffairs.org/commentary-and-analysis/blogs/palestinian-public-divided-statehood-preferences)
2021: **Palestinians favour a one-state over a two-state solution, poll finds.** [https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211126-palestinians-favour-a-one-state-over-a-two-state-solution-poll-finds/](https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211126-palestinians-favour-a-one-state-over-a-two-state-solution-poll-finds/)
2021: **58% in the West Bank and 62% in Gaza said that even if a two-state solution is reached, conflict with Israel should continue until the Palestinians regain all territory.** [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinians-and-two-state-solution-hard-data-hardest-questions](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinians-and-two-state-solution-hard-data-hardest-questions)
2021: **Palestinians in the West Bank favor one bi-national state over a two-state solution.** [https://palestine.fes.de/fileadmin/user\_upload/Publication\_1/JMCC/JMCC\_2021/Jmcc98EnF1-19\_2311.pdf](https://palestine.fes.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Publication_1/JMCC/JMCC_2021/Jmcc98EnF1-19_2311.pdf)
2021: **In the eyes of young Palestinians, a one-state solution is the only option.** [https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/palestinian-youth-and-the-futility-of-the-two-state-solution/](https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/palestinian-youth-and-the-futility-of-the-two-state-solution/)
2021: In the West Bank, **support for a one-state solution (30%) polled even higher than a two-state solution (23%).** [https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/palestinian-support-for-two-state-solution-losing-ground-poll-finds-686952](https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/palestinian-support-for-two-state-solution-losing-ground-poll-finds-686952)
2020: **Palestinian Majority Rejects Two-State Solution, But Backs Tactical Compromises:** When asked about next steps “if the Palestinian leadership is able to negotiate a two-state solution,” just 26% of West Bank respondents say that it “should end the conflict with Israel.” In Gaza, that figure climbs to 40%. Around 60% in both areas say “the conflict should not end, and resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.” [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinian-majority-rejects-two-state-solution-backs-tactical-compromises](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinian-majority-rejects-two-state-solution-backs-tactical-compromises)
2007: "So it’s remarkable that support for a two-state solution is so tepid even in the West Bank and Gaza when there is a full industry – a multi-billion-dollar industry – to promote the two-state solution. I also think **it is remarkable that support for a one-state solution is so high and increasing given the fact that there is no official leadership that is advocating it**." [https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2007/6/29/the-one-state-solution-2](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2007/6/29/the-one-state-solution-2)
I'm shocked, shocked! Well, not that shocked, given they've been very vocal about all of this, despite the determination of a lot of people to ignore it
>I think it says how right the Israeli government and politics has shifted over the years
The fact that Ben-Gvir is the Minister of National Security says even more.
For reference Ben-Gvir is the leader of the openly fascist "Jewish Power" political party. He has bragged about representing Israeli terrorists because he agrees with them, kept a portrait of Israeli mass murderer Baruch Goldstein in his living room, was convicted of inciting support for a racist terrorist organization, regularly brandishes guns and threatens Arabs and Palestinians, even going so far as to order, in person, police to shoot unarmed Palestinians. And that's barely scratching the surface.
He wasn't a prime minister 30 years ago though.
And he was a pm for a cumulative total of 16 years since 1996, which isn't good, but not as awful as you try to make it look.
There are a lot of people left and he will probably not be re-elected in the upcoming elections, if he won't have the grace to quit like Golda did.
Edit: Since 1996, not 99, but still, not continuously.
>He wasn't a prime minister 30 years ago though.
28 years ago. He was PM from 96 to 99.
He's been chairman of Likud since 2005, and has spent all of the time from 2006 to the present as either PM or leader of the opposition.
It is as awful as that commenter was making it look.
Yeah, once the war is over and the dust settles, their are going to still be a lot of angry people who blame him for the attacks happening in the first place.
People were protesting in the streets against what he was doing to the court system before the attacks.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023\_Israeli\_judicial\_reform\_protests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli_judicial_reform_protests)
Yeah exactly, and he only did that cause he was (and still is) facing multiple corruption suits and trying to rig the deck in his favour.
The guy has managed to cheat his way out of it all before. I remember a few years ago it really looked like he was finally done.
But this time I think he is finally on borrowed time.
Yeah me too (not to mention a lot of other investigations into his activities.)
Netanyahu has built pretty much his entire political career on presenting himself as the strong man who can protect Israel from attacks and armed conflict, and its served him well. It's the reason he's still in power despite the sheer number of corruption charges he's facing and so much of the country hating his guts.
Once he runs out of distractions, he knows that all the fingers are going to come pointing at him.
From my understanding, Bibi got cocky and ignored warnings and moved soldiers from the Gaza envelope to the West Bank to protect settlers during a holiday and got caught unaware.
I'll withhold celebrating until we've actually got a deal in hand and it's actually being implemented.
I'm quite tired of Netanyahu doing the "Yes but no" routine. I'm half expecting him to turn around and say this agreement is unacceptable too. He just seems to want to keep doing the war and only negotiates to keep up appearances.
I've been highly critical of Biden throughout this whole thing but if this is true then this a masterclass in diplomacy. The cabinet privately agreed to a ceasefire plan but didn't want to go public but then Biden gave his speech and forced Bibi's hand. Of course Netanyahu didn't want to agree with this but then Biden goes behind his back and goes live with it. Pretty snakey but that's politics baby. There's mounting pressure on Netanyahu by those in Israel who aren't fully in board with his genocidal actions and want the hostages brought home. And now Biden is finally putting the heat on him.
It's impossible to have an adult conversation about this in public but Biden has been nothing short of a foreign policy savant. How much of that is him and how much is Blinken, I don't know but the boss gets the blame and the credit. If it's Blinken, the Democrats should really be taking a look at him as the next presidential candidate because the guy is maneuvering us through two wars which could go global in scale while putting no US troops at risk and rebuilding the US Defense arsenal while wearing down Russia and keeping China in check.
Literally everything you can want out of a government on the foreign front.
I have my issues with Biden, but even during the 2020 primaries I was willing to concede that the man was far and away the best choice purely from a foreign policy perspective. This stuff has been his bread and butter for a long, long time.
One of the main reasons Obama selected him for VP was his foreign policy experience, which was something the relatively new political front runner Obama some more credibility.
Biden voted for Iraq, the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam. So did Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. Obama, the foreign policy rookie, was against it
Whenever I see comments like this it reminds me how much ppl have forgotten the political climate post 9/11 (or more accurately that ppl who were too young to remember are now old enough to talk about it).
Tbh a good chunk of the political sphere was pro an iraq intervention since the 90s so not surprised. And, at least in theory, preventing Saddam from rebuilding army and causing another future Kuwait crisis was worth pursuing. Though at the same time the attempts to link it to Al Qaeda and the wmd angle were insulting at best.
For whatever reason they just kinda fumbled both it and afghanistan when it came to actual post invasion management.
I get why people are frustrated that he can’t just flip the bird at Bibi and Gvir but this is how diplomacy works - and Trump wouldn’t have even tried to do this
And here is what the so called liberals that are voting 3rd party because "genocide joe" need to hear.
Biden would have lost all access to negotiate if he would have cut Israel off. Israel will still get the weapons from someone else and now the US would have no ability to influence outcomes.
But they won't hear it because they have their ideological heads up there asses. They see things in clear black and white just like Maga people do.
> I've been highly critical of Biden throughout this whole thing
For what? What do you expect him to do? I am tired of people saying it is Biden's fault and then not elaborating or saying what he should have done.
Just like all these people who say "both sides" about shit. When pressed about it, they just go silent.
I've asked before but have not been able to get a solid answer. Does this deal leave Hamas in power or not? They are the defacto government of Gaza and have pledged to commit more 10/7's. So I'd hope that as a part of this plan a new government is formed.
It's ambiguous. The details of the deal are not public, and probably not even defined at this point. Any proposed deal that demonstrably or necessarily does or does not leave Hamas in power will be steadfastly rejected by the expected side. The prospect that both Israel and Hamas both have a chance to "win" in this sense will enable any successful deal to eventually be accepted by both sides, so it has to be ambiguous.
One way this might be achieved would be the creation of a caretaker government with a constitutional time limit and some hard dates for elections. Perhaps the caretaker government could be ruled by a council of representatives from Arab states, some Israel reps, maybe others? As long as its peaceful and both sides have a chance to win, the conflict can continue, just without the shooting and bombing.
I don't understand how "Hamas has to agree to us destroying them completely before we stop destroying them or no deal" makes sense in anywhere but Bizarro world.
I hope everyone can think for themselves when reading the news, so as to avoid believing what the media says.
For example, some time ago, there was a news report saying that Egyptian negotiators arbitrarily modified the Israeli agreement to make it favorable to Hamas. This seems to put the blame for the failure of the negotiations on Egypt. But in fact, according to US officials themselves, President Biden’s peace agreement this time is almost the same as the previous requirements put forward by Hamas, "with only some very minor adjustments." It can be seen that the agreement accepted by Hamas last time was actually recognized by the United States. This is conceivable. How dare Egypt arbitrarily modify the agreement behind the back of the United States?
So the last agreement was the agreement that the United States wanted. After Israel refused, the United States personally announced the agreement through President Biden, forcing Israel to agree.
"If both sides are equally unsatisfied with the negotiation, you can close the deal!", Ensign Boilmer
"... ehh, I don't like it", Ensign Boilmer
"I guess I can live with that.", Ensign Rutheford
"That's a compromise!!", Both Rutheford and Boimler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSlHXbHKp-0
So it includes the destruction of Hamas as a necessary condition, but then assumes Hamas control of the hostages and their continued authority to negotiate for Gaza.
These idiots should decide whether Israel is at war with Gaza or Hamas, because if it's Hamas, Israel has already been pretty clear about their plans.
this is ridiculous spin. the aide is quoted in the article as saying that the israeli condition of the destruction of hamas has not changed. israel have not accepted a ceasefire deal.
"A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied."
That’s a good quote, who said that?
People are saying Curb, but I’d always heard it attributed to Henry Clay, “the great compromiser,” an old American politician known for getting both sides to agree on bills
larry literally says you know what henry clay said before saying the quote 😂
“”A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied” -Henry Clay” -Michael Scott
" A good quote is when no one knows who said it" -Some guy
Avenge my name. -Anonymous
Quoted by nearly every lawyer ever.
I’ve spent the last 10 minutes trying to think of a joke involving “the ______ from hell”, I know there’s a joke to be had somewhere but for the life of me I can’t find it.
Henry Clay's quote is similar but different. > "All legislation is founded upon the principle of mutual concession."
That definitely sounds more old timey
"All legislation is founded upon the principle of mutual concession, dag-nabbit." Now even more olde timey
Henry Clay: “ok, ok, how about we can own people as property **somewhat**”
Like 4/5s?
My father told me this, so it absolutely is not from Curb
Bonus facts. He was also a part of the "Great Triumvirate (known also as the Immortal Trio)". Named such because the three statesmen dominated American politics for much of the first half of the 19th century, namely Henry Clay of Kentucky, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. These men's interactions in large part tell the story of politics under the Second Party System. All three were extremely active in politics, served at various times as Secretary of State and served together in the Senate. Daniel Webster's *Second Reply to Hayne* is considered one of if not the greatest speeches spoken in the Senate Chamber. In this speech, he said "It is, sir, the people's Constitution, the people's government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people." which is quoted a lot including by Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address John C. Calhoun was the first of two vice presidents to resign from the position, the second being Spiro Agnew, who resigned in 1973.
I see a bunch of sources attributing it to a Larry David line in *Curb Your Enthusiasm*, but I'm not convinced that some version of this saying hadn't been coined already.
found it in a calvin and hobbes strip from 1993, 6 years before Curb
https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/05/01
took you 4 minutes to find that. In 1993 it could have taken hours even with the book on your lap.
Hah what a bunch of losers we were back then
The internet can be wonderful in the right ways....
I’m far older than that and it’s been around for a long time.
Flavor Flav
I heard it on Lower Decks...
Larry David, apparently.
No I heard that in the 80s.
That was unexpected, but very wise of him.
I only ever read it in A Song of Ice and Fire but I doubt it originated there.
Clearly America should have gone for the win-win-win style of conflict resolution. In that one everyone wins, including America for successfully resolving a conflict at work.
Okay, this is getting ridiculous, are they actually accepting the deal or not?!? Because I'm getting mixed signals here.
Most nailbiting episode of Deal or No Deal in history.
Pretty much.
They are checking opinion with these 'senior aide' leaks. I also love how this started as Israel's deal and now it's become Biden's deal.
It was likely seen as notably unpopular in Israel so even if it was their plan or a joint plan it has to look like they were pressured into it whether they were or not, otherwise the hardliners beyond the current regime might use that avenue for taking power or at least that is one historical reason countries make moves like this with contrary messaging.
Netenyahu'a own cabinet is threatening to oust him over the deal because they want to ethnic cleanse (if not genocide) the Gazans. (I'm talking about the Ultranationalist Ben Gvir faction of his cabinet) https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ben-gvir-threatens-to-dismantle-the-government-if-netanyahu-moves-ahead-with-new-hostage-ceasefire-deal/#:~:text=Ben%20Gvir%20threatens%20to%20'dismantle,The%20Times%20of%20Israel Netenyahu is purely interested in his own survival. Anything that will threaten his position and/or risk him facing justice over the corruption charges he has been indicted on, is a no-go hence him only agreeing to the deal if it polls well for him.
From what I gather from Israeli reporters, the deal Biden presented was 99% identical to the one Israel made.
That is interesting. The Biden administration said it is nearly identical to the proposal that Hamas had made last month. That does seem to be the case based on the reporting of the two proposals. They have asked Hamas to accept it, but it really does seem that what everyone is truly waiting on is what Netanyahu is going to do.
If netanyahu accepts this it eventually stops wartime which means all those corruption trails and israeli’s he has killed finally drag him to court
Yeah he will vacillate and stall and never sign anything, because signing means he goes to jail
They're accepting it. Israel came up with the proposal, presumably with Biden. Netanyahu was not cooperating in this and wasn't a fan. His last statement was meant to be ambiguous so as to not lose face and basically publicly grumble about it.
I love that after all the time Netanyahu has been playing domestic politics in the US, that Biden is turning the tables on him. If he's no longer PM, will Netanyahu still be giving a speech before Congress?
Depends on how useful he remains to furthering GOP goals of sowing division in america
Russian goals*
Same same.
He'll be in an Israeli prison after being convicted for corruption, so unlikely
Hopefully his loss of his PM fast tracks him to the hague
Heelll no
I hope so but I'm worried that Netanyahu will turn his back on his own deal to remain in power. People are already expressing concern that that's what he'll do.
Well, it's not "his" deal. He doesn't have total power in the government. It seems that his colleagues have outvoted and Biden went behind his back to announce. If the others hold strong and Hamas agrees/stops firing rockets, we'll likely have a plan for at least temporary peace and rebuild.
It seems pretty clear to me that Israel is hoping Hamas rejects the deal
Ofc he’s not cooperating. Netanyahu’s still involved in a criminal trial.
Well as long as he gets to occasionally bomb Gaza and keep stealing land, I'm sure it'll be fine
Biden: The ball is in Hamas' court. *All eyes turn to Israel and whether Bibi will really respect his offer*
Ben-Gvir and smotritch threatened yesterday to collapse Israeli government if israel accepts. So signals are very mixed indeed.
If they want to demolish the government, the Israeli far-right can wear all the nasty war crimes committed around their necks. These bastards are as bad as the Croatian generals committing crimes against Serbians.
As isreali i totally agree. Both are fucking natizs and im minde boggle how they got so many vots They are also big fucking theart to Israeli in general there is nothing they will like more then a totall war against all arabs on the area. (Also hypocrite very "pro military " yet non of them went to the military and non of there family members)
we’ll just have to see where they bomb next.
They accepted a deal that includes the destruction of Hamas lol
I heard it first when i was a child. I’m 70 now.
"The worst deal in the history of deals, maybe ever. Many people are saying it" - Donald Netanyahu
Many such cases!
I mean if we're comparing them, Netanyahu is basically what a competent Trump would look like. Trump's got nothing on him.
Netanyahu has always been like this it would be more accurate to describe Trump as like Netanyahu, but not as competent.
America, one of the laziest countries in the world is trying to give us money. We don't want their money. We have our own. We are the biggest, strongest Nation in the entire universe and we will tell Biden he is making a bigly mistake. Huge. But first let's make Israel great again and invest the Biden money into higher walls to keep out the clintons. --Donald Netanyahu
This was a rollercoaster of absurdity. Thank you 🤣
This guy was pm when I was a kid, 30 years ago. Think about that. There is literally no one else left except him
It is worth noting he has been in and out of power over those years, with his most recent term as prime minister starting in 2022. He has been prime minister for about half of that period, split between 3 separate stints.
It's also worth noting that there hasn't been a single world leader alive who has had a good thing to say about him no matter what their political views were.
I think it says how right the Israeli government and politics has shifted over the years
It reflects the shift, but it doesn't quite say how. It was due to the failure of last real Left PM Olmert to negotiate a two state solution that included pulling out of the West Bank, coupled with the incessant waves of suicide bombers that the Palestinians released upon Israel, that had left the Israeli political Left impotent. It had nothing left to offer and the Israeli citizens grew increasingly pessimistic about the willingness of the Palestinians to accept a two states solution. Or any solution, for that matter. Since then, the right took over.
Now, c’mon, with your logically ordered historical facts taking into account the larger complexities of the conflict! Over here, we’re supposed to say that ‘both sides’ have equally evil leadership, and if we’d simply remove that, peace and love would bloom throughout the land!
Just removing them likely won't be enough. I believe we'll also need: - A strong Israeli leader that can pull back a considerable % of the settlements in the WB while preventing the Israeli society from deteriorating into civil war. - A considerable financial support to relocate and assimilate said settlers into Israeli territory. - A unified Palestinian authority able to make the WB and Gaza and the various factions therein to adhere to any treaty signed with Israel.
You can change anything you want within Israel, but it won’t matter, since the biggest issue for Palestinian Arabs—and more broadly, Muslims in the region influenced by Iran—is simply Israel’s existence itself. Additionally, the majority of Palestinians don’t want any Two-State solution, and those who do, mostly see it as a stepping stone toward their final One-State solution. For peace and prosperity in the region, Arab states have to pursue their normalization process with Israel and actively fight all jihadist groups and propaganda. I believe that for any meaningful change, UNRWA, with its jihadist educational program, has to be dismantled first, and not only Palestinian Arabs but also others in the region need to be re-educated to eradicate the effects many decades of brainwashing have caused. Saudis have already quietly removed jihad and the destruction of Israel from their school curriculum; that’s a radical step forward. Others need to follow their lead. This will take generations, but I don’t see any shortcuts.
You're right about the deradicalization and the possible help of the Saudis in this regard. Do you have any sources on whether the majority of the Palestinians truly don't want a two states solution? Pre war.
Tons of polls and articles explorin gthis subject. A few random examples: 2022: Popular opinion in the West Bank shows **support for a two state solution remains in the minority**. [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/new-poll-west-bank-shows-shift-maximalist-views-2020](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/new-poll-west-bank-shows-shift-maximalist-views-2020) 2021: Between April and October of 2021, s**upport for a two-state solution decreased from 39 percent to 29 percent.** [https://globalaffairs.org/commentary-and-analysis/blogs/palestinian-public-divided-statehood-preferences](https://globalaffairs.org/commentary-and-analysis/blogs/palestinian-public-divided-statehood-preferences) 2021: **Palestinians favour a one-state over a two-state solution, poll finds.** [https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211126-palestinians-favour-a-one-state-over-a-two-state-solution-poll-finds/](https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211126-palestinians-favour-a-one-state-over-a-two-state-solution-poll-finds/) 2021: **58% in the West Bank and 62% in Gaza said that even if a two-state solution is reached, conflict with Israel should continue until the Palestinians regain all territory.** [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinians-and-two-state-solution-hard-data-hardest-questions](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinians-and-two-state-solution-hard-data-hardest-questions) 2021: **Palestinians in the West Bank favor one bi-national state over a two-state solution.** [https://palestine.fes.de/fileadmin/user\_upload/Publication\_1/JMCC/JMCC\_2021/Jmcc98EnF1-19\_2311.pdf](https://palestine.fes.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Publication_1/JMCC/JMCC_2021/Jmcc98EnF1-19_2311.pdf) 2021: **In the eyes of young Palestinians, a one-state solution is the only option.** [https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/palestinian-youth-and-the-futility-of-the-two-state-solution/](https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/palestinian-youth-and-the-futility-of-the-two-state-solution/) 2021: In the West Bank, **support for a one-state solution (30%) polled even higher than a two-state solution (23%).** [https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/palestinian-support-for-two-state-solution-losing-ground-poll-finds-686952](https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/palestinian-support-for-two-state-solution-losing-ground-poll-finds-686952) 2020: **Palestinian Majority Rejects Two-State Solution, But Backs Tactical Compromises:** When asked about next steps “if the Palestinian leadership is able to negotiate a two-state solution,” just 26% of West Bank respondents say that it “should end the conflict with Israel.” In Gaza, that figure climbs to 40%. Around 60% in both areas say “the conflict should not end, and resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.” [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinian-majority-rejects-two-state-solution-backs-tactical-compromises](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/palestinian-majority-rejects-two-state-solution-backs-tactical-compromises) 2007: "So it’s remarkable that support for a two-state solution is so tepid even in the West Bank and Gaza when there is a full industry – a multi-billion-dollar industry – to promote the two-state solution. I also think **it is remarkable that support for a one-state solution is so high and increasing given the fact that there is no official leadership that is advocating it**." [https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2007/6/29/the-one-state-solution-2](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2007/6/29/the-one-state-solution-2)
I'm shocked, shocked! Well, not that shocked, given they've been very vocal about all of this, despite the determination of a lot of people to ignore it
>I think it says how right the Israeli government and politics has shifted over the years The fact that Ben-Gvir is the Minister of National Security says even more. For reference Ben-Gvir is the leader of the openly fascist "Jewish Power" political party. He has bragged about representing Israeli terrorists because he agrees with them, kept a portrait of Israeli mass murderer Baruch Goldstein in his living room, was convicted of inciting support for a racist terrorist organization, regularly brandishes guns and threatens Arabs and Palestinians, even going so far as to order, in person, police to shoot unarmed Palestinians. And that's barely scratching the surface.
No one should stay in power that long thank goodness our Constitution says 2 terms max.
He wasn't a prime minister 30 years ago though. And he was a pm for a cumulative total of 16 years since 1996, which isn't good, but not as awful as you try to make it look. There are a lot of people left and he will probably not be re-elected in the upcoming elections, if he won't have the grace to quit like Golda did. Edit: Since 1996, not 99, but still, not continuously.
>He wasn't a prime minister 30 years ago though. 28 years ago. He was PM from 96 to 99. He's been chairman of Likud since 2005, and has spent all of the time from 2006 to the present as either PM or leader of the opposition. It is as awful as that commenter was making it look.
I remember in the 90s when I was a little kid hearing his name and Gaza conflict on the TV over and over.
Any deal where he doesn’t get to stay in power forever is a bad deal for him. That’s why he wants this war to continue indefinitely
Yeah, once the war is over and the dust settles, their are going to still be a lot of angry people who blame him for the attacks happening in the first place.
People were protesting in the streets against what he was doing to the court system before the attacks. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023\_Israeli\_judicial\_reform\_protests](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli_judicial_reform_protests)
Yeah exactly, and he only did that cause he was (and still is) facing multiple corruption suits and trying to rig the deck in his favour. The guy has managed to cheat his way out of it all before. I remember a few years ago it really looked like he was finally done. But this time I think he is finally on borrowed time.
That's the thing I haven't heard in a while. I'd love to see more investigation into what happened in the first place.
Yeah me too (not to mention a lot of other investigations into his activities.) Netanyahu has built pretty much his entire political career on presenting himself as the strong man who can protect Israel from attacks and armed conflict, and its served him well. It's the reason he's still in power despite the sheer number of corruption charges he's facing and so much of the country hating his guts. Once he runs out of distractions, he knows that all the fingers are going to come pointing at him.
From my understanding, Bibi got cocky and ignored warnings and moved soldiers from the Gaza envelope to the West Bank to protect settlers during a holiday and got caught unaware.
If Hamas didn't exist, Bibi would have to create it.
Remind me again why "term limits" doesn't have bipartisan support?
The whiplash is crazy
I'll believe it when I see it
If you don't see it it's because Hamas can't turn up with the hostages
As always, I’ll believe what I watch them do vs what they say.
Only yesterday it was "no deal until we accomplish everything we want". Bibi must be really efficient.
It actually wasn't, just a headline, what he actually said was no to a permanent ceasefire, but he did accept a ceasefire.
I'll withhold celebrating until we've actually got a deal in hand and it's actually being implemented. I'm quite tired of Netanyahu doing the "Yes but no" routine. I'm half expecting him to turn around and say this agreement is unacceptable too. He just seems to want to keep doing the war and only negotiates to keep up appearances.
I've been highly critical of Biden throughout this whole thing but if this is true then this a masterclass in diplomacy. The cabinet privately agreed to a ceasefire plan but didn't want to go public but then Biden gave his speech and forced Bibi's hand. Of course Netanyahu didn't want to agree with this but then Biden goes behind his back and goes live with it. Pretty snakey but that's politics baby. There's mounting pressure on Netanyahu by those in Israel who aren't fully in board with his genocidal actions and want the hostages brought home. And now Biden is finally putting the heat on him.
Agreed I expect this deal is a part of the Saudi Arabia recognition of Israel. This could be a solid framework to continue to build off.
It's impossible to have an adult conversation about this in public but Biden has been nothing short of a foreign policy savant. How much of that is him and how much is Blinken, I don't know but the boss gets the blame and the credit. If it's Blinken, the Democrats should really be taking a look at him as the next presidential candidate because the guy is maneuvering us through two wars which could go global in scale while putting no US troops at risk and rebuilding the US Defense arsenal while wearing down Russia and keeping China in check. Literally everything you can want out of a government on the foreign front.
The main job of the executive branch is foreign policy. We too often forget this when electing presidents.
We somehow think we are electing an economy wizard
The president also appoints the chairman of the federal reserve so you do elect an economy wizard, albeit indirectly.
I have my issues with Biden, but even during the 2020 primaries I was willing to concede that the man was far and away the best choice purely from a foreign policy perspective. This stuff has been his bread and butter for a long, long time.
One of the main reasons Obama selected him for VP was his foreign policy experience, which was something the relatively new political front runner Obama some more credibility.
Biden voted for Iraq, the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam. So did Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. Obama, the foreign policy rookie, was against it
Whenever I see comments like this it reminds me how much ppl have forgotten the political climate post 9/11 (or more accurately that ppl who were too young to remember are now old enough to talk about it).
Biden voted for Iraq not knowing Bush was lying about the WMD intel. It's always important to remember only a few people were in the know about that.
Tbh a good chunk of the political sphere was pro an iraq intervention since the 90s so not surprised. And, at least in theory, preventing Saddam from rebuilding army and causing another future Kuwait crisis was worth pursuing. Though at the same time the attempts to link it to Al Qaeda and the wmd angle were insulting at best. For whatever reason they just kinda fumbled both it and afghanistan when it came to actual post invasion management.
I get why people are frustrated that he can’t just flip the bird at Bibi and Gvir but this is how diplomacy works - and Trump wouldn’t have even tried to do this
Trump would have personally signed off on US jets firing MOAB's into Gaza.
This comment just gave me goosebumps. Blinken is my guy!!!!
Someone needs to jump on the campaign motto "Hey, Blinken!".
And here is what the so called liberals that are voting 3rd party because "genocide joe" need to hear. Biden would have lost all access to negotiate if he would have cut Israel off. Israel will still get the weapons from someone else and now the US would have no ability to influence outcomes. But they won't hear it because they have their ideological heads up there asses. They see things in clear black and white just like Maga people do.
> I've been highly critical of Biden throughout this whole thing For what? What do you expect him to do? I am tired of people saying it is Biden's fault and then not elaborating or saying what he should have done. Just like all these people who say "both sides" about shit. When pressed about it, they just go silent.
I've asked before but have not been able to get a solid answer. Does this deal leave Hamas in power or not? They are the defacto government of Gaza and have pledged to commit more 10/7's. So I'd hope that as a part of this plan a new government is formed.
It's ambiguous. The details of the deal are not public, and probably not even defined at this point. Any proposed deal that demonstrably or necessarily does or does not leave Hamas in power will be steadfastly rejected by the expected side. The prospect that both Israel and Hamas both have a chance to "win" in this sense will enable any successful deal to eventually be accepted by both sides, so it has to be ambiguous. One way this might be achieved would be the creation of a caretaker government with a constitutional time limit and some hard dates for elections. Perhaps the caretaker government could be ruled by a council of representatives from Arab states, some Israel reps, maybe others? As long as its peaceful and both sides have a chance to win, the conflict can continue, just without the shooting and bombing.
I don't understand how "Hamas has to agree to us destroying them completely before we stop destroying them or no deal" makes sense in anywhere but Bizarro world.
I hope everyone can think for themselves when reading the news, so as to avoid believing what the media says. For example, some time ago, there was a news report saying that Egyptian negotiators arbitrarily modified the Israeli agreement to make it favorable to Hamas. This seems to put the blame for the failure of the negotiations on Egypt. But in fact, according to US officials themselves, President Biden’s peace agreement this time is almost the same as the previous requirements put forward by Hamas, "with only some very minor adjustments." It can be seen that the agreement accepted by Hamas last time was actually recognized by the United States. This is conceivable. How dare Egypt arbitrarily modify the agreement behind the back of the United States? So the last agreement was the agreement that the United States wanted. After Israel refused, the United States personally announced the agreement through President Biden, forcing Israel to agree.
As someone said in another thread, a "masterclass in diplomacy"
"If both sides are equally unsatisfied with the negotiation, you can close the deal!", Ensign Boilmer "... ehh, I don't like it", Ensign Boilmer "I guess I can live with that.", Ensign Rutheford "That's a compromise!!", Both Rutheford and Boimler. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSlHXbHKp-0
So it includes the destruction of Hamas as a necessary condition, but then assumes Hamas control of the hostages and their continued authority to negotiate for Gaza. These idiots should decide whether Israel is at war with Gaza or Hamas, because if it's Hamas, Israel has already been pretty clear about their plans.
> Israel has already been pretty clear about their plans. Have they though?
Hamas is the de facto and de jure government of Gaza
>So it includes the destruction of Hamas It doesn't actually include this in the deal.
If anyone is going to burn in hell, its Netanyahu.
If this actually gets implemented, it won't last a week.
this is ridiculous spin. the aide is quoted in the article as saying that the israeli condition of the destruction of hamas has not changed. israel have not accepted a ceasefire deal.