Israeli Officials Calling for "Total War" In Gaza

[Sam]

While the hospital bombing thread was becoming something of a catch-all for dropping news bits of the Israel/Gaza conflict, that thread is getting long in the tooth. I don't like starting threads, as doing so entails some extra oversight authority, so everyone posting can help me out: please refrain from name-calling, petty insults, abrasive talk, and any criticism of Sting's later musical work. Violators will be asked to leave. With that said ...

Whether one calls it ethnic cleansing, genocide, or total war, the rhetoric among Israeli officials blurring lines between combatants and civilians continues with retired Israeli General Giora Eiland's article in Yediot Ahronot (translated by Mete Sohtaoglu on Twitter):

Source: Let's Not Be Intimidated By the World. Giora Eiland. Yediot Ahronot. 2023.11.19

According to the American narrative, there are two groups of people in Gaza. One is the Hamas fighters, who are brutal terrorists and are therefore mortal. Most of the people in Gaza belong to a second group, innocent civilians who suffer for no fault of their own. Therefore Israel must not only avoid harming them as much as possible but also act to make their lives easier.

The other, and more correct, narrative is as follows: Israel is not fighting a terrorist organization but against the State of Gaza. The State of Gaza is indeed under Hamas leadership, and this organization managed to mobilize all the resources of its state, the support of the majority of its citizens, and the absolute loyalty of its civil administration, around Sinwar's leadership, while fully supporting his ideology. In this sense, Gaza is very similar to Nazi Germany, where a similar process also took place. Being that this is the accurate description of the situation, so it is also correct to manage the war accordingly.

A war between states is not only won by military combat, but also by the ability of one side to break the opposing side's system, the economic ability, and first and foremost the ability to provide energy, is of the utmost importance. The collapse of Germany at the beginning of 1945 was mainly due to the loss of Romania's oil fields, and once Germany didn't have enough fuel for its planes and tanks - the war was won.

Israel must therefore not provide the other side with any capability that prolongs its life. Moreover, we say that Sinwar is so evil that he does not care if all the residents of Gaza die. Such a presentation is not accurate, since who are the "poor" women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers. On the one hand, they are part of the infrastructure that supports the organization, and on the other hand, if they experience a humanitarian disaster, then it can be assumed that some of the Hamas fighters and the more junior commanders will begin to understand that the war is futile and that it is better to prevent irreversible harm to their families.

The way to win the war faster and at a lower cost for us requires a system collapse on the other side and not the mere killing of more Hamas fighters. The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics. We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers. And no, this is not about cruelty for cruelty's sake, since we don't support the suffering of the other side as a goal but as a means.

The other side is given the option to end the suffering if they surrender. Sinwar will not surrender, but there is no reason for the Hamas militia commanders in the southern Gaza Strip not to surrender when they have no fuel and no water, and when the plagues reach them as well and when the danger to the lives of their women increases. The Israeli cabinet must take a harder line with the Americans, and at least have the ability to say the following: as long as all the hostages are not returned to Israel, do not talk to us about the humanitarian aspects.

And yes, we believe that humanitarian pressure is also a legitimate means of increasing the chance of seeing the hostages alive. But we must not, absolutely must not adopt the American narrative that "permits" us to fight only against Hamas fighters instead of doing the right thing - to fight against the entire opposing system because it is precisely its civil collapse that will bring the end of the war closer. When senior Israeli figures say in the media "It's either us or them" we should clarify the question of who is "them". "They" are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the "civilian" officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population who enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th.

© Copyright Original Source

In this view, echoed by earlier Israeli officials' references to Dresden and Nazi Germany, any distinction between civilian and combatant is immaterial: hospital administrators, school teachers, and even Gazan mothers who keep Gaza's "system" intact are effectively Hamas operatives and can be treated as such. Eiland supports "collapsing" Gaza, destroying not only Hamas military operations but Gaza's economic, medical, and structural integrity. Epidemics, Eiland says, may be a humanitarian disaster but something Israel "must not shy away from", as "experienc[ing] humanitarian disaster" will lead Hamas officers to surrender more quickly. To Eiland and others sharing his outlook "It's Us or Them" equates to destroying the whole of Gaza and causing whatever suffering is necessary to produce victory — with the added caveat that this is not "about cruelty for cruelty's sake".

Israel's current finance minister apparently "agree[s] with every of word Giora [Eiland] in this column."

This isn't the first time that Giora Eiland has referenced Nazi Germany when denying a clear distinction between a civilian population and military units. From 2017:

Source: Israeli General: No Civilians in Gaza. The Daily Beast. 2017.04.14

Retired Israeli Major General Giora Eiland wrote in an op-ed that there is no such thing as an innocent civilian in Gaza. Late Monday, the former head of the National Security Council published an article on Ynet News arguing that the citizens of Gaza were as responsible for the recent violence as Hamas. He even made a comparison between the Gaza under Hamas and Nazi Germany.

"[T]hey are to blame for this situation just like Germany's residents were to blame for electing Hitler as their leader and paid a heavy price for that, and rightfully so," Eiland wrote.

© Copyright Original Source

When we look at the Israeli military's actions since October 7, it is our responsibility to ask what the end goal is. And while there has been talk about returning Gazans to their homes (now unhabitable) and relying on some as-of-yet- unspecified international police force, we should also pay attention to what current and former Israeli officials say about the civilian population and ask if there is really a priority — or even consideration — for engaging in a limited war against Hamas, rather than a total war against all of Gaza.

-Sam

[CivilDiscourse]

While the hospital bombing thread was becoming something of a catch-all for dropping news bits of the Israel/Gaza conflict, that thread is getting long in the tooth. I don't like starting threads, as doing so entails some extra oversight authority, so everyone posting can help me out: please refrain from name-calling, petty insults, abrasive talk, and any criticism of Sting's later musical work. Violators will be asked to leave. With that said ...

Whether one calls it ethnic cleansing, genocide, or total war, the rhetoric among Israeli officials blurring lines between combatants and civilians continues with retired Israeli General Giora Eiland's article in Yediot Ahronot (translated by Mete Sohtaoglu on Twitter):

Source: Let's Not Be Intimidated By the World. Giora Eiland. Yediot Ahronot. 2023.11.19

According to the American narrative, there are two groups of people in Gaza. One is the Hamas fighters, who are brutal terrorists and are therefore mortal. Most of the people in Gaza belong to a second group, innocent civilians who suffer for no fault of their own. Therefore Israel must not only avoid harming them as much as possible but also act to make their lives easier.

The other, and more correct, narrative is as follows: Israel is not fighting a terrorist organization but against the State of Gaza. The State of Gaza is indeed under Hamas leadership, and this organization managed to mobilize all the resources of its state, the support of the majority of its citizens, and the absolute loyalty of its civil administration, around Sinwar's leadership, while fully supporting his ideology. In this sense, Gaza is very similar to Nazi Germany, where a similar process also took place. Being that this is the accurate description of the situation, so it is also correct to manage the war accordingly.

A war between states is not only won by military combat, but also by the ability of one side to break the opposing side's system, the economic ability, and first and foremost the ability to provide energy, is of the utmost importance. The collapse of Germany at the beginning of 1945 was mainly due to the loss of Romania's oil fields, and once Germany didn't have enough fuel for its planes and tanks - the war was won.

Israel must therefore not provide the other side with any capability that prolongs its life. Moreover, we say that Sinwar is so evil that he does not care if all the residents of Gaza die. Such a presentation is not accurate, since who are the "poor" women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers. On the one hand, they are part of the infrastructure that supports the organization, and on the other hand, if they experience a humanitarian disaster, then it can be assumed that some of the Hamas fighters and the more junior commanders will begin to understand that the war is futile and that it is better to prevent irreversible harm to their families.

The way to win the war faster and at a lower cost for us requires a system collapse on the other side and not the mere killing of more Hamas fighters. The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics. We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers. And no, this is not about cruelty for cruelty's sake, since we don't support the suffering of the other side as a goal but as a means.

The other side is given the option to end the suffering if they surrender. Sinwar will not surrender, but there is no reason for the Hamas militia commanders in the southern Gaza Strip not to surrender when they have no fuel and no water, and when the plagues reach them as well and when the danger to the lives of their women increases. The Israeli cabinet must take a harder line with the Americans, and at least have the ability to say the following: as long as all the hostages are not returned to Israel, do not talk to us about the humanitarian aspects.

And yes, we believe that humanitarian pressure is also a legitimate means of increasing the chance of seeing the hostages alive. But we must not, absolutely must not adopt the American narrative that "permits" us to fight only against Hamas fighters instead of doing the right thing - to fight against the entire opposing system because it is precisely its civil collapse that will bring the end of the war closer. When senior Israeli figures say in the media "It's either us or them" we should clarify the question of who is "them". "They" are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the "civilian" officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population who enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th.

© Copyright Original Source

In this view, echoed by earlier Israeli officials' references to Dresden and Nazi Germany, any distinction between civilian and combatant is immaterial: hospital administrators, school teachers, and even Gazan mothers who keep Gaza's "system" intact are effectively Hamas operatives and can be treated as such. Eiland supports "collapsing" Gaza, destroying not only Hamas military operations but Gaza's economic, medical, and structural integrity. Epidemics, Eiland says, may be a humanitarian disaster but something Israel "must not shy away from", as "experienc[ing] humanitarian disaster" will lead Hamas officers to surrender more quickly. To Eiland and others sharing his outlook "It's Us or Them" equates to destroying the whole of Gaza and causing whatever suffering is necessary to produce victory — with the added caveat that this is not "about cruelty for cruelty's sake".

Israel's current finance minister apparently "agree[s] with every of word Giora [Eiland] in this column."

This isn't the first time that Giora Eiland has referenced Nazi Germany when denying a clear distinction between a civilian population and military units. From 2017:

Source: Israeli General: No Civilians in Gaza. The Daily Beast. 2017.04.14

Retired Israeli Major General Giora Eiland wrote in an op-ed that there is no such thing as an innocent civilian in Gaza. Late Monday, the former head of the National Security Council published an article on Ynet News arguing that the citizens of Gaza were as responsible for the recent violence as Hamas. He even made a comparison between the Gaza under Hamas and Nazi Germany.

"[T]hey are to blame for this situation just like Germany's residents were to blame for electing Hitler as their leader and paid a heavy price for that, and rightfully so," Eiland wrote.

© Copyright Original Source

When we look at the Israeli military's actions since October 7, it is our responsibility to ask what the end goal is. And while there has been talk about returning Gazans to their homes (now unhabitable) and relying on some as-of-yet- unspecified international police force, we should also pay attention to what current and former Israeli officials say about the civilian population and ask if there is really a priority — or even consideration — for engaging in a limited war against Hamas, rather than a total war against all of Gaza.

-Sam

Correction. He is a retired general, not an official.

[Gondwanaland]

Given they are now dropping evacuation leaflets in the south (where they told people to evacuate to and still were bombing), and have switched up from their claims of the North being Hamas headquarters to now claiming it is in south-central Gaza, this isn't surprising at all, sadly. They'll keep going until ethnic cleansing is complete either by killing as many as possible or eventually forcing them through the Egyptian border en masse (which we've seen there was at least one inter-governmental proposal for that got leaked).

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/is...on-of-invasion
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle...rs-2023-11-18/

https://twitter.com/amalsaad_lb/stat...D8U6mMcqg&s=19
chart.png
20231119_195833.jpg

[NorrinRadd]

I honestly waver regarding this issue, in general and not just in the Jews/Hamas case. I have sympathy for those civilians, be they few or many, who did not support or celebrate the Hamas attack. But ISTM the whole notion of "civilians are off-limits" is relatively new historically (maybe I'm wrong there), and I do have a tendency to view things through the "A Taste of Armageddon" ep. of TOS.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

While the hospital bombing thread was becoming something of a catch-all for dropping news bits of the Israel/Gaza conflict, that thread is getting long in the tooth. I don't like starting threads, as doing so entails some extra oversight authority, so everyone posting can help me out: please refrain from name-calling, petty insults, abrasive talk, and any criticism of Sting's later musical work. Violators will be asked to leave. With that said ...

Whether one calls it ethnic cleansing, genocide, or total war, the rhetoric among Israeli officials blurring lines between combatants and civilians continues with retired Israeli General Giora Eiland's article in Yediot Ahronot (translated by Mete Sohtaoglu on Twitter):

Source: Let's Not Be Intimidated By the World. Giora Eiland. Yediot Ahronot. 2023.11.19

According to the American narrative, there are two groups of people in Gaza. One is the Hamas fighters, who are brutal terrorists and are therefore mortal. Most of the people in Gaza belong to a second group, innocent civilians who suffer for no fault of their own. Therefore Israel must not only avoid harming them as much as possible but also act to make their lives easier.

The other, and more correct, narrative is as follows: Israel is not fighting a terrorist organization but against the State of Gaza. The State of Gaza is indeed under Hamas leadership, and this organization managed to mobilize all the resources of its state, the support of the majority of its citizens, and the absolute loyalty of its civil administration, around Sinwar's leadership, while fully supporting his ideology. In this sense, Gaza is very similar to Nazi Germany, where a similar process also took place. Being that this is the accurate description of the situation, so it is also correct to manage the war accordingly.

A war between states is not only won by military combat, but also by the ability of one side to break the opposing side's system, the economic ability, and first and foremost the ability to provide energy, is of the utmost importance. The collapse of Germany at the beginning of 1945 was mainly due to the loss of Romania's oil fields, and once Germany didn't have enough fuel for its planes and tanks - the war was won.

Israel must therefore not provide the other side with any capability that prolongs its life. Moreover, we say that Sinwar is so evil that he does not care if all the residents of Gaza die. Such a presentation is not accurate, since who are the "poor" women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers. On the one hand, they are part of the infrastructure that supports the organization, and on the other hand, if they experience a humanitarian disaster, then it can be assumed that some of the Hamas fighters and the more junior commanders will begin to understand that the war is futile and that it is better to prevent irreversible harm to their families.

The way to win the war faster and at a lower cost for us requires a system collapse on the other side and not the mere killing of more Hamas fighters. The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics. We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers. And no, this is not about cruelty for cruelty's sake, since we don't support the suffering of the other side as a goal but as a means.

The other side is given the option to end the suffering if they surrender. Sinwar will not surrender, but there is no reason for the Hamas militia commanders in the southern Gaza Strip not to surrender when they have no fuel and no water, and when the plagues reach them as well and when the danger to the lives of their women increases. The Israeli cabinet must take a harder line with the Americans, and at least have the ability to say the following: as long as all the hostages are not returned to Israel, do not talk to us about the humanitarian aspects.

And yes, we believe that humanitarian pressure is also a legitimate means of increasing the chance of seeing the hostages alive. But we must not, absolutely must not adopt the American narrative that "permits" us to fight only against Hamas fighters instead of doing the right thing - to fight against the entire opposing system because it is precisely its civil collapse that will bring the end of the war closer. When senior Israeli figures say in the media "It's either us or them" we should clarify the question of who is "them". "They" are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the "civilian" officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population who enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th.

© Copyright Original Source

In this view, echoed by earlier Israeli officials' references to Dresden and Nazi Germany, any distinction between civilian and combatant is immaterial: hospital administrators, school teachers, and even Gazan mothers who keep Gaza's "system" intact are effectively Hamas operatives and can be treated as such. Eiland supports "collapsing" Gaza, destroying not only Hamas military operations but Gaza's economic, medical, and structural integrity. Epidemics, Eiland says, may be a humanitarian disaster but something Israel "must not shy away from", as "experienc[ing] humanitarian disaster" will lead Hamas officers to surrender more quickly. To Eiland and others sharing his outlook "It's Us or Them" equates to destroying the whole of Gaza and causing whatever suffering is necessary to produce victory — with the added caveat that this is not "about cruelty for cruelty's sake".

Israel's current finance minister apparently "agree[s] with every of word Giora [Eiland] in this column."

This isn't the first time that Giora Eiland has referenced Nazi Germany when denying a clear distinction between a civilian population and military units. From 2017:

Source: Israeli General: No Civilians in Gaza. The Daily Beast. 2017.04.14

Retired Israeli Major General Giora Eiland wrote in an op-ed that there is no such thing as an innocent civilian in Gaza. Late Monday, the former head of the National Security Council published an article on Ynet News arguing that the citizens of Gaza were as responsible for the recent violence as Hamas. He even made a comparison between the Gaza under Hamas and Nazi Germany.

"[T]hey are to blame for this situation just like Germany's residents were to blame for electing Hitler as their leader and paid a heavy price for that, and rightfully so," Eiland wrote.

© Copyright Original Source

When we look at the Israeli military's actions since October 7, it is our responsibility to ask what the end goal is. And while there has been talk about returning Gazans to their homes (now unhabitable) and relying on some as-of-yet- unspecified international police force, we should also pay attention to what current and former Israeli officials say about the civilian population and ask if there is really a priority — or even consideration — for engaging in a limited war against Hamas, rather than a total war against all of Gaza.

-Sam

Given what I am reading in the press I do not know if, as yet, Israel has an end plan for this. The Israeli historian, Yuval Noah Harari, writing for The Guardian over a month ago suggested that bombing Gaza to rubble could result in a terrible humanitarian crisis not seen since 1948 and that now appears to be unfolding. He also referenced religious fanatics on both sides including Smotrich, whom you cited, and who told Arab Israelis that the reason they are still in Israel was a mistake by Ben Gurion who didn't complete the job in 1948. There is also Gvir who has given firearms to West Bank settlers, some of whom are violent extremists, and where, in less reported incidents, some 190 Palestinians have been killed since October 7. Such behaviour risks igniting another Intifada in that region and yet Netanyahu does nothing to rein in such individuals and their extremist language and behaviour because he needs their support to stay in power and out of jail.

I would not be surprised if Israeli settlements are re-established in Gaza but what happens to the Palestinians remains to be seen. Will a smaller group be permitted to stay and provide a cheap labour force? Or will the entire population be expelled?

[Mountain Man]

Given they are now dropping evacuation leaflets in the south (where they told people to evacuate to and still were bombing), and have switched up from their claims of the North being Hamas headquarters to now claiming it is in south-central Gaza...

I know you're on the "Hate Israel" bandwagon, but you do realize that terrorists tend to be a fairly mobile group and can quickly relocate their base of operations when needed.

[Gondwanaland]

I know you're on the "Hate Israel" bandwagon, but you do realize that terrorists tend to be a fairly mobile group and can quickly relocate their base of operations when needed.

Yes, your defense of ethnic cleansing is very clear

[Ronson]

I honestly waver regarding this issue, in general and not just in the Jews/Hamas case. I have sympathy for those civilians, be they few or many, who did not support or celebrate the Hamas attack. But ISTM the whole notion of "civilians are off-limits" is relatively new historically (maybe I'm wrong there), and I do have a tendency to view things through the "A Taste of Armageddon" ep. of TOS.

Yeah, I think it started right after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. The civilian toll was so great that people began debating if it was a moral tactic to target civilians. Johnson and Nixon had no compunctions about bombing Hanoi, although they didn't try to obliterate it. It really took hold during the Gulf War, where (guessing) 100% of the targets were military. It's mostly just a western-democracy attitude. I don't believe much of the rest of the world cares, or is even capable of the sophistication required to go after only military targets.

[Sam]

Yeah, I think it started right after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. The civilian toll was so great that people began debating if it was a moral tactic to target civilians. Johnson and Nixon had no compunctions about bombing Hanoi, although they didn't try to obliterate it. It really took hold during the Gulf War, where (guessing) 100% of the targets were military. It's mostly just a western-democracy attitude. I don't believe much of the rest of the world cares, or is even capable of the sophistication required to go after only military targets.

While the Principle of Distinction has its origin in 20th century humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants and the distinction between legitimate targets of warfare and "innocents" dates back much farther, with Aquinas (and I think Augustine) both making the distinction for Christian concepts of just war.

The specific language that interests us here can be found in Protocol I amendments to the Geneva Convention. This map depicts the signatories and states that have made themselves parties to the amendments. Israel has, as of present day, refused to join.

ScreenShot00137.png

-Sam

[Ronson]

While the Principle of Distinction has its origin in 20th century humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants and the distinction between legitimate targets of warfare and "innocents" dates back much farther, with Aquinas (and I think Augustine) both making the distinction for Christian concepts of just war.

I wasn't aware of that. But in a modern sense, the removal of civilian targets began after WWII, and (I believe) mostly in response to the US bombings of Japanese cities - including 67 cities that were firebombed.

The specific language that interests us here can be found in Protocol I amendments to the Geneva Convention

I don't believe many African countries honor their agreements, based on civil war casualties there.

[Mountain Man]

Yes, your defense of ethnic cleansing is very clear

[Sam]

OK — you both got your jabs in. Let's please try to keep this thread to substantive posting only, thank you.

-Sam

[Sam]

Israel's intelligence minister, Gila Gamliel, calls for the permanent removal and resettlement of Gazans, allowing Israeli settlers to take their place. In shorter terms, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza:

Source: Victory is an opportunity for Israel in the midst of crisis - opinion. Gila Gamliel. The Jerusalem Post. 2023.11.19

ANOTHER OPTION is to promote the voluntary resettlement of Palestinians in Gaza, for humanitarian reasons, outside of the Strip.

It is important that those who seek a life elsewhere be provided with that opportunity. Some world leaders are already discussing a worldwide refugee resettlement scheme and saying they would welcome Gazans to their countries. This could be supported by many nations around the world, especially those that claim to be friends of the Palestinians.

This is an opportunity for those who say they support the Palestinian people to show these are not just empty words.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the global UN body that deals with refugees, is mandated by its Statute and the UN General Assembly Resolutions to undertake resettlement as one of its three durable solutions. Unfortunately, however, for the last 75 years, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), a refugee body that privileges Palestinians over every other refugee population, has done zero to help the Palestinian people, even though it has an annual budget of well over $1 billion.

Instead of funneling money to rebuild Gaza or to the failed UNRWA, the international community can assist in the costs of resettlement, helping the people of Gaza build new lives in their new host countries.
Gaza has long been thought of as a problem without an answer. We have tried many different solutions – Disengagement, enrichment, conflict management, and building high walls in the hope of keeping the monsters of Hamas out of Israel.

These have all failed.

We must try something new, and we call on the international community to help make it a reality.

It could be a win-win solution: a win for those civilians of Gaza who seek a better life and a win for Israel after this devastating tragedy.

Israeli communities in the Gaza border area and the South could then return to their homes and communities and live in safety and security. They should not have to continue living with the constant threat of rocket attacks and murderous infiltrations.

THIS SOLUTION, which I proposed already during the early days of the way, is far from perfect. It has its drawbacks and obstacles, but it is our job to look at all options and decide which is better.

I am gratified to hear that Members of Knesset from across the political spectrum, including both the coalition and opposition, have joined my Ministry’s initiative and declared their support for it. I am certain that many others will follow suit.

© Copyright Original Source

-Sam

[Starlight]

There also seems to be strong support within parts of Israel's government for arming settlers on the West Bank, to kick Palestinians off their land there (for those not following the conflict closely, the Palestinians on the West Bank aren't involved with Hamas or the current war).

It's pretty hard not to see this all as intentional ethnic cleansing / genocide, with major actors in the Israeli government perceiving this as an opportunity to remove all Palestinians from the area permanently. As Netanyahu's party's charter puts it: "between the river and the sea there will be only Israel".

It's interesting to watch 3rd parties make well-meaning proposals (like "maybe the Palestinian Authority could be put in charge of Gaza?") and see them slapped down by the Israeli government. Slowly everyone's beginning to get the message that those running Israel aren't interested in normal and reasonable outcomes.

[Gondwanaland]

There also seems to be strong support within parts of Israel's government for arming settlers on the West Bank, to kick Palestinians off their land there (for those not following the conflict closely, the Palestinians on the West Bank aren't involved with Hamas or the current war).

It's pretty hard not to see this all as intentional ethnic cleansing / genocide, with major actors in the Israeli government perceiving this as an opportunity to remove all Palestinians from the area permanently. As Netanyahu's party's charter puts it: "between the river and the sea there will be only Israel".

It's interesting to watch 3rd parties make well-meaning proposals (like "maybe the Palestinian Authority could be put in charge of Gaza?") and see them slapped down by the Israeli government. Slowly everyone's beginning to get the message that those running Israel aren't interested in normal and reasonable outcomes.

But hey, when Palestinians say it, its a "call for genocide".