Hamas strike on Israel - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

The war would end if the Hamas leaders in Gaza went into exile, which Netanyahu said he is willing to let them do. Presumably, if the Hamas leaders agreed to that, Arab League and ICRC observers would be on the scene to ensure that the deal is adhered to.

To let Hamas keep ruling Gaza is to invite Hamas to do another October 7th.

So she didn't meet everyone in the city, she just mind-read everyone and anyone she did see.

Passing the OTB would tank our economy - the US multinationals would quit Ireland.

That's exactly what Hamas have been offering Israel for months now - they will leave Gaza (go into exile) and hand over all the hostages.

So why won't Alleged War Criminal #1 accept the deal? Because he doesn't want that deal. He and his Govt. want to ethnical cleanse Gaza and Settle it.

And to be fair, seeing as Netanyahu reneged on the last ceasefire, he is not be trusted at all.

I don't doubt that poor girl suffered at the hands of Hamas but the hyperbole smacks of the 'auld Hasbara.

Last 2 posts victim blaming lads. Sure it surely couldn't be true!

Not really - I would have as much sympathy for an Israeli victim as a Palestinian.

The discussion is not about her mistreatment or her suffering - clearly she was a hostage and deserves to be treated respectfully and with care. The discussion is about her description of what happened - 'twas a bit far fetched and clearly exaggerated.

The Israeli modus operandi does not change. Exaggerate, deflect, deny etc.

Remember when the Maccabi Tel Aviv fan lost a tooth in Amsterdam? That was instantly a "Pogrom". Remember the "beheaded babies", "Microwaved babies" and "fetuses cut from their mother's womb"? All debunked - and Zaka made money out of it.

And we've covered the IDF lies extensively in recent times.

Reminds me of the parable "the boy who cried wolf".

I'm not much into a detail analysis of local politics but I do know some of the delay (perhaps all of it) has been around legalities surrounding the ICJ ruling on Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. I don't think they are outright lying in fairness - perhaps prevaricating?

Its rather imaginative to see this as victim blaming to be honest:

I don't doubt that poor girl suffered at the hands of Hamas but the hyperbole smacks of the 'auld Hasbara.

And the second poster also referred to the girl clearly being "traumatised".

But if she was a Gazan, you know precisely what the reaction would be on here - "she was Hamas", "Human shield". Besides, from what I can tell, it seems Palestinian hostages are treated way worse - like being anally raped, murdered, starved to death, electrocuted etc.

And just a reminder of what was posted:

when Hamas took her into the Gaza Strip, she saw "everyone, the entire city, from the smallest child to the oldest one, celebrating evil"

That is clearly exaggeration - and has been a very common theme from Israel from the start. Look up the various quotes from Netanyahu, Gallant and the particularly odious gruesome twosome - Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. Exaggeration in all its glory. Its like its ingrained into the psyche.

But no, the discussion here is not victim blaming. Just commenting on the common theme.

We all seen the videos of Gazans celebrating atrocities, hostage exchanges, no hyperbole. As I said who can blame them really. But your idea that this girl is lying in your own refusal to admit that gazans are capable of such. They are and it's understandable that they are.

Really good piece from Jeremy Bowen on the Beeb:

Now, Britain and the European Union both say they are against a new Israeli offensive. A fortnight ago, the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom, France and Germany, all allies of Israel who regard Hamas as a terrorist group, warned that the "intolerable" blockade put Palestinian civilians, including one million children, at "an acute risk of starvation, epidemic disease and death". The ministers also warned, implicitly, that their ally was violating international law.

"Humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool and Palestinian territory must not be reduced nor subjected to any demographic change", they insisted. "Israel is bound under international law to allow the unhindered passage of humanitarian aid."

Two further interesting paras from Jeremey Bowen's report. The first alludes to the evidence folders growing larger every day for the case before the ICJ regarding Israeli Genocide.

The second clearly states why Israel reneged on the ceasefire - politics and Netanyahu needing the power he desperately craves.

Countries and organisations that believe Israel systematically violates its legal obligations, committing a series of war crimes, will scour any new offensive for more evidence. Extreme language used by ministers will have been noted by the South African lawyers arguing the case at the International Court of Justice alleging Israeli genocide in Gaza.

Netanyahu's extremist allies told him they would bring down his government if he agreed to a second phase of the ceasefire. First, Israel blocked humanitarian aid to put pressure, it said, on Hamas to agree to a renegotiated deal that would give Israel the option of going back to war even after the hostages were released. When Hamas refused, Israel went on the offensive again with a massive air attack on the night of 18 March.

Trade policy is an exclusive EU competence - it says so on the following site. Copy and past the address onto the address bar on your browser and you'll be able to read the article.

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/topics/trade/

Much of what I just googled does indeed prohibit the banning of trade between EU members in most cases. However, I couldn't find any eu law on prohibiting the banning of trade between non eu member states.

The following applies to trade between member states - but I'd imagine they apply to other trade outside the eu:

The socio-cultural identity of a state has been accepted as a potential justification for measures.  Where French legislation prevented the sale or hire of all films for a year from cinema release, it was justified on the basis of the protection of the French film industry.  Other potentially permissible grounds include

• The maintenance of a diverse press,
• improvement of working conditions,
• prevention of fraud,
• protection of human rights.

Seems to me that banning products from the illegally occupied territories does not breach EU law. But I could be wrong.

Is this a figure of speech?

Israeli minister says 'Gaza will be entirely destroyed'

A victory for Israel in Gaza means that the Palestinian territory will be "entirely destroyed" before its inhabitants depart for other countries, Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has said.

"Gaza will be entirely destroyed, civilians will be sent to ... the south to a humanitarian zone without Hamas or terrorism, and from there they will start to leave in great numbers to third countries.