The irony is that all this fluff is you justifying why Israeli citizens are worth more. Just because terrorists kill civilians doesn’t give one the right to callously allow the death of yet more innocent civilians.

They both matter, which is what we’re saying when we speak out against Israel’s policy of collective punishment.

Your argument essentially boils down to this: Israeli civilians are worth less than Palestinian civilians. You didn’t write it like this, but is the logical consequence of what you are asking.

That’s not what the argument boils down to. They didn’t write it like that because that wasn’t a position they were taking. You wrote it like that because you want that to be the case. That says more about you and your character.

Civilians should not be used as fodder by either side.

Do you disagree?

Well the logical step forward would be a negotiated peace that includes lifting the blockade so Gazans don’t have a reason to launch rocket attacks. That was the idea in 2008 and 2012, only a country whose name starts with Israel didn’t follow through with it. As seen from this attack, the current Israeli policy on Palestine is a colossal failure on multiple levels, so something needs to change,

Your argument essentially boils down to this: Israeli civilians are worth less than Palestinian civilians. You didn’t write it like this, but is the logical consequence of what you are asking.

*Honk*

Straw man. Five minute timeout.

The headline is about Israel telling the UN to ask Hamas for fuel. You’re presupposing that Hamas is going to steal Hamas’s own fuel from the UN.

You must be working for Hamas because you’re certainly not doing Israel any favors with the quality of that rhetoric.

Idk the forcible expulsion of millions of people from their ancestral home seems to fit the definition.

What? Israel has actively stated Gaza’s territory would go down after the war, and there are honest to God pogroms going on right now in the West Bank (as if settlement wasn’t already ethnic cleansing enough).

The quote you’re using is from the 2010-2011 peace talks. The reason those broke down is as follows:

Direct talks broke down in late September 2010 when an Israeli partial moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank expired and Netanyahu refused to extend the freeze unless the Palestinian Authority recognized Israel as a Jewish State, while the Palestinian leadership refused to continue negotiating unless Israel extended the moratorium.[3] The proposal was rejected by the Palestinian leadership, that stressed that the topic on the Jewishness of the state has nothing to do with the building freeze. The decision of Netanyahu on the freeze was criticized by European countries and the United States.

In regards to Oslo and the 2014 peace talks:

2014:

A deadline was set for establishing a broad outline for an agreement by 29 April 2014. On the expiry of the deadline, negotiations collapsed, with the US Special Envoy Indyk reportedly assigning blame mainly to Israel, while the US State Department insisting no one side was to blame but that “both sides did things that were incredibly unhelpful.”

Oslo: Both Oslo accords were signed, however,

the interim process put in place under Oslo had fulfilled neither Israeli nor Palestinian expectations.

This led to the Camp David Accords where the main issues and points seemed to be the following:

the refusal of the Palestinians and Arafat to give up the right of return

Judged from the perspective of Palestinians’ and Israelis’ respective rights under international law, all the concessions at Camp David came from the Palestinian side, none from the Israeli side.

the Palestinians starting position was at the 1967 borders, but they were ready to give up Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, and parts of the West Bank with Israeli settlements. Further, the Palestinians were willing to implement Right of Return in a way that guaranteed Israel’s demographic interests.

The proposals were, for the most part, verbal. As no agreement was reached and there is no official written record of the proposals, some ambiguity remains over details of the positions of the parties on specific issues.

The talks ultimately failed to reach agreement on the final status issues: Territory, Territorial contiguity, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, Refugees and Palestinian right of return, Security arrangements, Settlements

To summarize the 2010-11 peace talks broke down due to Israel not abiding by the terms of the negotiation. The 2014 talks are debated with more blame seeming to be placed on Israel. The Oslo accords were signed but left unresolved and unfollowed by Israel leading to the camp David accords where the main issue seems to be the right of return for the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were displaced. However, who actually ended the talks is still debated.

Nothing in your post is citation, and all of it is made up.

Lmfao. It was Netenyahu that stopped negotiations when he was elected in 1996.

Also it literally says in the article you sent: “Both sides claim the other dropped follow-up contacts”.

Not really, since they kept at it.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/