Journal damn_registrars's Journal: What is the Netanyahu Gaza End Game? 66
Conservatives have been tripping over each other to praise Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They claim that the Israeli attacks on Gaza are somehow very precise and targeted. He claims that Hamas is the target, and that they will eradicate Hamas.
The question I haven't seen answered though is what will he do with Gaza when/if he accomplishes that goal? Conservatives here and in Israel are happy to allow people to confuse Hamas with Gaza, and even more so Hamas with the population of Gaza. But even if he found a list of everyone who is part of Hamas and had them all killed, what happens then?
It is important to note that Hamas has a majority in the politics of Gaza because Israel has ensured they would. Israel has prevented elections from happening in Gaza, and now there has not been one there for 15 years. There are already people who have been elected, died, and not been replaced. Simultaneously because Israel controls immigration in and out of Gaza, they have prevented people from leaving.
So what would happen if all of Hamas were indeed killed off in this conflict? You then have a country with no ruling government. We've seen that the Netanyahu government does not want to see elections happen in Gaza, nor does it want to see people achieve any kind of economic or geopolitical mobility from within Gaza. Who then will they acknowledge as the leaders of Gaza?
The question I haven't seen answered though is what will he do with Gaza when/if he accomplishes that goal? Conservatives here and in Israel are happy to allow people to confuse Hamas with Gaza, and even more so Hamas with the population of Gaza. But even if he found a list of everyone who is part of Hamas and had them all killed, what happens then?
It is important to note that Hamas has a majority in the politics of Gaza because Israel has ensured they would. Israel has prevented elections from happening in Gaza, and now there has not been one there for 15 years. There are already people who have been elected, died, and not been replaced. Simultaneously because Israel controls immigration in and out of Gaza, they have prevented people from leaving.
So what would happen if all of Hamas were indeed killed off in this conflict? You then have a country with no ruling government. We've seen that the Netanyahu government does not want to see elections happen in Gaza, nor does it want to see people achieve any kind of economic or geopolitical mobility from within Gaza. Who then will they acknowledge as the leaders of Gaza?
"what will he do with Gaza" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That said, doing such a thing is not in Netanyahu's best interest. Similar to the fascists from Your Team, he is primarily concerned with holding on to power as long as possible. Also similar to the fascists from Your Team, he is not the least bit concerned about the fact that far more people from his country disapprove of his actions t
Re: (Score:2)
Similar to the fascists from Your Team, he is primarily concerned with holding on to power as long as possible.
What a risible thing to write. Name *ANYONE* in power who is all "Yeah, I'll just turn that over now." Even Zombie Joe, who is barely aware he's President, seeks re-election despite ever common-sense argument to the contrary. Noise like this is why I laugh at you.
Re: (Score:2)
Name *ANYONE* in power who is all "Yeah, I'll just turn that over now."
President Lawnchair freely gave power over to your Dear Leader. Before him President Clinton freely gave power over to GWB.
seeks re-election
Seeking reelection is vastly different from what your Dear Leader did after he lost the presidency in 2020.
Re: (Score:2)
President Lawnchair freely gave power over to your Dear Leader.
There are those who claim that the presence of so many Obama holdovers for the Biden whitehouse, beside Obama's buying a residence in DC, makes this administration tantamount to a third term for President Personal Pronoun. Especially given Biden's assuming the position for Iran, this argument is hard to refute.
Re: (Score:2)
Obama holdovers for the Biden whitehouse, beside Obama's buying a residence in DC, makes this administration tantamount to a third term
First of all, it is not the least bit unusual to keep cabinet and other administration officials around between terms. That says not a damned thing about who is running the show nor does it in any way fuel your silly conspiracy about some nefarious behind-the-scenes direction. Your Team does the same thing all the time; GWB brought on plenty of people who advised his dad. Bush Sr. brought on plenty of Reagan appointees, Reagan brought on Ford appointees.
The only reason your Dear Leader didn't have a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason why your Dear Leader had possibly fewer people in his administration who were from previous administrations of his same party were because he was fond of having
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is not clear what you're talking about.
Are you not reading what you are writing?
You yourself claimed that because a non-zero number of President Lawnchair's advisers are also advising Biden, that his Administration should be considered an invalid extension of the Lawnchair Administration. Yet I pointed out that this is a long standing tradition of both parties, and you - unsurprisingly - brushed it off entirely.
For that matter if you look back at the advisers who advised President Lawnchair, you'll find that several of them advised GWB a
Re: (Score:2)
Staffing continuity between other administrations is not in dispute.
BHO stayed in DC after DJT was sworn in to manage the anti-Trump resistance, and then install a meat puppet in 2020.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know you wanted badly to drive him out for the high crime of not being a member of the Trump cult, but you're going a bit far there to tell him where he cannot buy
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares?
Americans who have had their lives economically sodomized during BHO's de facto third term care quite a bit. Hence the enduring popularity of the Eminence Orange.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares?
(silly anti-factual partisan nonsense)
OK so you can't actually point to any reason why anyone who isn't just looking to grind a partisan axe would care in the least where a previous POTUS chooses to buy property. Interesting that all of a sudden you want to restrict where people can or cannot buy property; your own Dear Leader owns buildings in or near DC as well, but you don't seem the least bit worried about that.
I'd love to know what causes you to think that some "precedent" exists for where former POTUSes can or cannot live after their
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We understand that BHO established a residence to run a shadow government
The only evidence you have of that is that he bought a house in the DC area. There is zero evidence of him running any such "shadow government".
Just because someone from Your Team imagined a precedent and then claimed that Obama broke it does not mean that some great conspiracy is unfolding. Naturally in line with the rest of your "rules for thee, but not for me", you have completely ignored the fact that your own Dear Leader still owns property in DC; by the "precedent" you claim, he should have sol
Re: (Score:2)
It's a shadow government, and if you didn't vehemently deny the obvious, you'd be completely out of character.
Re: (Score:2)
Except all of the BHO holdovers in the administration
Which is not the least bit unusual. As I mentioned before, every previous POTUS of at least average intelligence brought over people from previous administrations. Some even were so daring as to bring over advisers who advised presidents of other parties.
the pro-Iran moves
Which is completely unsupported by reality.
the general commie idiocy...
Which is not connected to any definition of "commie" or "idiocy" that I have ever heard. Seriously, your use of various conjugations of "communist" only make you look foolish. Try a different insult, this on
Re: (Score:2)
I admire your patience
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's Caesar's (Augustus) 510th term, more or less
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why "Troll"? You guys take top honors in that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Oh no. d_r seems to offer some sort of vaguely sociopathic belief in what he's spouting.
He's a democrat, you're a republican, tell me how you're any different, I mean, other than the more pleasant writing style.
Re: (Score:2)
Small 'r' republican, sure. Minimal government/regulation, lowest level of delegation. Which is *not* what the GOPatsies are pushing.
The ship is off course, but we still have to use the helm to try to correct that course.
Which is why your "you can't vote for X" arguments sound completely feckless.
Re: (Score:1)
Which is why your "you can't vote for X" arguments sound completely feckless.
Of course to you it would seem that way. I'm just reminding you that you are voting for the same old thing that d_r is voting for, thinking you're in the club
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Can't believe that, all your faves are regular swamp creatures too, with all their own cronies
And why am I not surprised that you would idolize Col. Jessup too?
Re: (Score:2)
why am I not surprised that you would idolize Col. Jessup too?
I was literally doing the opposite of that, but perhaps your sense of humor is falling into damn_regristrarsian disrepair.
Re: (Score:1)
Oops, sorry, you're right... I really don't differentiate one "former (or even present day) NSA and CIA chief" from the other.. and It's hard to tell which way you flip these days.
[reads link in the link]:
Oh, he insulted Trump... figures
Re: (Score:2)
hard to tell which way you flip
I flip anti-establishment, and I'm increasing unsure of the Citrus Caesar's "outsider" status.
I was against what I saw as an Archie-Bunker-meets-Mitt-Romney candidate in 2016 because I figured they'd (actually) bury him in court and give us Her Majesty.
Now they are fake-burying Trump in court, and I find the whole thing a total farce.
Looking for the reform, sir.
Re: (Score:1)
I flip anti-establishment
Hardly.. You're only taking sides inside the establishment
Looking for the reform, sir.
See? You don't even know you have the key.
Re: (Score:2)
I flip anti-establishment
Right up until you're in the voting booth, where candidates conveniently have (D) or (R) after their names. Then that "anti-establishment" notion magically disappears entirely.
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly..
Indeed, Article V done properly would be good and hard on the establishment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
But you can never explain how when you put it in the same corrupt hands you reelect now. Change comes from within
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
more honest though
While I think that Your Team are nothing but despicable liars, I have not called you a liar. If you think that I am EVER lying to you, just say so and we can quit exchanging posts.
We'll both stand tall before God Almighty and be judged at one point, and my failures will be multitude. But deceiving you will not be among them.
Re: (Score:2)
While I think that Your Team are nothing but despicable liars, I have not called you a liar.
If you are saying that everyone on the team that you envision me to be part of is a liar, then you are indeed calling me a liar.
If you think that I am EVER lying to you
I believe that you think that the conspiracies you are spouting here are somehow connected to reality. You have said a great many things that have had zero connection to reality and zero facts to support them. I have not seen you actually lie, but with your conspiracies you have often walked up to the line and spat on it.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes it is the same. corruption is corruption, balkanizing it just creates more confrontation and warfare
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
*sigh* again with the partisan delusion, you're still stuck in the monkey trap
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Please, you are hardly non-partisan, on the contrary you (and your doppelganger there) are extremely so, your denial of which are psychological, not political issues. And your Article V cannot work until the voters reform themselves, corruption begins, and ends in the home
Re: (Score:2)
And your Article V cannot work until the voters reform themselves, corruption begins, and ends in the home
Today in endorsements of the status quo...
Re: (Score:1)
Today in endorsements of the status quo...
Despite your denials, endorsement of said status quo is all you offer. And yes, you are extremely partisan, buried very deeply in the status quo, standing tall for your favorite faction within. And as usual, your accusations are just projection of your own choices
Re: (Score:2)
Despite your denials, endorsement of said status quo is all you offer. And yes, you are extremely partisan, buried very deeply in the status quo, standing tall for your favorite faction within. And as usual, your accusations are just projection of your own choices
My choices? I'm offering you a sound organizational behavior analysis, and telling you that power in the hands of the few, who don't stand for election, is a Bad Thing.
"Despite your denials"...what? Next, you're going to tell me that, despite my certainty that I've been writing in American English on here to you for the last decade+, I have actually been communicating in Klingon the whole time.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm offering you a sound organizational behavior analysis
Of the animal world, sure. The only revelation being that humans act like animals, nothing new there
and telling you that power in the hands of the few, who don't stand for election, is a Bad Thing.
And only the voters can fix that, there is no other way, regardless what your silly charts say, unless you want your dictatorship
"Despite your denials"...what?
Of your partisanship, which distorts your vision. You are a factional establishmentarIan
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Not yet, soon maybe, when you actually get out of that rut
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and telling you that power in the hands of the few, who don't stand for election, is a Bad Thing.
Yet you are telling us that the January 6th insurrectionists were somehow victims. They were trying to stop a lawful election from moving forward.
I'll even accept that some of the people who entered the capitol that day were likely just caught up in the moment. If they walked in with no contraband, walked out without committing any other crime, then they should not have much to worry about. However we found that many of those from Your Team clearly had more profound intentions. Those who broke down
Re: (Score:1)
No, not just you, your stunt double too, and 98% of the others strategically voting for the same thing, the rut is pretty deep and well traveled, but amazingly trivial to exit. Your choice
Re: (Score:2)
We've seen what Your Team does to prevent those from happening
Please do enumerate, with links. I'm anxious learn more about this non-occurrence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
:-) You forgot to deny that you're in denial, should I take that as tacit admission?
Re: (Score:2)