Despite the UN declarations against them despite America’s public denouncement, despite 32,552 Palestinians killed and 74,980 wounded, despite famine now engulfing Gaza, despite bombing Gaza in a month with more bombs than America dropped on Afghanistan in a year, despite killing more civilians in 4 months than Russia has in two years, despite the UN rulings on Genocide against them – despite all that, Netanyahu’s need for endless conflict means there can be no peace while he is Prime Minister.
Netanyahu has no choice other than escalation and permanent conflict.
That has been his entire political career. Enrage Palestinians into violence and then using disproportionate overwhelming violence to smash the threat he created while appealing to the most damaged and frightened elements of a people still living in the memory shadow of the worst Genocide of the 20th Century.
I argued January last year that all the ingredients for a third intifada were in place after Netanyahu aligned with radical Zionists to form the most extreme right wing Government in Israel’s history.
This toxic Far Right Radical Zionist Government wanted to over rule their Judiciary to allow Zionist Settlers to illegally steal Palestinian land in the West Bank and make the lives of Palestinians prisoners held by Israel even more cruel and draconian.
The Abraham Accords sidelined Hamas and left them with desperate conditions and no hope for the future.
The reality now is that Netanyahu requires permanent conflict because the moment there is a pause and the war ends, the Israeli people will turn on Netanyahu and demand accountability for the security failure of October 7th as well as the ethnic cleaning war crime he has committed in his disproportionate response.
Schumer wants Netanyahu gone because the White House has realised Netanyahu is a major part of the problem and his need to escalate is driven by his political insecurity…
Schumer faces backlash after calling for new Israeli elections to oust Netanyahu
Chuck Schumer, the US Senate leader and a top ally of Joe Biden, on Thursday broke with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, over his handling of the invasion of Gaza and called for Israel to hold new elections, in comments that upset its ruling party and allies on Capitol Hill.
The shift by Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader and the highest-ranking Jewish official in the United States, came as he continued to press lawmakers to pass a military assistance package for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, the countries Biden has named as the country’s top national security priorities.
In remarks from the Senate floor, Schumer said he had a longstanding relationship with Netanyahu but believed he “has lost his way by allowing his political survival to take precedence over the best interests of Israel”.
…Netanyahu has responded by doubling down on his Rafar invasion threats…
Netanyahu ‘determined’ to carry out Rafah assault despite pleas from Biden
Israel’s PM says he does not see an alternative to a ground attack on Gaza’s southern city, in a sign of widening disagreement with the US president
…if Netanyahu is insane enough to invade Rafah, he will take his ethnic cleansing war crime to genocidal levels.
If Netanyahu is insane enough to invade Rafah, NZ must expel the Israeli Ambassador.
The ramifications of what has already been caused to the Palestinians are enough to cause an explosion of violence but a Rafar invasion would take things to a new level.
I think we would see an uprising on the West Bank, Hezbollah would engage from Lebanon, the Houthis (who now claim to have a hyper-sonic missile) and even expand to Iran successfully testing a nuclear weapon which I’m sure Putin will consider if NATO Next Gen weaponry breaches Russian territory…
US held secret talks with Iran over Red Sea attacks
Western powers are also concerned about Iran’s nuclear programme as Tehran continues to enrich uranium at levels close to weapons grade.
That had been a focus of the Biden administration before October 7 as it sought to contain the crisis triggered by former president Donald Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal that Iran signed with world powers.
In September, Tehran and Washington agreed to a prisoner swap, and the US unfroze $6bn of Iran’s oil money, which had been stuck in South Korea.
The funds were transferred to an account in Qatar, where their use would be monitored. Alongside that deal, the Biden administration was seeking to agree unwritten de-escalation measures with Tehran, including a cap on its uranium enrichment.
…the question over how far Putin is prepared to give Iran’s nuclear program with the Ukraine War in the background as a means of further destabilising the Middle East opens up the real possibility this would be an escalation to any invasion of Rafar…
The question we are forgetting to ask: How will we handle this once Iran is nuclear?
Americans are debating whether President Biden’s retaliatory strikes against Iranian proxies for killing three U.S. service personnel will deter Iran. But they are asking the wrong question.
The current dispute centers on the best tactical approach to deter the theocratic regime and its Revolutionary Guards. The Biden camp believes that a significant strike in Iran is not worth the risk of entangling America in a full-scale war. The alternative and counterintuitive choice for the administration would be to attack the Islamic Republic directly and reinstate the full force of sanctions to deter the source of most of the mischief currently underway in the Middle East.
…I also think the evidence bridge linking Russia and Iran to nuclear aspirations is well made…
The form of assistance Russia is most likely to provide in the nuclear space is diplomatic. In the past few months, Moscow has heightened its support for Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors, and it will likely continue shielding Tehran from referral to the UN Security Council regarding the regime’s noncompliance with nuclear safeguards obligations.
Conceivably, Russia could also contribute to a potential future Iranian nuclear weapons effort by providing technology and know-how, whether covertly or openly. For instance, Russian scientists could help Iran advance its R&D on delivery systems, warhead development, and miniaturization, or collaborate on dual-use research relevant to weaponization. Yet there are many reasons to be skeptical of these scenarios. Besides running counter to Russia’s official stance against Iranian nuclear weapons development, such assistance would antagonize Moscow’s Gulf partners.
That said, the Russian government has not viewed Iran’s potential development of nuclear weapons with the same degree of alarm as the West. Moreover, the Ukraine war may have reshuffled Moscow’s strategic calculus to the point where it views such assistance as a means of undermining U.S. interests in the region. Even if it eschews official assistance, deepened contacts between the two countries and the continued deterioration of Russia’s economy might spur its engineers and scientists to conduct unauthorized work that benefits Iran’s nuclear program, as occurred in the past. That said, this degree of collaboration might be a step too far for Iran given its longstanding distrust of Russia, the risk of exposing its most sensitive projects and secrets, and its continued insistence that it does not have a nuclear weapons program.
On the civilian side, Iran could seek more help in developing its nuclear power industry. Russia built the first Bushehr reactor and is constructing two additional ones. The new reactors are at least two years behind schedule, but Moscow could commit to accelerating construction or offer better financial terms. It could also help with reactor fuel fabrication. If Iran were able to make its own fuel for Bushehr and similar future reactors, it would have a better civilian justification for maintaining an industrial uranium enrichment capacity. Yet Russia currently provides fuel for Bushehr and may not want to put itself out of business, especially as its nuclear industry faces pressure in Europe.
…my point is that there is still so much more horror to come if Israel invades Rafah.
The ease with which this could all spin out of control isn’t being appreciated.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
“…the question over how far Putin is prepared to give Iran’s nuclear program with the Ukraine War in the background as a means of further destabilising the Middle East opens up the real possibility this would be an escalation to any invasion of Rafar…” Martyn Bradbury
World War III comes closer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDUeIxibigQ
Russia may be losing its control of the Baltic but, the latest news is that Russia is in negotiations with Eritrea to set up a naval base on the Red Sea Coast opposite Yemen a far more important seaway than the Baltic with the potential to gain a chokehold on world trade through this vital seaway.
And indeed, the zionists even attacked a UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon*, including an Australian soldier, yesterday. As long as ‘israel’ exists, it will be a threat not only to Palestinians, Syrians, Lebanese, Yemenis, and all the others that they’re bombing right now, but to literally everyone on the planet Earth.
Now, I keep hearing that we’re supposed to be allies with America and Australia. But apparently we’re just going to stand by and do nothing while the zionists try to murder Australians on a UN mission? It seems like if we were a real ally, we’d be striking back.
* UNIFIL is actually far from a neutral force- many elements openly work with the zionists to help them spy on Lebanon- but even being supportive of the zionists isn’t enough to protect them
We did nothing after they deliberately targeted UN personnel and property during their last invasion of Lebanon so it’s no wonder they assume they can act with impunity.
The imperialist chessboard is becoming more crowded.
” If Netanyahu is insane enough to invade Rafah, NZ must expel the Israeli Ambassador. ”
But Bomber we are an ALLY of the Zionist state. Allies don’t expel their partners Ambassadors.
When we agreed to American demands to censor what our fourth estate reported and commented on the war in case it was misconstrued as being against the state of Israel then any hope of Kiwis being informed and presented with the facts about the conflict means that ignorance prevails which is deliberate so it suits the 5 eyes partnership and any sitting Labour or National led governments position. The last thing Hipkins needed or Luxon wants is mass protests against genocide which will be embarrassing to the elected elite.
Liberal democracy that you often refer to is only applied when it suits someone’s agenda.
Foreign policy has been sold out to foreign interests , hell even China can hack and spy here without any serious repercussions and Israel ( Mossad ) has been involved in suspicious activity here in the past.
If we had a militant union movement we could make it uncomfortable enough for the Israeli ambassador that he would leave anyway, pickets, restrictions on supply etc, non violent also.