"More likely if they lost contact with the fighters who would have him, and don't want to be caught in a lie later."

Really?

We've been discussing earlier how, in the age of Twitter and quick communication methods, Israel could have attacked minutes after Hamas broke the ceasefire, and you're telling me that A DAY LATER Hamas' command still wouldn't know or have contact when this news story has been plastered all over Arab and Western media?

Sounds pretty dubious.

Anyway, Chairman, we're never going to agree on this...I wonder how we'd do on other topics (since we've only ever debated on this) but on this, clearly we won't agree.

And Putin...well, yeah.

sorry, here's the link for the veteran negotiator

http://www.alternet.org/world/who-broke-ceasefire-obama-blames-hamas-against-all-evidence

and I get it. You don't agree with me. Stating that over and over isn't going to get me to stop posting whenever you go on about total junk. I mean, we do have a word for what occurs in a person's mind when they continue to ignore mounting evidence and remain steadfast in their original position.

"Really?

We've been discussing earlier how, in the age of Twitter and quick communication methods, Israel could have attacked minutes after Hamas broke the ceasefire, and you're telling me that A DAY LATER Hamas' command still wouldn't know or have contact when this news story has been plastered all over Arab and Western media?

Sounds pretty dubious."

They clearly posted a tweet at 7:34am about a fight with advancing Israeli troops. While not minutes, it's about as close as you're going to get.

I'd also ask you to answer the point I've raised again and again, Chairman--

The Palestinians wanted this ceasefire.
The Gazan Palestinians wanted this ceasefire.
Mahmoud Abbas wanted this ceasefire.
The Palestinian Authority wanted this ceasefire.

HOW, then, can you possibly defend Hamas as a champion of the Palestinian people when they defy what the Palestinian people specifically ask for, namely, that 72-hour ceasefire and peace talks in Cairo that have now been cancelled?

This is what I've been saying all along--

Israel is wrong wrong WRONG when it comes to a lot of the policies in its borders...I think some of those policies are exacerbated by outside elements like Hamas, but they are STILL wrong.

But Israel being wrong on domestic policy does NOT make Hamas right, especially when it ignores the will of its own people this way!

Hamas isn't in this for the Palestinians, they're in it for themselves.

I'll say it again, Chairman--

Get Hamas out, and Abbas in when it comes to Gaza. Give the Palestinians a TRULY unified, peace-seeking government that DOES listen to the will of its people, rather than destroy ceasefires when its citizens have been crying desperately for one and peace talks that now won't happen.

Hamas has to go. I'm sorry, but they do.

If you want the Palestinians to succeed against Israel, then Hamas must go--frankly, Hamas is the worst thing for the Palestinians all around:

They don't listen to demands for things like ceasefires,
Their terrorism gets them condemned by Western governments,
They make the moral equivalency argument murkier for those governments...

If not for Hamas' being so reprehensible, even the United States would be against Israel at this point, if they did this against a faction like Abbas'!

Get Hamas out, and Abbas in, and the Palestinians have a unified power structure that doesn't include terrorism that scares Israel AND Israel then has ZERO excuses...you may argue they don't have any already, but their biggest one, and the one that appeals (like it or not) to Western governments is Hamas' existence.

Get rid of Hamas in favor of Abbas, and either Israel deals for peace, or Israel is completely and justly shunned.

Under those circumstances, Chairman...why is Hamas so worth it to you?

You must admit that their being loathed by the West is the ONLY reason Israel is still able to carry out its actions without losing total support from all its allies, the US included...are they really worth keeping, then, or can you not even entertain the idea of Abbas' party just speaking for all Palestinians and eliminating the faction the US AND Israel AND Egypt all view as the worst of the worst here?

"HOW, then, can you possibly defend Hamas as a champion of the Palestinian people when they defy what the Palestinian people specifically ask for, namely, that 72-hour ceasefire and peace talks in Cairo that have now been cancelled?"

Well I mean clearly no ceasefire actually took place. Israel advanced troops into Rafah before the ceasefire, met Hamas militants there, and by your own admission Israel do not have to stop attacking tunnels during ceasefires. This doesn't sound like a ceasefire in any sense of the word.

"Get Hamas out, and Abbas in when it comes to Gaza. Give the Palestinians a TRULY unified, peace-seeking government that DOES listen to the will of its people, rather than destroy ceasefires when its citizens have been crying desperately for one and peace talks that now won't happen."

And I'll say again. 1) The removal of Hamas is not going to happen. Their weapons are too cheap, their militants too easily replaceable. Israel can keep pounding away but that only furthers the resolve of Hamas and its supporters. That said, Abbas tried a unity government deal, and it was condemned and derailed by Israel, another point you have yet to acknowledge. How can Palestinians even initiate a process like dismantling the Hamas government internally when they have to constantly rebuild, face Israeli aggression, AND dont even have reassurance that Israel will play along in the end? This is the dilemma of the Palestinian people.

"If not for Hamas' being so reprehensible, even the United States would be against Israel at this point, if they did this against a faction like Abbas'!"

This is patently untrue. The US support for Israel runs much deeper than any evils done by Hamas.

"Get Hamas out, and Abbas in, and the Palestinians have a unified power structure that doesn't include terrorism that scares Israel AND Israel then has ZERO excuses...you may argue they don't have any already, but their biggest one, and the one that appeals (like it or not) to Western governments is Hamas' existence."

I'd argue again that you should look to the West Bank for this very situation. There Abbas is in control, but Israel still pushes the Palestinians around, does not succeed full citizenship or rights to them, and is in the slow process of dismantling the West Bank. When the West Bank rose up in protest recently, unarmed protesters were killed by the IDF.

Hamas is not "worth it" for me. I just recognize the reality of the situation. Israel is in complete control everywhere. For anything to change, they must be the ones to make the change for the better.

But it's hilarious that for someone who was harping on the point earlier that Hamas only want Israel's complete destruction, and being shown how that point is ridiculous, that you would come back and completely base your viewpoint and arguments on the total destruction of the other side. Weird, almost hypocritical?

To reinforce my second last point, I would love to see a new government where no Hamas members were present and which israel would support. This was in the process of happening, but Israel ACTIVELY WORKED AGAINST IT

"The U.S. State Department, however, said it would work with the new government and cautiously pledged to continue to disburse aid to the Palestinians while monitoring its policies, drawing Israeli anger.

"It appears that President Abbas has formed an interim technocratic government that does not include ministers affiliated with Hamas," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in Washington.

"But we will continue to evaluate the composition and policies of the new government and calibrate our approach accordingly," Psaki said.

An Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, released a statement after Psaki's comments, denouncing the unity cabinet as supported by Hamas, a group bent on Israel's destruction."

http://news.yahoo.com/abbas-swears-palestinian-unity-government-shunned-israel-105415671.html

Obi, this right here pertained exactly to your wishes, and was still wrecked by Israeli efforts. How can you continue to support this?

Repeat after me: Israel Benefits From The Status-Quo. Israel Benefits From The Status-Quo. Any Actual Progress By Palestinians To Form A Rational Government Is Seen As A Set Back By Israel's Hard-Right-Wing Government. Israel Benefits From The Status-Quo.

"Well I mean clearly no ceasefire actually took place. Israel advanced troops into Rafah before the ceasefire, met Hamas militants there, and by your own admission Israel do not have to stop attacking tunnels during ceasefires. This doesn't sound like a ceasefire in any sense of the word."

The last part I have to call you on, as Israel WAS allowed to engage and destroy tunnels as part of the accepted terms of the ceasefire.

So, whether it "sounds" like it or not...those were the terms, and they WERE allowed to do that...Hamas agreed to the ceasefire, ergo, they agreed to the terms, ergo, they are responsible for abiding by those terms...

Israel was allowed to keep destroying tunnels; if Hamas interfered with that process, as they did (in force) that would be a violation of the ceasefire terms as agreed upon by both parties.

So merits aside, the legality isn't up for debate--Israel WAS allowed to do what they were doing, and Hamas STILL attacked.

"Any Actual Progress By Palestinians To Form A Rational Government Is Seen As A Set Back By Israel's Hard-Right-Wing Government."

The key word there is RATIONAL.

Care to describe Hamas, a terror organization that first calls for and then destroys a ceasefire as rational?

Well, you naturally do, but still...the Western powers don't...Egypt doesn't....

And like it or not, they're the ones with the power in this scenario.

thanks for skipping my point. You've stated yourself you think an Abbas government would be better, that Israel and the world would work with it to stop violence. I posted evidence that this is clearly not that case, that in a unity government where no Hamas officials were included, Israel still opposed efforts for peace. Why is this do you think?

As for the ceasefire, I stand by my point. A ceasefire where one is allowed to engage in hostilities and the other isn't is a very weird idea of a ceasefire.

"An Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, released a statement after Psaki's comments, denouncing the unity cabinet as supported by Hamas, a group bent on Israel's destruction."

"Obi, this right here pertained exactly to your wishes, and was still wrecked by Israeli efforts. How can you continue to support this?"

^There's your answer, above, in your own citation--

Hamas WAS part of the unity government, which Israel could not and would not support as...well, it's bent on the destruction of Israel and Jews...that's enough to sour any diplomatic deal involving civilized people, let alone a Jewish state.

obi, the israeli official, who wouldn't even go so far as to put his name on record, was lying, plain as day:

"It appears that President Abbas has formed an interim technocratic government that does not include ministers affiliated with Hamas," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in Washington."

of course Hamas is going to be a part of a unity government deal. That's the idea, taking two halves and making something new. That doesn't mean they are running or operating the new government, or that the new government will be curtailed to Hamas beliefs.

"As for the ceasefire, I stand by my point. A ceasefire where one is allowed to engage in hostilities and the other isn't is a very weird idea of a ceasefire."

Forgive me for saying so, since you seem like a nice guy...

But it doesn't matter what the hell you think is or isn't a legit ceasefire--

If Parties A and B agree to terms...they have to ABIDE by the terms of that ceasefire, regardless of what you personally think about them.

Under the terms, Israel could destroy and work to destroy tunnels.

That's what it was doing when it was engaged by a suicide bomber by Hamas.

Under the terms HAMAS *AGREED TO*, Hamas was not allowed to attack when Israel was doing what it was permitted to do under the ceasefire, ie, destroy tunnels, ergo, Hamas broke the ceasefire, legally and otherwise.

It really doesn't matter what you think...

You can't very well agree to terms and then go back on the deal later.

that's fine and all, it'd be great if you could even give the impression of citing a source or something for your words, but I know you're not really into that sort of thing. From all accounts it sounds like hostilities were going on well before and into the ceasefire hour, which is why I say that while one may have been negotiated, it never actually came about. It's very strange that Israel would advance its forces only hours before a ceasefire was to take place.

"of course Hamas is going to be a part of a unity government deal. That's the idea, taking two halves and making something new. That doesn't mean they are running or operating the new government, or that the new government will be curtailed to Hamas beliefs."

If they are part of the new government, doesn't it follow that they are, to a certain extent, running it? Even if they're not in charge, like Abbas, they're helping to run it?

Again--

Why include Hamas at all?

They're a hindrance to both parties...and frankly just make the Palestinians look bad, when frankly, without Hamas, Israel wouldn't be able to have any excuse to the West to accede to a peace deal.

If you really want peace, why not just sacrifice Hamas?

Is a political party, one that's bent on killing all Jews at that and perpetually acts contrary tot he interests of other members of your unitary government, really worth keeping around?

"From all accounts it sounds like hostilities were going on well before and into the ceasefire hour, which is why I say that while one may have been negotiated, it never actually came about."

But the terms were agreed upon...so, yes, the terms were in place, and did come about circa 8am yesterday--

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-gaza-ceasefire-20140801-story.html

"Under the accord, both sides received some of the incentives they had demanded: Israel was moving ahead with the destruction of Palestinian tunnels; Hamas was to be part of the Palestinian delegation traveling to talks in Cairo, which would also include the Palestinian Authority and the militant group Islamic Jihad."

^In exchange for Hamas being allowed to the peace talks in addition to Abbas' party, Israel WAS allowed to keep working on the tunnels, since tunnels into Israel violate their national sovereignty.

Those WERE the terms...Hams broke them.

"If they are part of the new government, doesn't it follow that they are, to a certain extent, running it? Even if they're not in charge, like Abbas, they're helping to run it?"

No? It could mean that ex-Hamas members are involved in its operations a low levels, but for the political officials, no Hamas members were affiliated. Here's the list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Government_of_2014

"Again--

Why include Hamas at all?"

Because Hamas is the elected, governing body in Gaza? You can't have a "unity" government if you're not unifying anything.

I don't think it frankly matters what Hamas did, if they are working towards efforts for peace Israel need to take them up on that. If not we're just going to be stuck in this loop of violence, which again, only works to benefit Israel.

By your logic, why should Hamas work with Israel, who is hellbent on their destruction? Nothing of what you're stating makes any sense.

If Hamas didn't want to abide by the terms, they shouldn't have accepted them.

They accepted the ceasefire terms...and they didn't.

That is wholly THEIR fault.

Whatever else you want to say about the conflict can be debated, but agreeing to and then reneging in terms in this specific case is wholly the fault of Hamas.

"The new government will reunite Gaza and the West Bank under a single political authority for the first time since 2007, when Hamas – which won Palestinian legislative elections in 2006 – asserted control over the Gaza Strip, forcing out Fatah."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/02/palestinian-unity-government-sworn-in-fatah-hamas

I mean that's pretty much it, plain as day. A new government, with no Hamas officials in its cabinet, running Gaza in replacement for Hamas. That is exactly what you want, obi. But you see again how Israel denied this from ever happening.

"Because Hamas is the elected, governing body in Gaza? You can't have a "unity" government if you're not unifying anything."

There are other parties in Gaza...do you really need Hamas?

Simply put...Abbas doesn't have to placate anyone, or include Hamas for the sake of "fairness."

If Hamas stands in the way of his political goals--and I think after this it's fair to say they do, to an extent--then get someone else in.

I ask you, what's better--a semblance of unity with actual division under the surface, or a government that's actually unified in its goal and thus actually works? There's dysfunction in the Palestinian ranks right now PRECISELY because there's division...

Get rid of Hamas, and you can work to get rid of that division.

"of course Hamas is going to be a part of a unity government deal. That's the idea, taking two halves and making something new. That doesn't mean they are running or operating the new government, or that the new government will be curtailed to Hamas beliefs."

If they are part of the new government, doesn't it follow that they are, to a certain extent, running it? Even if they're not in charge, like Abbas, they're helping to run it?

Again--

Why include Hamas at all?

They're a hindrance to both parties...and frankly just make the Palestinians look bad, when frankly, without Hamas, Israel wouldn't be able to have any excuse to the West to accede to a peace deal.

If you really want peace, why not just sacrifice Hamas?

Is a political party, one that's bent on killing all Jews at that and perpetually acts contrary tot he interests of other members of your unitary government, really worth keeping around?

Palestinian unity government of Fatah and Hamas sworn in

^THAT being the title of your article...how is THAT sans Hamas?

Ceremony paves way for long-delayed elections in Gaza and West Bank, but US expresses concern about role of Hamas

^Seems like the US expressed concern about Hamas being involved...again, how are they NOT part of this government?

okay obi, I'm done for now. Even when an exact situation that you've called for occurs, you're still against it on a singular condition. You're literally advocating the extermination of an entire people before peace can even be discussed.

"again, how are they NOT part of this government? "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Government_of_2014

You didn't answer my objection at all...

If it says, right in the damn title, that not only are Hamas involved, but the US is concerned BECAUSE Hamas is involved...how are they not involved or part of that government?

Anyway, I have to go to, sleep and then job...one day, we shall talk on something NOT Israel/Palestine, lol.