War & Civilians

In war there is no winning.  Wars only end when a decision is made to stop fighting; when people on both sides are mutually sickened by the scores of causalities, bloodshed and loss of life. (What I write is based on my limited investigation: don't agree or disagree but be curious to explore the available information and form your own viewpoint.)

If one investigates the whole history of Israel and Palestine going back to the 1920s one will learn that since the start the leading authorities of the Palestinian people has traditionally rejected a two-state solution because they didn’t want Israel to exist as an autonomous, landed state. (Interestingly in the 1940s the Israelis were willing to concede to a two-state solution where the Palestinians would own the majority of the lands being shared: the mutual hostilities have spurned on the land grab politicking which now sees Israel as dominating the greater share of the land in the region. (From a defense standpoint the more land one party can dominate/control/own the greater a resource land becomes for the purpose of negotiations: land is leverage, and easier to make concessions with if one has lots of it. (I believe it is a significant error of juris prudence for a government to back ‘settlers’ whom have illegally invaded people’s homes and have expelled them from those homes leaving them without the benefit of selling the home on the open market or other compensation.  It is what The United States of America did to Americans who were of Japanese descent during WW2: they lost homes, businesses, history, and security and the reparations were $12,000 per family household regardless the actual financial losses experienced.)

It’s a dangerous presumption to regard every civilian opposed to the State ‘Overrule’ as an enemy combatant; it is inaccurate and risks being used as a propaganda narrative which dehumanizes and vilifies those wanting self-rule, a ‘Homeland’ or ‘Nation State’ which inadvertently threatens to radicalize the hurt and hopeless, driving them into the arms of those who will readily exploit and capitalize upon their pain, and the risk that the IDF detention centers become the Israeli version of Abu Ghraib).

About Civilian Casualties of War: It is not credible to assert that one is not targeting civilians and that there was no intention of inflicting civilian casualties; saying one didn’t intend to doesn’t evidence that one actively intended not to.

Intending not to do something is as significant as the intention to do something: this a matter of accountability and credibility.   It is reasonable to consider that the intent to do, or not to do is not even a credible notion when a nation state carries out a carpet-bombing campaign: civilians cannot escape harm’s way, and there has been no safe route out of danger. De facto:- if a military campaign does not actively seek to protect civilians it is de facto leaving them vulnerable. If one commands an evacuation one must make certain, guarantee that there are the means and ways for people to actually and safely evacuate (and yet refugee sites have been “accidentally bomb”).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

EXCERPT FROM WIKIPEDIA: The main discussion since 1993 has focused on turning most or all of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank into an independent Palestinian state.
Israel has rejected calls for the return of lands seized during the 1967 war.
The Palestinian leadership has embraced the concept since the 1982 Arab Summit in Fez, and in 2017 Hamas accepted the idea of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. Israel views moves by Palestinian leaders to obtain international recognition of a State of Palestine as being unilateral action by the Palestinians and inconsistent with a negotiated two-state solution.

It was reported in 2009 that although polls had consistently shown Israeli and Palestinian majorities in favor of a negotiated two-state settlement, there was "growing disillusionment" with a two-state solution.

There have been many diplomatic efforts to realize a two-state solution, starting from the 1991 Madrid Conference. There followed the 1993 Oslo Accords and the failed 2000 Camp David Summit followed by the Taba negotiations in early 2001.
In 2002, the Arab League proposed the Arab Peace Initiative. The latest initiative, which also failed, was the 2013–14 peace talks.

A 2021 survey of experts found that 52 percent believe that the two-state solution is no longer achievable. 77 percent believe that if not achieved, the result would be a "one- state reality akin to apartheid".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine