That depends on your idea of how to allow them to travel. If they could just exit Gaza without any documentation and going through border control, Hamas and the 90 other terrorist organizations would just drive out to carry out terror attacks across Israel. Or do you really expect them to just not murder Jews whenever they see them?The ability to travel is a fundamental right not a luxury or to "make travel a bit more comfortable for "some people"'. Also how on earth does letting "some people" travel leads to the "sacrifice thousands of civilians on both sides"?
Unless you do propose they get processed at a border, in which case you're really just proposing the status quo because people CAN travel to and out of Gaza. Many Gazans do it on a daily basis.
Here's the excerpt from the source you gave:What I did say is that it's a false and simplistic assumption to assume that the Houthis are the ever willing and obedient proxies/puppets of the Iranians. The Iranians were embarassed because certain Houthi attacks were carried out without Iranian knowledge and permission at a time when talks were being held. By the same token not every Shia group which is has benefited from Iranian largesse always listens to Iran.
military attacks are not the solution to the crisis in Yemen" and called for "a calm atmosphere and away from the continuation of tension and the cycle of violence and Establishing peace and stability in the region
Iran is not pro-calm, anti-tension or anti-violence, and certainly not pro-peace and stability. So this whole statement sounds a lot to me like denial of personal involvement in the attack, much like they denied any involvement in the bombing of ships in the gulf.
To take this one denial out of many in Iran's MO, and think it has a trust crisis with Houthis, is a huge leap, especially when we have more concrete data, like sensors, to tell us the drones in the attack on Aramco did not come from Yemen.
The United States said new evidence and analysis of weapons debris recovered from an attack on Saudi oil facilities on Sept. 14 indicates the strike likely came from the north, reinforcing its earlier assessment that Iran was behind the offensive.
It lasted this long because Israel and the US are not out to destroy Iran. They are out to contain the Iranian threat to the region and the world.There is a time for military action and a time when military action is not required or conducive to other actions being carried out. Iran - like Israel - relies on both soft and hard power. You figure Iran would have lasted this long against such powerful enemies like the U.S. and Israel if it didn't know when and how to strike a fine balance with regards to it's actions?
Well then what DO you propose makes Iran target Israel, if you think you know better than the Israeli intelligence apparatus?You make it sound as if I suggested that Israel should supply Arrow and David's Sling to Iran as a confidence building measure or rename a Kibbutz after a matyred Iranian figure. All I pointed out is that the Iranians didn't suddenly wake up the wrong side of bed one morning and decided to wage "terror", "terror" and more "terror" or to adopt the policy is has without good reason. I asked what change in Iran's threat calculus or actions on the part of others would see Iran having a lesser need for nukes or proxies. Valid question. Also valid to assume that Israel; which has long realised that military action has its limits; would like to understand what motivates or makes it's enemies tick. I'm assuming of course that Israel isn't in need of a perpetual threat.
And what do you propose Israel do to avoid being targeted? And I mean anything other than bending over and be annihilated.
Maybe, but none in their right mind would actually support such a move in 2022.On the contrary there is but not necessarily Palestinian land per see. There is the Golan which is Syrian [and recognised as such by the international community] and which Israel continues to occupy in violation of UN Resolution 242 and there are strips of Lebanese territory
Because Israel is not a communist state. It doesn't dictate with an iron fist what happens exactly, and people are not living in fear of a secret police. People build, and it's up to the state to tear down if it's done without a permit, or outside permitted areas.With regards to Pakestinian land there is the West Bank which shrinks year by year due to the illegal construction of sentiments; sprouting like mushrooms. You'll no doubt claim this isn't an issue because settlements can always be vacated; as some have been in the past but then the question arises as to why even bother constructing them in the first place if Israel is willing to vacate them at some distant point in the future.
Israel does not build settlements. People do, and whenever they do, it's subject to scrutiny by the government.
Anyone who wishes to put an end to this construction has to tackle not the legal issue, but the practical one - why are people building there, and why should they stop?
Why people are building there is simple - untapped lands that can be settled in a time of housing crisis, and for only a fraction of the price of housing in central Israel.
But then, how do you convince them to stop? Do you tell them their houses might be vacated and demolished to pave way for a Palestinian state? They'll scoff and tell you there will never be one.
The best motivator for a solution is lighting a fire under one's feet. Don't tell them - show them the situation is urgent. Build more and show them if they won't accept peace and prosperity now, the offer will shrink and they'll get less later. Less and less until they break and accept.
Or maybe bring another US president that's willing to make the solution comprehensive, and seek land for them elsewhere, like the flat northern Sinai that's suitable for their economical model.