The Israeli military has ordered new forced evacuations in parts of central Gaza, signaling the expansion of ground operations and the latest displacement of Palestinians, many of whom have already been displaced multiple times over the course of Israel’s war on the territory. At least 50 Palestinians have been killed in the last 24 hours, according to the Health Ministry in Gaza, pushing the official death toll past 40,200.

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken ended his ninth visit to the Middle East since October without securing any breakthrough for a ceasefire deal. In Chicago, where Democrats are gathered for the DNC, Gaza has been mentioned only in passing from the main stage of the convention. The party’s official platform adopted this week does not call for an arms embargo on Israel and reasserts unwavering U.S. support for Israel.

“There’s been an almost competition between Democrats and Republicans on ‘how much can we show Israel that we support them and that we have their back?’” says human rights lawyer Zaha Hassan, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and previously the senior legal adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team during Palestine’s bid for U.N. membership. “Why should Israel ever compromise its positions if they know that by holding out, they’ll get more goodies from the U.S.?”

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Doubts grow” implies that anybody believed it in the first place. I don’t doubt that the administration preferred a ceasefire, but Netanyahu has pretty much no incentive to even try for one. If anything, his motivation would be to keep stringing along the current administration and make the war as bloody and nasty as possible, since that will peal away support for Harris. If Trump wins, he doesn’t have to worry about getting nagged anymore, he may even get increased support from Trump and carte blanche to go all out.

    • distantsounds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      If this current administration preferred a ceasefire, why send the 2000lb bombs? Complete head-scratcher there

      • BassTurd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t know the answer, but I’d imagine geopolitical ramifications are a big part, and that it’s more complicated that us civilians without top secret clearance know. Maybe I’m wrong and it’s as easy as saying no, but I doubt it. I’d like if they did though.

        • distantsounds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t buy the whole deep state idea, but I suppose anything is possible. I enjoy a good conspiracy shitpost now & then. This issue feels much more Occam’s razor than 4-D chess. I mean with 40000 already counted dead it’s pretty disgusting to have to try to justify. You’re just creating more radicalized people with these actions.

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m not trying to suggest there’s some deep state fuckery at play. I’m just saying that I think the situation is not black and white and there are more pieces to the puzzle than we are privy to.

            Again, I would love if we stopped supplying weapons. I left my last job in manufacturing partly because we were making parts that were going into bombs that were ending up in Israel. That’s not a fun thing to have on your conscience all of the time.

            • distantsounds@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              There is plenty of gray area in anything. This seems pretty cut & dry. This is has not been self defense, it has been nothing but escalation. The campaign to justify it rings hollow.

              • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I understand and agree, but there are a lot of national secrets traded between Israel and the US amongst probably countless other national interests that we are unaware about that may be important to consider. If the cutting of “defense” support somehow compromises national security, then it might be less bad to begrudgingly supply. I’m not saying that’s the case, but that’s a plausible argument given the scale of geopolitics.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        Because Israel has nukes and a 2000lb bomb is a fuck of a lot better than just glassing the entire area or using them against Iran who would 100% invade if the US were to withdraw support.

        It’s almost like global politics, especially when talking about the Middle East and nuclear powers is really fucking complicated.

        • distantsounds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Israel can already defend itself. Those bombs and continued aid were, and are not required. They are being used to escalate, it’s really not that complicated.

          The threat of nuclear war is old hat