The problem is that there's no peaceful organization saying "yes two state solution" or "yes one integrated, non-religious state".
Weaker violence only works if there's a weaker peaceful option.
We'll see. I think the hope is that strong words and troop movements will make Venezuela reconsider it's actions.
Well now they'll be double occupied! - the UN probably
In fairness colonizers just sounds silly. Just like most words with a "z" in it.
No it likely won't go well. But it doesn't really need to go well. It just needs to go better.
If peace can't be sustained, might makes right unfortunately.
And there's a definition of occupied that makes that true. However the colloquial definition of occupied generally involves actual militaries actually occupying actual territory.
Few would consider the North during the American Civil War to be occupying the south because of it's blockade. The same with Britian vs. Napoleonic Europe or Britain with WW1 era Germany (again during the war).
Tbh the fact that the UN already sees it as occupied makes it easier to justify an actual occupation.
They is who?
The die hard style terrorist you suggested in the previous comment.
based on unconfirmed rumors (at the time) of the hospitals being used for weapon storage.
They should have demanded the right to inspect the facilities because they were "unconfirmed" only because it made the Jews look good. A report like that coming from anywhere else by outlets like Reuters and the BBC would be seen as fact unless proven otherwise.
MSF work in the environment that is available to them, wherever that is.
There are plenty of places they could be where they're not. They've hardly saturated the worldwide need for charity doctoring. A volunteer stationed in Palestine is one you can't station in Ethiopia, Hati, etc..
Every doctor in Palestine could be doing just as much good elsewhere in the world.
Not operating there since 2007 would be taking a side, which, again, they don't do. They treat patients.
If they had refused to serve in military depots; Hamas would have either been forced to provision them a safe place to work. Ignoring your integrity is choosing a side too.
and require a purity of apolitical stance that does not exist in a warzone, or even a stable democracy.
Honestly, "don't operate in a military installation" is hardly a purity test. Even in active wars the Red Cross will establish field hospitals that doctors like this could work out of and remain apolitical.
The ceasefire they signed at the end of their last conflict was in place.
Synonymous
It's amazing that people can see Apartheid and how it ended and never question Palestinian actions. Apartheid ended because there was a belief in a peaceful future. There's no Mandela in Palestine that can convince the Israeli's that giving up power would lead to peace. And after a 20 year experiment in self rule in Gaza failed; it's hard to see the alternative.
No. I'm saying that when a conflict starts there is no "right" anymore in the colloquial sense. And while I can easily blame am aggressors in a conflict for removing the comfort of peace, it's much harder to justify blaming the entity attacked for its response.