An alternative strategic goal should include lifting the siege in the short term and reaching a fair and stable compromise with the Palestinian people in the medium to long term. I use the word “compromise” here because there won’t be a “solution” in Israel/Palestine that will end politics and history. Jews and Palestinians will continue to compete and cooperate on this land for the foreseeable future. But as long as maintaining the status quo remains the Israeli goal, the violent military campaigns, with all their horrors and losses on both sides, are an inevitable consequence.
There is no way around this. The “peace for peace” formula doesn’t work because the occupation is not peace. So what the Palestinians are getting is “a little less war for peace.” For this reason, the current war with Hamas is not an effort to “strengthen the moderates” and to “facilitate peace,” as some claim, but rather an alternative to peace.
Abbott treats so many things like ‘crises’ in Australia - border security, debt, carbon tax, Labor. Here’s what I consider real crises in Australia that deserve all the front pages until they’re sorted: child protection (ie. domestic abuse, foster care etc), mental illness care; disability care; old age care; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander disadvantage; asylum seeker treatment; climate change.
"The Abbott government’s agenda has been driven by three major claims, all of them economic in nature. Let’s see how economists view these three themes:
1) There is a budget emergency Number of economists who agree: zero
2) The federal government has a debt crisis Number of economists who agree: zero
3) Carbon pricing is an economic wrecking ball Number of economists who agree: zero
The above represents a very slight exaggeration. You can find people with some economics qualifications who agree with the government but, without exception, they either work for the Coalition or for some entity with ideological motives (like the IPA or News Corp).”